met for at least the next 15 to 25 years under the step-rate increases in OASI taxes already provided in the law." In fiscal 1955, annual receipts would be raised "by an estimated $100 million, benefit disbursements by $400 million, and administrative expense by $8 million."

The President recommended that grants to States for old-age assistance be reduced as the expanded OASI program takes over an increasing share of this load, under a formula which also "should take into account the financial capacity of the several States to support their public assistance programs by adopting, as a measure of that capacity, their per capita income."

Turning to the field of health, the President found two key problems: the distribution of medical facilities and the costs of medical care. Further action on these problems should, while "rejecting the socialization of medicine," be directed to two goals: (1) "the means for achieving good health should be accessible to all"; and (2) "results of our vast scientific research should be broadly applied for the benefit of every citizen." Toward these ends, he recommended "the establishment of a limited Federal reinsurance service to encourage private and nonprofit health insurance organizations to offer broader health protection to more families." This service would cover the special additional risks involved, and the initial Federal capital investment would be repaid from reinsurance fees. He also requested that Federal grants-in-aid under the Hospital Survey and Construction Act be broadened to stimulate construction of nonprofit "diagnostic and treatment centers, rehabilitation facilities, nursing homes, and additional chronic disease hospitals, and to help finance State surveys of their needs for such facilities." Further, such preventive health measures as the Public Health Service's activities in industrial hygiene must be maintained, and the Service's research activities must be strengthened and supplemented by "research grants to State and local governments and to private research institutions."

Special concern for the disabled was reflected here, as in the OASI proposals. The President hoped that the number of persons rehabilitated to productive lives might be gradually increased over the next 5 years from the current level of about 60,000 to 200,000 a year, largely through accelerating Federal grants-in-aid for such purposes as

training the needed specialized professional personnel and providing clinical facilities for rehabilitative services. Recommendations on this program contemplated that the States would be in a position to participate equally with the Federal Government by 1959.

The betterment of health was also cited as one objective of the President's recommendations on housing, which would enhance "the economic and social well-being of the country" as well. The housing measures were designed to promote "the efforts of our people to acquire good homes" and wholesome neighborhood development-problems to which "the building of new homes provides only a partial solution." Therefore, he proposed broadening or extension of existing housing laws to assist communities in renovating salvable slum areas and eliminating those nonsalvable and to provide financial encouragement to housing maintenance and improvement.

The President promised that Federal housing agencies would take administrative steps "to insure that families of minority groups displaced by urban redevelopment operations have a fair opportunity to acquire adequate housing; we shall prevent the dislocation of such families through the misuse of slum clearance programs; and we shall encourage adequate mortgage financing for the construction of new housing for such families on good, well-located sites."

The other housing proposals included an experimental program under which "the Federal Housing Administration would be authorized to insure long-term loans of modest amounts, with low initial payment, on both new and existing dwellings, for low-income families." This program, aimed at encouraging private lenders and builders to meet the "challenge," would be limited to families requiring relocation because of "slum rehabilitation, conservation, and similar activities in the public interest." Meantime, such families would also be preferred in the selection of tenants under the program for the construction of new public housing, which the President proposed be continued for 4 years "at a reasonable level"-35,000 units each year. In addition, the President asked that Congress broaden the authority which he had previously been granted, on a limited basis, to adjust from time to time, in the light of economic conditions, the permissible terms on Government guaranteed and insured mortgages.

State Unemployment Insurance
Legislation in 1953

AMENDMENTS to unemployment insurance laws were adopted by 41 States in 1953. On the whole, these changes increased benefit rate levels, imposed more restrictive disqualification standards, and modified experience-rating systems to permit certain employers to reduce payroll tax rates, according to a recent report on the subject.'

Extension of coverage to unprotected groups received comparatively little legislative attention in 1953, according to the report.

Twenty-six States amended their financing provisions, in most cases to permit the assignment of lower tax rates to individual employers. Nevada was the first State to raise its taxable wage base to $3,600 from $3,000 (the limit provided in the Federal Unemployment Tax Act and in all State employment security laws).

Benefit Provisions

Most of the amendments to benefit clauses adopted by 26 States in 1953 provided for increases for some workers. In some States, however, the changes reduced the benefit rights of others or entirely excluded some from unemployment insurance protection, "usually those with low earnings, who would have been eligible under the former provisions." Significant benefit provisions of the laws of each State, as of December 1, 1953, embodying the legislative changes of 1953, are summarized in the accompanying table.

Qualifying Wages or Employment. During 1953, 17 States amended the provisions as to qualifying earnings or employment: 11 States increased the minimum qualifying wage requirements; 3 made no change in basic qualifying requirements but added provisions which would make it more difficult for some workers to qualify; and 3 others liberalized qualifying requirements slightly for some workers.

