as well as drugs and medicines prescribed by a duly licensed physician as specific therapy in the treatment of any illness or injury suffered by such veteran. And it would provide financial assistance toward the purchase of specially equipped automobiles for certain disabled veterans of service after January 31, 1955, as well as hospital, domiciliary, and medical care for veterans of this period of service. Of course, my bill would also provide statutory awards for certain specific disabilities in addition to other compensation payable, and a burial allowance for veterans of service after January 31, 1955.

In view of the present high cost of living and the fact that many of our disabled veterans and their dependents as well as survivors of deceased veterans have no other source of income, except perhaps for a small social secuirty benefit, I feel that legislation of this kind is urgently needed and should be enacted into law promptly. Therefore, I respectfully request the committee to give due and thoughtful consideration to the two bills I have pending before this body.

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I thank you for your kind attention and courtesies.

Mr. DORN. Thank you, Mr. Carter. We will now hear from Congressman John Flynt of the State of Georgia. Congressman Flynt, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN J. FLYNT, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF GEORGIA

Mr. FLYNT. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully request that you and the Committee on Veterans' Affairs favorably consider H.R. 581, a bill to amend title 38 of the United States Code with respect to the payment of certain benefits under that title. Its language is simple and clear and has no hidden meaning nor is it subject to ambiguity. It simply seeks to correct an inequity presently imposed by the present language of the statute.

Under the provisions of title 38, a person's entitlement to monetary benefits ceases as of the first day of the month in which death occurs.

This literally means that if a person entitled to monetary benefits under title 38 is declared dead 1 second before midnight on the last day of the month, no payment is made for that month. This deprives survivors, or responsible for payments of the debts of the deceased, of that monetary benefits which as accrued to the deceased but is suddenly canceled, nunc pro tunc, by death.

This often results in severe hardship on those who have incurred or must incur indebtedness on behalf of the deceased.

The purpose of this bill is to recognize the day-by-day accrual of monetary benefits and prevent the reversion of the portion of these benefits to which the deceased veteran was entitled.

The correctness and fairness of the proposal contained in H.R. 581 is exemplified by the most probable fact that our courts would have insured this day-by-day accrual had title 38 been silent on this point.

Mr. DORN. Thank you so much, Mr. Flynt. The next witness will be the Honorable Sam Stratton of New York. Congressman Stratton, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF HON. SAMUEL S. STRATTON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Mr. STRATTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to testify in behalf of my bill, H.R. 1295, to increase the percentage of social security benefits not considered when determining the amount of veterans' pensions.

As the committee members know, this amount was increased last year in anticipation of an increase in social security benefits. When the legislation increasing social security benefits was delayed many veterans received an increase in pensions at the time your committee's legislation became effective. In any case, this increase was lost when the social security increase finally became effective.

I am sure this committee and Congress as a whole intends that any increase in social security is passed along to those who rely on these pensions.

Those living on social security and veterans' pensions face serious financial problems as a result of the ever-increasing cost of living. Any increase in benefits which is enacted to meet these rising expenses and to supplement what is in many cases the only and sometimes inadequate income should be passed along fully to our veterans and their families.

My bill would exempt an additional 10 percent income for the purposes of determining pensions. I realize that if any greater increase in social security is approved this percentage would have to be increased correspondingly. I would support any such change needed.

I strongly urge the committee to take favorable action on this proposal so that the entire increase will be received by those who so clearly deserve them.

Mr. DORN. Thank you very much, Mr. Stratton. If there are no questions, the next witness will be Congressman Ryan, also from the State of New York. You may proceed, Mr. Ryan.

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM F. RYAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Mr. RYAN. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to support H.R. 1221. It was introduced by me on the first day of this Congress. Specifically, it would amend section 521 (f) (1), of title 38, which provides for non-service-connected disability pensions for veterans of World War I, World War II, and the Korean conflict, who are totally and permanently disabled. As you know, eligibility for the pension is determined by certain maximum income requirements. For instance, a veteran with dependents receives no pension at all if his income exceeds $3,000. My bill would provide that in determining this maximum income, $3,600 of the wife's unearned income, rather than $1,200 of it, as the law provides now, will be excluded.

