provides pensions only in cases where the veteran is so disabled that he cannot engage in any "substantially gainful occupation." Furthermore, under the recent amendments to the pension provisions, the Administrator is authorized to withhold even those pensions if the veteran has any considerable estate. Present disability pensions are no help whatever to the veteran who is not permanently and totally disabled, but who is nevertheless unable to maintain himself and his family in a decent way. This, I think, is a great problem for the committee to solve. The average age of World War I veterans is now about 65. We cannot postpone action any longer if it is our genuine desire to be of help. In all our great wars we have produced a great deal more material than was consumed by combat. That is why we won those wars. At the end of these wars we have always had a great surplus of material. It as been our custom to discard this leftover war material because we considered it obsolete and no longer useful. I submit that we cannot treat the men who fought in those wars in the same way. Passage of legislation granting pensions to World War I veterans would relieve much human misery by allowing millions of persons to live in a decent way. Relief of such need is one of the primary duties of our Government today. The refore, it seems to me that we must satisfy both our special debt of honor to this group of veterans, and our general obligation to relieve human misery wherever it may be found. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I hope that your committee will report favorably in the near future pension legislation for World War I veterans. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, OLIVER E. MEADOWS, Staff Director, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, DEAR MR. MEADOWS: Thank you for your letter of June 30, advising that hearings on pending pension legislation, including my bill, H.R. 5216, are scheduled for Tuesday, July 11. As you know, my bill provides that agricultural furloughs during World War I shall be deemed creditable service for pension purposes. Since I feel that servicemen furloughed to work on farms performed a most necessary and important service for the country, I am most interested in having my bill enacted, and will very much appreciate the committee's favorable consideration of same. I shall also appreciate your making my letter a part of the printed hearings on pension legislation. Thanking you, and with best wishes, I am, JAMES H. MORRISON, Member of Congress. STATEMENT OF HON. F. BRADFORD MORSE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS Mr. Chairman, distinguished colleagues, before coming to Congress, I was privileged to serve for nearly 2 years as Deputy Administrator of the Veterans' Affairs Administration. In this capacity I worked with almost every veteran organization extant in an effort to give impetus to improved legislation which would express the Nation's gratitude to those who have defended our flag. Among the major changes taking place during my tenure with the VA was Public Law 86-211, for which this great committee deserves high credit. This law, enacted in 1959, was designed to provide higher payments for veterans eligible for pension benefits who are most in need of such assistance. I think there was almost unanimous agreement at the time of the bill's passage that it was a step in the right direction. However, since its enactment, some of the provisions of this legislation have caused concern. There have been objections to the income limitations, to the chargeability of spouses' income, to the corpus of estate test, to the inclusion of retirement income from other sources. We have in this country some 2,500,000 men who fought the war to save democracy in 1917-18. There can be no doubt that the benefits which those men who served in later conflicts received as a result of their service exceeded benefits granted to veterans of World War I. There was no GI bill for them. I know of the chairman's deep concern for the welfare of these veterans. I know that he and you other members of the committee are sympathetic to the problems which advancing years are bringing to the veteran of World War I, and I am pleased that the committee sees fit to focus its attention upon their problems, to hear, with compassionate understanding, the testimony that has been offered in support of H.R. 3745 and H.R. 4611. I know that proponents of these bills have worked hard to develop reasonable proposals. I have every confidence that this distinguished committee, working with the representatives of veterans of World War I, will work equally hard in finding just and adequate solutions to the problems which H.R. 3745 and H.R. 4611 are intended to correct. Thank you. STATEMENT OF HON. MORGAN M. MOULDER A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI, IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 6856, TO PROVIDE INCREASES IN PENSION FOR VETERANS OF THE SPANISH-AMERICAN WAR or of THE INDIAN WARS Mr. Chairman, there are approximately 10,000 Spanish-American War veterans remaining. All other segments of our population have received substantial increases in salary, wages, pension, and retirement benefits commensurate at least so some extent to the rising cost of living. My bill, H.R. 6856, would amend sections 511 and 512 of title 38, United States Code, to provide increases in pension for veterans of the Spanish-American War or of the Indian wars. This bill will pay to each veteran of the Indian wars who meets the service requirements of this section a pension at the monthly rate of $125 instead of $101.59 or $170 instead of $135.45 if the veteran is in need of regular aid and attendance. And for each veteran of the Spanish-American War who does not meet the service requirements a monthly rate of $84 instead of $67.73 and $113 instead of $88.04 if the veteran is in need of aid and attendance. This bill provides a reasonable increase of pensions to those whose service and right to a pension has been established by Congress and surely no one can justly dispute my contention that their right to a pension, having been established by law, changing circumstances has brought about the need and obligation to increase the pensions in order to keep good faith in the original act of Congress to provide for the Spanish-American War or Indian war veterans-now living in the twilight of their lives. I sincerely urge favorable consideration of my bill. STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM H. NATCHER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KENTUCKY, IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 1059 Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the record my name is William H. Natcher and I have the honor of representing the Second District of Kentucky. On January 3, 1961, I introduced H.R. 1059 which was referred to your committee. Under the provisions of this bill, all privileges, rights, and benefits granted to persons who served in the military or naval service during World War I would be granted to members of the Armed Forces of the United States who served 90 days or more during the period beginning May 9, 1916, and ending April 6, 1917, in Mexico, on the borders of Mexico, in the waters adjacent to Mexico, or in any combination of the foregoing. The unremarried widows and dependent children of such members of the Armed Forces of the United States would also be extended the benefits granted to unremarried widows and dependent children of World War I veterans. