"No." Yet these and other deficiencies exist in our benefit system today.

It is in this context, Mr. Chairman, that I urge passage of my bill H.R. 4887. Its provisions would do much to correct the weaknesses which I have mentioned; it would offer increased pension benefits, adjusted to keep pace with the cost of living; it would liberalize somewhat the eligibility rules for these benefits, and finally, it would provide for those serving today benefits commensurate with the hazards they face, benefits equal to those given their comrades of World War I, World War II, and the Korean conflict. It is a small enough sacrifice for the far greater sacrifices which they have made for us.

An increase in pension benefits today is of prime importance. Since January 1965, when the last increase was made, the cost of living has increased 5.3 percent. The provisions contained in my bill, if enacted, would help veterans to live on their pensions in dignity and comfort despite the rise in cost of goods and services. It would provide an overall average 5.4 percent increase for all those on the pension rolls, with correspondingly higher increases for those at the lowest levels of benefits. We are all aware how difficult it is to keep up with the rising cost of living, but for those on a fixed income, the problem is far more difficult if not impossible. These people need our aid in the form of higher pensions. We can also increase pensions by liberalizing the eligibility standards required for certain benefits. Many of these standards no longer serve a useful function; the needs they were created to serve have long since been eliminated, and today they only make more difficult the burden of those whose load has been too heavy for too long. Other standards are weak because we have failed to modernize them to keep pace with the growing needs of an aging veteran populations. For these reasons, I support wholeheartedly measures designed to simplify these rules in accordance with the Veterans' Administration policy of continually revising and improving the system in order to serve the veterans and their dependents and their widows more effectively. These changes would: (1) reduce the 5year alternative marriage requirement for widows to 1 year (or any amount of time if there is a child born of the marriage); (2) provide an aid and attendance allowance for all widows; (3) presume permanent and total disability for pension purposes at age 65 and presume need for aid and attendance if the veteran is in a nursing home; (4) provide for the exclusion from income for pension purposes of amounts equal to the amounts paid by a wife for the last illness of the veteran prior to his death or the amounts paid by a wife or widow for the last illness and burial of the veteran's child.

One of the important provisions of this bill which was passed by the House last year is the creation of a special "housebound" rate of $100 per month for veterans under the old pension law. The Senate committee which held hearings on the bill passed by this House deleted the provision because, "It was of the opinion that this liberalization of the old pension program would be inconsistent with the stated intent of Congress that the old pension program should be ultimately phased out and replaced by the current pension program (Public Law 86-211)." While I am wholly in sympathy with the new pension program, which is by all measures a more equitable program,

and the laudable desire of the Senate committee to see it become our sole pension program, I feel that it is markedly unfair to cause a few individuals to suffer because they made a free choice to continue under the old pension law which was more advantageous to them personally. Their needs are clear and pressing; their loyalty and devotion to their country is unquestionable, and they have served her well. Can we now turn our backs upon them in their time of need?

Another major purpose of the bill I am supporting is to equalize the benefits available to veterans of service since January 31, 1955. At present they are denied the pension, compensation, and medical-health benefits which this Nation has traditionally bestowed upon those who have served her in time of war. It is both within our power, and our duty, to see that those who have defended their country with supreme disregard of the sacrifices which might be asked of them, be compensated insofar as it is within our abilities to do so. The sacrifice made by our soldiers today is no less than that made by soldiers of World War I, World War II, or the Korean conflict. Their widows do not suffer a grief less poignant. Their children are deprived of the presence of a father in the same way as orphans of other wars. How then, can we presume to offer these men any less than we have provided for their comrades in arms? I am confident that every Member of the Congress will support this measure, and that the people of this Nation will applaud our action. Passage of the provisions in title II of my bill will provide entitlement to wartime disability compensation to all members of service since January 31, 1955. It will also provide pensions for them and for their widows and for their children. Other benefits extended to these men will be drugs and medicine paid for by the VA if the individual is in need of regular aid and attendance, $1,600 toward the purchase of a specially equipped automobile for a disabled veteran, and a burial allowance of $250.

