sions. A practically universal social-security system protects veterans and nonveterans alike against the ordinary risks of life. Consequently, the veterans' pension program needs reorientation in its scope and direction. Properly alined with the old-age and survivors insurance (OASI) and other general welfare programs, the pension program can continue to serve a useful purpose for the time being by providing veterans a "reserve line of defense" against economic need. The aim should be to provide protection to war veterans and their dependents whose minimum needs are not met by OASI. Thus, the veterans' pension program has a holding mission to perform: To fill gaps in the general social-insurance programs, without duplicating them, until such time as those "falling through the meshes" will be few and their residual needs can be met acceptably by public assistance. The Commission recommends that the veterans' pension benefits be coordinated with those payable under OASI, which now covers 9 out of 10 veterans and nonveterans. It is proposed that this be done by maintaining a separate veterans' pension program, but changing the present eligibility standards to take account of all income, including OASI but not public-assistance payments, as resources in determining need for a pension. Accordingly, veterans' pensions would supplement the income of the eligible beneficiaries from OASI and other sources up to a guaranteed minimum. The Commission believes that the objective of the veterans' pension program should be to provide the greatest assistance to those who are most in need. At present the program does not always accomplish this. Current limits on outside income operate on an inequitable all-or-nothing basis and discourage productive work on the part of pensioners approaching these limits. As measures of need, present income limits are too high and result in payment of tax-free pensions to persons who are not in genuine need. The Commission recommends that in place of the present limits on outside income, a realistic test of need based on the standards carefully worked out under the Federal-State public assistance programs be used. It also recommends that the pension benefit should be on a sliding scale with only a partial offset for earned income, so that pensioners will have an incentive to work and will not lose their entire pension because they earn a small amount. In view of the basic character of the OASI system, the gratuitous pension benefits should not exceed comparable benefits which will be paid by OASI when it reaches reasonable maturity. The Commission also recommends that other eligibility conditions be adjusted to shift emphasis toward providing assistance for those who need it most and doing so in the most constructive fashion. In keeping with this policy, a disability of at least 30 percent should be required at ages below 70, and procedural arrangements should be established so that applicants for benefits will be served by the Federal-State Employment and Vocational Rehabilitation Services. Only those found incapable of rehabilitation and unemployable should be eligible for a pension bringing their income up to the level underwritten by the Government. Benefits should take account of family responsibilities, and resources available should likewise be determined on a family basis. In line with present Federal-State public assistance standards, a guaranteed income of, for example, $70 per month for a single veteran and $105 per month for a veteran with a wife, would currently meet the stated criteria for the majority of cases. Rates and limits for widows and orphans should be correspondingly adjusted. Administration Sound programs to serve the welfare of veterans will be developed in the future only if their needs are fully understood and measured. The administration of veterans' programs cannot be forward-looking unless the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs has at hand the necessary facts about the effectiveness of his programs and their relationship to the total structure of benefits which other agencies provide. The Commission believes that the Administrator should have improved facilities for the analysis and review of the many large programs which he administers so that he can manage them effectively and also be equipped fully to advise the Congress and the President on policy issues. At the same time, limits and procedural safeguards should be placed on the exercise of the broad and unchecked authority now delegated to the Administrator. Adequate and economical service to veterans by the Federal Government also requires improvement in the machinery for top-level coordination on a governmentwide basis of the various programs which serve veterans directly or indirectly. This machinery is necessary not only to assure that these programs operate in a coordinated framework, but also to enable the executive branch to provide more adequate information to the Congress. THE COMMISSION'S PHILOSOPHY No group of people in a year's time can hope to provide all the final answers to the complex problems involving veterans' benefits. The subjects touched on are deeply colored by emotion and tradition; they have been the cause of many debates in the past and will doubtless cause many in the future. Insofar as possible, the Commission has tried to limit the area of debate by resting its own conclusions on basic facts. Some of the most important of these facts are new-disclosed by the Commission's own research projects. Other facts were developed by other researchers and brought into the veterans' benefit picture for the first time by the Commission. It is the hope of the Commission that these primary facts, augmented by continuing research, will lead to a more equitable and rational system of veterans' benefits-one adjusted to the real needs of veterans on the one hand, and to the requirements of a healthy national economy on the other. The Commission's recommendations have been made in this context. It has kept fully in mind, in all of its deliberations, that it is dealing directly with the welfare of almost half of the population who are either veterans or the dependents of veterans. It has also been mindful that the welfare of the nonveteran half of the population is concerned almost as directly. |