Maximum Weekly Benefit. The emphasis of unemployment insurance legislation in 1953 was on adjusting the maximum weekly benefit to reflect higher wage levels rather than on extending duration of benefits. Twenty States increased the basic maximum weekly benefit by $1 to $6: Alaska to

3

$35 (from $30); Wisconsin to $33 (from $30); 9 States to $30 (1 from $24, 6 from $25, and 2 from $28); Colorado and Oklahoma to $28 (from $22.75 and $22, respectively); Maine to $27 (from $25); Georgia, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Tennessee to $26 (from $20, $24, $25, and $22, respectively); South Dakota to $25 (from $22); and Montana to $23 (from $20). All but 2 of these States raised the amount of wages required for eligibility for the new maximum benefit, and, in addition, Rhode Island, without increasing its maximum benefit, provided for an increased amount of qualifying wages. In some cases, "the increases were substantial, and disproportionate to the increase in benefit rates as compared with other States."

In 5 States, the rise in basic benefits resulted in higher maximum benefits including allowances for dependents in 1953: Connecticut to $45 (from $36); Maryland to $38 (from $33); Wyoming to $36 (from $31); Ohio to $35 (from $33); and North Dakota to $32 (from $31). Alaska raised the limit of the allowance from 60 to 100 percent of the weekly benefit, thus providing a maximum augmented benefit of $70 (for a worker with 5 dependents). Nevada also raised the maximum dependents' allowance from $12 to $20 and the maximum augmented weekly benefit to $50, but retained a limiting proviso which may override this provision.

At the end of the 1953 legislative sessions, the maximum basic weekly unemployment insurance benefit varied from $20 to $35, except in 4 States where the potential augmented benefit ranged from $38 to $70. Twenty States, having 55 percent of covered workers, provided a maximum weekly benefit of $30 or more, including the maximum dependents' allowance in 3 of these States. Three States, with only 3.5 percent of total covered workers, provided a maximum of $22 weekly

1 State Unemployment Insurance Legislation, 1953. (In Social Security Bulletin, December 1953, Washington, pp. 14-21; report prepared in the Bureau of Employment Security, U. S. Department of Labor.)

Experience rating refers to the program in each State by which individual employers' unemployment insurance tax rates are varied from the standard rate on the basis of their experience with unemployment risk.

A worker, to be entitled to benefits, must have earned at least a specified amount of wages or have worked at least a minimum number of weeks, or both, within his base period.

Connecticut, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

Minimum weekly benefit amounts were also increased in 8 States in 1953, but affected a comparatively small segment of the insured (in 1952 only 1.4 percent of total weeks compensated was paid at the minimum benefit rate). Benefits for partial unemployment were also increased in some States in 1953.

1 Weekly benefit amount is abbreviated throughout the table as wba. When State uses a weighted high-quarter formula, annual-wage formula, or average-weekly-wage formula, approximate fractions or percentages are taken at midpoint of lowest and highest normal wage brackets. When dependents' allowances are provided, the fraction applies to the basic benefit amount.

3 When 2 amounts are given, higher includes dependents' allowances except in Colorado, where higher amount includes 25 percent additional for claimants employed in State by covered employers for 5 consecutive calendar years with wages in excess of $1,000 per year and no benefits received; duration for such claimants is increased to 26 weeks. Higher figure for minimum weekly benefit amount includes maximum allowance for 1 dependent at minimum weekly benefit. In the District of Columbia same maximum with or without dependents. Maximum augmented payment to individuals with dependents not shown for Massachusetts, since any figure presented would be based on an assumed maximum number of dependents.

In States noted, full weekly benefit is paid if earnings are less than one

half weekly benefit; one-half weekly benefit amount, if wages are one-half weekly benefit but less than weekly benefit. In all States with dependents" allowances except Michigan and Ohio, claimant receives full allowance for weeks of partial unemployment. In Michigan, claimant eligible for one-half weekly benefit amount gets one-half dependents' allowance; in Ohio, payment of dependents' allowance is limited to 26 weeks.

In States with weighted schedules the percent of benefits is figured at the bottom of the lowest and of the highest wage brackets; in States noted the percentages at other brackets are higher and/or lower than the percentages shown. In Utah, duration is based on average State wage; percentages given apply for benefit years beginning between Apr. 1, 1953, and Mar. 31, 1954.