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1059 will affect only a relatively few persons, but, if enacted into law, will correct an injustice which should have been corrected many years ago. It is my hope that you and the members of your committee will report this bill favorably. STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM H. NATCHER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KENTUCKY, IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 1062 Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the record my name is William H. Natcher and I have the honor to represent the Second District of Kentucky. On January 3, 1961, I introduced H.R. 1062 which was referred to your committee. This bill extends veteran benefits to persons serving in the Armed Forces between November 12, 1918, and July 2, 1921. Those persons who would benefit under the provisions of H.R. 1062 were members of the U.S. military occupational forces who served in Europe between November 12, 1918, and July 2, 1921, and, therefore, in view of the services they rendered during the occupation, I believe they should be allowed to enjoy veteran status and should be extended the benefits accruing from such status. H.R. 1062 would provide for a reestablishment and a reinstatement of veteran status previously enjoyed by those persons who served in the occupational forces in Europe after World War I, and which, in my opinion, should never have been removed. Mr. Chairman, only a relatively few persons will be affected by H.R. 1062, and I firmly believe the services rendered by these individuals should be appropriately recognized. I know that you and the members of your committee will give every consideration to H.R. 1062, and it is my hope that this bill will be favorably reported. STATEMENT OF HON. PHILIP J. PHILBIN, a RepresentATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS, ON H.R. 7603 AND RELATED WORLD WAR I PENSION BILLS Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am very thankful to you for this opportunity to be heard on my bill, H.R. 7603, and similar bills providing pension benefits for veterans of World War I. Sometime ago, at the request of some of the very able leaders of the Veterans of World War I of the U.S.A., Inc., I was privileged to join many of my colleagues in filing the World War I pension bill in the 86th Congress. Again this year I have submitted the World War I pension proposal in the 87th Congress at the request of the leaders of this outstanding veterans organization, now the third largest veterans group in the country, and many of the individual members who reside in my State and district. The Veterans of World War I of the U.S.A., Inc., have many flourishing barracks in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and several very active units are located in my district. It is unnecessary for me to dwell extensively on the magnificent contributions to the Nation of our veterans of World War I. Their heroic exploits and unforgettable scarifices are memorialized forever in the stirring annals of that great conflict. This great Committee on Veterans' Affairs and this Congress, as well as the country as a whole, are mindful of the immeasurable value of the outstanding contributions and unexcelled patriotic services of the brave veterans of World War I. While that war was fought to banish all wars and to give democracy and the world a rebirth, many of the leaders and people of the world soon turned their backs on these ideals and noble purposes. Since that war, on two other occasions American boys have been called upon to fight in bloody wars caused by the aggression of power-crazed tyrants who scorned the freedom of man and waged ruthless aggression, endangering world peace. Many of the veterans of World War I fought gloriously in these later wars and many of them are now in advanced years and unable to earn a suitable livelihood. Many of them are in need. Many of them are sick and disabled from the ordinary vicissitudes of life. Many of them have serious problems taking care of themselves. But these veterans do not come as supplicants begging alms. They come as great heroes of the past who have served the Nation unselfishly and who have laid down their arms. They ask merely that recognition and that assistance which this Nation has extended to countless others throughout the world, not because they were veterans of any war alone, but because they were human beings. I think that it will be recognized by the American people that any nation that can spend, as we have spent, over $100 billion since the end of World War II in helping peoples in many countries all over the world might, with ordinary good judgment and sympathetic understanding, be willing to authorize some pittance for those who, in another day, were willing to lay down their lives that freedom 72275-61--33 might live and who, now in their declining years, need some surcease from labor and adequate sustenance to keep body and soul together, and to live in dignity, comfort and peace. I feel sure that this committee and the Congress will continue to give sympathetic consideration to the needs of the veterans of all wars, and I am hopeful that some action will be taken to provide additional benefits for the veterans of World War I, who in some respects feel that they have been left behind whenever perfecting and liberalizing amendments to the veterans program are passed by the Congress. The average age of our World War I veterans is now over 65 and the great majority is far from being financially well off. When they were released from active duty at the end of the war, they received a gratuity of $50 from the Federal Government. My own State of Massachusetts granted its returning veterans a $100 gratuity. The fortunate ones had a job waiting for them. There were no reemployment rights in those days, no so-called 52-20 club benefits, as the readjustment allowance