This bill is one of many which have been introduced in the House, which attempt to remedy in varying degrees the curious and ironical inequity occasioned by the Social Security Amendments of 1965 (Public Law 89-97). Because of the increase of the social security bene

fits, many veterans and veterans' widows are placed in a higher income bracket for purposes of determining the veteran's pension. An estimated 29,000 people are thus affected.

In the Senate it was proposed that the social security increase be excluded outright from determination of the income. The proposal was offered as an amendment to the social security amendments themselves, to the war orphans assistance program, and to bills which would increase disability compensation. The Senate adopted the proposal each time, but the House did not concur.

The Veterans' Administration has opposed the exclusion on the ground that in 1964, when it appeared that social security benefits would be increased, a bill was enacted which allows 10 percent of pension income to be excluded in determination of the veteran's pension. However, the social security benefits were not increased because the bill died in conference in the final days of the Congress. But the 10percent exclusion already enacted went into effect in January 1965. The position of the Veterans' Administration is that this 10-percent exclusion compensates for the effect of the 1965 7-percent social security benefit increase upon computation of income for determination of the pension.

While I do not agree that the 10-percent exclusion meets the problem, it certainly will not compensate for the increase recommended by the administration to the 90th Congress.

I believe that the President voiced widespread sentiment when he urged on January 31, 1967:

We must make certain that . .

(the social security increases) do not adversely affect the pensions paid to those veterans and dependents who are eligible for both benefits.

Accordingly, I propose that the Congress enact the necessary safeguards to assure that no veteran will have his pension reduced as a result of increases in Federal retirement benefits such as social security.

I agree with the President and support legislation to exclude the social security increases from computation of income. There are bills to accomplish this pending before your committee.

There are also other bills directed at this problem. Some would permit waiver of all or part of the social security benefits so that the amount thus waived would not be considered as income. Other bills would raise the 10-percent exclusion, while others would generally raise the Veterans' Administration pension income limit. Also it has been proposed that income limitations be removed as regards veterans of certain ages. All of these proposals reflect the inequity of the present situation and the desire of many Congressmen to change the law so veterans will not suffer a loss of their well-earned pensions.

H.R. 1221 which would increase the excludable amount of the wife's unearned income is in this spirit. Certainly the good fortune of any increase in the wife's pension benefits, or the increase of any other income which is not earned, should not be at the cost of the husband's veteran's pension.

Mr. DORN. Thank you, Mr. Ryan. Now the subcommittee will hear a statement by Congressman Philip Ruppe, of Michigan. Congressman, you go right ahead.

STATEMENT OF HON. PHILIP E. RUPPE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

Mr. RUPPE. The young men who have served and who are serving in the war in Vietnam have every right to receive the same benefits as veterans of Korean or the major wars. Any man who endures an armed conflict of this nature is, by anybody's description, a veteran. It is an oversight that these men have not been afforded true veteran status before now. They have endured hardship and dangers certainly as great as Korea, and there is absolutely no reason why Vietnam veterans should be denied the benefits that veterans of the other wars have received.

Mr. DORN. Thank you so much for your statement, Congressman Ruppe. We will now hear Congressman Cramer, of Florida. You proceed, Mr. Cramer.

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM C. CRAMER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am most appreciative of this opportunity to testify in behalf of my bill, H.R. 5278, the purpose of which is to liberalize the veterans' pension program (1) by permitting the waiver of certain retirement or annuity payments, (2) by increasing income limitations applicable to the payment of pensions, and (3) by increasing certain monthly pension

rates.

H.R. 5278 embodies the proposals and provisions of the veterans' pension bills I introduced in the last Congress and on which I had the privilege of testifying before your committee during last year's hearings on non-service-connected pension legislation.