Mr. Chairman, it is easy in these times to become so dazzled by the vastness and complexity of the society in which we live that we tend to forget about the problems and the contributions of the individual. Yet each single veteran who fought for his country and for us made his own personal contribution to the cause of liberty; each soldier on today's battlefronts suffers his own anguish and fears and dreams his own dreams. We must not forget the individual veteran. For these reasons, I respectfully urge a favorable report on this legislation to better the life of those who have sacrificed for their country.

Mr. DORN. I will now call on Congressman Gray. Mr. Gray, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF HON. KENNETH J. GRAY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

Mr. GRAY. Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee, let me first express my profound gratitude to your committee for scheduling hearings on the important subject of pensions and added benefits for certain veterans, and for the opportunity of appearing before you today in behalf of H.R. 1993, that I introduced on January 11, 1967. H.R. 1993 would amend title 38 of the United States Code to entitle veterans of World War I, and their widows and children, to pension on the same

basis of veterans of the Spanish American War and their widows and children. Before I give my reasons for urging approval of this specific legislation, let me first say that I am for added benefits for Vietnam veterans and also increased compensation for service-connected veterans of all wars. However, Mr. Chairman, I want to be perfectly candid when I say that we have shown more neglect, in my opinion, to the veterans of World War I and their widows and dependents, than any other group of veterans in our Nation's history. As you know, the veterans of World War I are dying at a very rapid rate. Many of them are going into the sunset of their lives-living in destitution and without hope. It is my firm and honest belief that we should take action immediately to assist this forgotten group. Many bills have been introduced in prior sessions that would increase pensions for veterans of World War I. It always has been a problem to determine just how much would be a fair and equitable amount. This problem has seemed to preclude the type of consideration this matter deserves. Therefore, in order to simplify a pension bill, I have proposed in H.R. 1993, that we give to veterans of World War I, and their widows and children, the same pension and on the same basis as veterans of the Spanish American War. These amounts, generally speaking, would be $101.59 per month for a World War I veteran or $135.45 monthly if the veteran is in need of regular aid and attendance. These amounts of course, are for veterans who have served 90 days or more.

The legislation I propose would also pay a lesser amount of $67.73 to veterans who have served 70 days or more. Many deserving veterans who are destitute, fall in this category and I believe we should recognize these needy veterans. H.R. 1993 would also pay the widows of veterans of World War I a pension at the monthly rate of $65 per month unless she was the wife of the veteran during his service in the Spanish American War or World War I, in which case the monthly rate would be $75. If there is a child of the veteran, the rate of pension paid to the widow would be increased by $8.13 per month for each such child. Mr. Chairman, these are small amounts indeed compared to the high cost of living today and would barely help meet the necessities of life. It would be an improvement over existing pension laws. I have received scores of letters from all over the United States in support of H.R. 1993 and will, of course, not expect the committee to receive this correspondence in the record. However, I would like to ask permission to insert one resolution and one letter, from my constituents, that represents a broad area of expression and sentiment on this subject. I realize with the Vietnam conflict requiring large outlays of expenditures, this is a difficult time to pass any type of legislation that requires additional spending. However, let me remind the committee that time is running out for this group of aging veterans, and surely we can find other fields in which to cut expenditures and at the same time allow proper recognition to these deserving veterans, and their widows and children.

Thanks again for allowing me the opportunity of appearing before you this morning.

Mr. DORN. Thank you, Mr. Gray. If there are no questions, I will next call on Congressman Waggonner. Mr. Waggonner, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOE D. WAGGONNER, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF LOUISIANA

Mr. WAGGONNER. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, may I begin my remarks by expressing my appreciation to you for allowing me to appear before you today. I take pride in the fact that I have supported every piece of major legislation favorably reported out by your committee since I came to Congress. You have my utmost admiration and support.