When 2 figures are given, higher applies to claimants with minimum weekly benefit amount and minimum qualifying wages except in Colorado, where some claimants are entitled to 26 weeks (see footnote 3); if qualifying wages are concentrated largely or wholly in the high quarter, weekly benefit for claimants with minimum qualifying wages may be higher and consequently weeks of benefits are less, as indicated by lower figure. In Delaware,

(Continued on next page.)

benefits. "Only 5 States, with 7.4 percent of the covered workers, now provide a maximum weekly benefit of less than $22."

Nevertheless, taking into account the legislative changes of 1953, 3 States alone Mississippi, New Hampshire, and North Carolina-provided maximum basic weekly benefits amounting to more than 50 percent of the average weekly wage of insured workers in the State. For benefits plus maximum dependents' allowances, only 7 additional States attained this level. In 1939, maximum weekly benefits exceeded 50 percent of average weekly wages of covered workers in 48 States," whereas in 1953 maximum weekly benefits for claimants not entitled to dependents' allowances were less than 50 percent of average weekly wages.

5

Duration of Benefits. During 1953, only 8 States amended provisions governing the maximum length of benefit payments. Four of these which provide for variable duration of benefits increased the maximum period to 26 weeks. Two others extended the 26-week maximum to additional groups, and 2 with uniform duration raised the maximum to 24 and 20 weeks, respectively.

At the end of legislative sessions in 1953, the potential maximum duration of benefits ranged from 16 to 261⁄2 weeks. More than two-thirds of the number of workers covered by State unemployment insurance systems were in States which provided a maximum of 26 weeks of benefits in 1953 (including Wisconsin, which provided 261⁄2 weeks).

9

Eligibility and Disqualification

Except for provisions as to qualifying earnings already noted, only 3 States made any changes in eligibility requirements for benefits in 1953. Arkansas and Oklahoma added the equivalent of an "active search for work" clause to their provision of availability for work, bringing the number of States with such statutory requirements to 26. Connecticut added a provision that a woman need not be available for work between 1 and 6 a. m. Of the 24 States which amended disqualificationfrom-benefit provisions, 8 struck out certain causes which rendered workers ineligible for benefits and 15 added new causes (8 of these by administrative action). Eleven States intensified the severity of their disqualifying provisions, and 6 lessened the severity.

In addition to the legislative disqualifications of workers for voluntary leaving, discharge for misconduct, or refusal of suitable work, or because of a labor dispute, adopted by various States in 1953, administrative disqualifications also went into effect. Eight States added an administrative disqualification for fraud, bringing to 46 the number of States with such provisions. Four States added a disqualification for unemployment due to pregnancy (already adopted by 29 States). Five States added to existing provisions that already disqualified workers from benefits or reduced the amount payable if they currently received specified outside payments such as pensions. On the other hand, New Mexico dropped its disqualification for receipt of retirement benefits under Federal old-age and survivors insurance.

Two States changed their labor-dispute disqualifications in 1953. In Massachusetts, a worker who has been disqualified because of a labor dispute must earn $500 before he again becomes eligible for benefits; wages earned from the employer involved in a labor dispute cannot be counted for benefit rights as long as the dispute lasts. In New Hampshire, the disqualification is to be lifted if the stoppage continues for 2 weeks after the labor dispute ends.

The new disqualification provisions, according to the report, generally would increase the difficulty of disqualified workers in reestablishing their benefit rights by requiring some reemployment and earnings to do so. Such provisions would, it was held, be likely to result in wiping out benefit rights in periods of increased unemployment and lessened opportunities for obtaining jobs.

Alaska, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, North Dakota, and Wyoming.

Of a total of 51 "States," which include Alaska and Hawaii and the District of Columbia, in accordance with definition under the Social Security Act.

7 Wyoming, by 6 weeks, Massachusetts, 3 weeks, and Minnesota and Alaska, each 1 week; to attain maximum duration, Alaska, by amendments, required a weekly benefit of $22 or more.

Connecticut, Maryland, West Virginia, and Montana, respectively.
As of 1952.

(Footnotes to table continued.)

statutory minimum; in Illinois and Utah, statutory minimum of 10 and 15 weeks, respectively, not applicable at minimum weekly benefit amount. 7 If benefit is less than $5, benefits are paid at the rate of $5 a week; no qualifying wages and no minimum weekly or annual benefits are specified. No partial benefits paid, but earnings not exceeding the greater of $7 or 1 day's work of 8 hours are disregarded for total unemployment.

Partial benefits are one-quarter of weekly benefit amount for each of 1 to 3 effective days. "Effective day" is defined as the fourth and every subsequent day of total unemployment in a week for which not more than $30 is paid. 10 Effective Apr. 4, 1954, $10.

11 Effective Apr. 4, 1954, $200.