I was particularly glad to learn of the early date set for hearings on proposed veterans' pension legislation. I am hopeful that by holding early hearings the committee will have a greater opportunity in this Congress to more fully study all proposals presented for its consideration and that the result will be the reporting out of a bill which will come far closer than last year's to providing desperately needed relief for our veterans, and their widows and dependents. The so-called cost-of-living increase bill presented for House action in the last session was, in my opinion, pitifully inadequate.

There is an urgent need for this Congress to approve a strong, effective bill and I hope that included therein will be provisions such as I and many others have proposed to provide needed increases in pension rates, to permit the waiver of certain other income that will reduce pension rates, and to permit higher outside earnings without loss of pension. Viewed with the ever-increasing cost of living-which always hurts most those restricted to and dependent upon fixed incomes to do less is to burden our veterans with the cost of the present administration's inflationary fiscal policies—the price of which they can ill afford.

To expect our veterans to meet today's living costs with yesterday's pension rates-in effect to lower their standard of living-is cruel ingratitude.

I know of no greater debt this Nation owes than to those who served in the wars of this country to protect the lives and preserve the free

doms we cherish and enjoy. To the veterans of this Nation, who valiantly and unselfishly risked their lives and suffered irreparable losses, and to the widows and dependents of those who made the most supreme sacrifice, we owe not only gratitude but the responsibility to provide all those in need with adequate benefits and compensation to permit them to afford life's necessities with dignity and self-respect. My bill, H.R. 5278, is aimed at alleviating some of the most glaring inequities in our veterans' pension program, beginning with the unreasonable and unrealistic outside earnings limitations which constantly threaten to further reduce a veteran's pension.

My bill would first rectify the reduction in veterans' pensions-and in many instances loss of pensions-unjustly resulting from the 1965 increase in social security benefits. The inequity of this situation is readily apparent-when a source of income other than his veterans' pension is increased, the veteran is penalized with a reduction in or loss of his veteran's pension. My bill would permit a waiver of such out earnings to prevent a loss of pension.

In addition, H.R. 5278 would increase the pension rates payable under Public Law 86-211. As the committee knows, many veterans chose to remain under the old pension law, in effect prior to june 30, 1960, because of the more favorable outside earnings limitations. The increased rates of pension I propose are enumerated in the bill and I therefore will not list them again here.

My bill proposes a further remedy to accomplish the objective of increasing pension rates under Public Law 86-211 by increasing the amount of outside earnings permitted before the veteran, or widow or dependent of a veteran, suffers a reduction in pension rates. My bill proposes to increase the earnings limitations to $2,100 (from $1,400) for an unmarried veteran, or a widow without child; to $3,400 (from $2,700) for a married veteran, or a veteran with minor children, or a widow with children; and to $3,600 (from $1,200) on the total earned income of a veteran's spouse, after which amount the spouse's income shall be considered as the income of the veteran.

H.R. 5278 further would increase the pension rates payable under Public Law 88-664, effective July 1, 1960, by permitting those receiving benefits under this law to earn increased outside earnings without suffering pension deductions. As we are all aware, the major difference between the "old" and the "new" pension systems is based upon income. Under the "new" system, the less income a veteran has the more pension he will draw; the more income he has, even though still eligible for pension payments, the less monthly pension he will draw. The need to increase the amount of outside earnings under the "new" system, and thereby increase pension rates, is obvious.

This provision of my bill would increase the outside earnings limitations for an unmarried veteran, without dependent children, from $600 per year to $2,400; for a married veteran, or one with dependent children, from $1,000 per year to $3,600; for a widow, without children, from $600 to $1,800; and for a widow, with one child, from $1,000 per year to $2,400. Further increases would be provided for additional children. The bill would also increase from $1,200 to $3,600 the amount a spouse may earn without affecting the veteran's pension. A final, and most important, provision of my bill would authorize the furnishing of outpatient medical services to veterans of World