It is with a sense of duty and responsibility that I come before you today to speak out for the young men of this county who have placed us in their debt by giving their lives and their service to our Nation in Vietnam. And there will be more to follow these men as this conflict continues to become one of our major wars of all time. More than 7,500 of our sons have given their lives on the Vietnam battlefields and some 44,000 have suffered wounds in combat. This, unmistakably, ranks this far-off conflict as a major American war.

For the ones who have died, we must remember their families, and to those who will forever bear the scars of this war, we must remove the inequities in our treatment of them as veterans. I humbly urge your committee to endorse legislation to right this wrong. In the same breath I hasten to continue my complete support of our veterans of past wars. For them, I heartily support legislation to provide pension increases, particularly in the face of the constant cost-of-living increase. I have introduced legislation for both purposes for which I speak here today, but I do not come to you in support of my bills only, but with confidence in your committee to report the type of legislation needed for the best interest of our veterans.

Mr. DORN. Thank you very much, Mr. Waggonner. We will now hear from our good friend, the former national commander in chief of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, our colleague from Indiana, Congressman Roudebush. Richard, you go right ahead.

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD L. ROUDEBUSH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF INDIANA

Mr. ROUDEBUSH. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am happy that you have seen fit to hold hearings on two of my proposals involving veterans' pension legislation.

The bills I am appearing on today are H.R. 1202 and H.R. 1210. The first I would like to discuss is H.R. 1210. This bill affects only a limited number of veterans, but it will permit some old soldiers to receive some benefits which will help them in their senior years.

This bill amends section 501 of title 38, United States Code, providing that military service on the Mexican border prior to World War I by persons who had additional service in World War I shall be considered wartime service in determining eligibility for pension of the veteran, his widow, and/or his children.

In many cases, soldiers who served on the Mexican border later served in World War I. In view of the fact that the service during World War I may have been of limited duration, due either to age or disability, the requirement of 90 days' service in time of war was not

met. This bill merely provides that the service on the Mexican border and during World War I can be combined, and thereby provide eligibility for penson for the veteran and/or his dependents.

I think this bill should have long ago become a law. Service on the Mexican border was pursuant to the calls by the President on May 9, 1916, and June 18, 1916. The rigors of service on the Mexican border were often much more severe than those in World War I.

The second bill is H.R. 1202. This bill also deals with our World War I veterans.

It amends section 503 (6) of title 38, United States Code, and provides that all payments to an individual veteran accruing from public or private retirements, annuities, endowments, or similar plans and programs shall not be counted as income in determining the rate paid a veteran for nonservice disability.

This amendment would resolve the tremendous controversy which has surrounded payments of pensions for nonservice disability. It seems very unfair to me that these types of income, paid for in part or whole by the veteran, should be regarded as income.

This bill is supported very strongly by the Veterans of World War I, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and others.

These veterans are interested in this legislation. Since I introduced this bill on the first day of the 90th Congress I have probably got as much mail for this legislation as I have received on any other subject.

I hope this committee will see fit to act favorably on this proposal. Again, I want to thank the committee for its courtesy, attention, and the opportunity to appear here and discuss this important legislation. And for many of our boys who served us in World War I, this, believe me, is the most important legislation being introduced in the 90th Congress.

Thank you.

Mr. DORN. Thank you, Dick. We will now hear our good friend Bob Dole, our colleague from the great State of Kansas. Bob, you go right ahead.

STATEMENT OF HON. BOB DOLE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KANSAS

Mr. DOLE. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appreciate this opportunity to present my views on legislation I have introduced relating to veterans' pensions. My initial comments are directed to H.R. 500, introduced on January 10, 1967, and H.R. 3952, introduced on January 26, 1967.

H.R. 500 provides that where the entitlement of a veteran, widow, or child to a pension from the Veterans' Administration is based upon the veteran having served in World War I, the beneficiary shall, if otherwise eligible, have the right to elect payment of pension under either the provision of title 38, as in effect on June 30, 1960, or as amended by the Veterans' Pension Act of 1959, whichever provides the greater benefit.

H.R. 3952 would amend the United States Code, in order to increase by 20 percent the income limitations imposed by chapter 15 of title 38 on persons entitled to pensions thereunder.