program has been described, no liberalized education and training program, as was authorized in the GI bill for our World War II and Korean war veterans. In some small measure, a liberalized and more generous program of benefits for the aging veterans of World War I, if authorized now before it is too late since, with each passing day, their number becomes less, will do much to compensate for the enlightened and far more generous veterans programs the Congress provided for the Nation's returning heroes of later wars. I am very thankful to you, Mr. Chairman, and the members of this subcommittee for the high privilege you have accorded me to present my views. STATEMENT OF HON. ALEXANDER PIRNIE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK IN BEHALF OF H.R. 3173 Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to testify in behalf of my bill H.R. 3173, to extend service pension benefits to certain persons who served honorably as commissioned officers in the Philippine constabulary during the period beginning August 8, 1901, and ending January 1, 1920. Mr. Chairman, I am aware of the policy of this committee restricting such benefits to those who served during wartime and am in general accord with this principle. Nevertheless, I believe that Congress has a responsibility to provide for the veteran, his widow and his children whose organization engaged in missions comparable in hazard to those in wartime. It appears that the activities of the Philippine constabulary involved such hazards. I am hopeful that my bill will insure proper recognition of the services rendered by members of the Philippine constabulary many of whom are in great need of benefits. Statement of HON. LOUIS C. Rabaut, a Representative in Congress FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, IN SUPPORT OF HIS BILL, H.R. 2516 Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I very much appreciate having the opportunity of submitting a statement to your committee in support of my bill, H.R. 2516. This proposal is designed to protect certain veterans' wives from losing their widows' pension after the death of their husbands. Under present law a veteran's pension automatically ceases upon the veteran's death. His widow must then apply for a widow's pension in her own right. It is possible, and it has happened, that the widow's application can be denied on the basis of completely new and separate review of her deceased husband's record and qualification for a pension-even though he had already been adjudged eligible and had been receiving a pension for many years prior to his death. I do not think this is fair and such a denial has the effect of depriving an often elderly widow of her sole source of income. My bill amends section 541(a), title 38 of the United States Code in such a way as to waive the present requirement that the veteran had to have served at least 90 days in the military to be eligible for a pension. This waiver-contained in the four short words: "was receiving pension or"-would apply only in cases where the veteran was actually receiving a pension at the time of his death; and, besides waiving the 90-day requirement in such cases, would have the additional effect of eliminating altogether the completely new review of a widow's application in such instances. I believe my bill will establish a standard of fairplay and equity in cases where strict application of the letter of the law is now creating unfair results. And I will appreciate the members of the Veterans' Affairs Committee giving my proposal favorable consideration. STATEMENT OF HON. LOUIS C. RABAUT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE MICHIGAN, IN SUPPORT OF HIS BILL, H.R. 2517 Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appreciate having the opportunity of submitting a statement to your committee in support of my bill, H.R. 2517, introduced during the present Congress to provide that in determining income of World War I veterans and their widows for the purpose of ascertaining eligibility for pensions, payments under title II of the Social Security Act shall not be taken into account. The majority of our World War I veterans are now past 65 years of age. Only about half of the original doughboys of 1917 and 1918 are still living—or I should say many are still existing. The annual death toll of these defenders of our Nation averages 110,000. Unfortunately, the World War I veterans are lumped with some 20 million other veterans insofar as veterans benefits are concerned. This places them at a great disadvantage since cost estimates are immediately based upon the total of all veterans whenever legislation is suggested favorably affecting the veterans of our country. The doughboys of World War I did not have such advantages awaiting them as were provided for the veterans of World War II and the Korean conflict. The disastrous effects of the two major depressions blighted their economic opportunities and, as a consequence, hundreds of thousands of them have not been able to build up substantial social security benefits or take advantage of other pension programs now in effect in most major industries. The maximum benefit payment an individual may receive under the social security law is $127 per month. But according to the Social Security Administration, the average monthly benefit for the month of April 1961 for a man at age 65 or a woman at age 62 was $74.46. This is an annual payment of $893.52. If a veteran, with no dependents, entitled to receive a veteran's pension were permitted to have social security benefit payments excluded as income under Public Law 86-211, he would be entitled to a pension payment of $85 per monthprovided he had no other income or an annual payment of $1,020. This payment, coupled with the average social security payment of $893.52 totals $1,913.52 annually. A veteran, with one dependent would, under the same public law receive only $5 a month additional-an annual pension of $60 more. The income limitation as established by Public Law 357 of the 82d Congress, May 23, 1952, is $1,400 for an unmarried veteran and $2,700 for a married veteran with a minor child or children. This income limitation was predicated on the increased cost of living. A look at the Consumer Price Index of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, for May 1952 shows the cost-of-living index as 113 points and for May 1961 it is 127.4. This is an increase of 14.4 points and represents a tremendous increase in the cost of living for all of us—but especially for our World War I veterans who, mostly retired now, are living on fixed incomes. Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, I plead for favorable consideration of my bill which will allow our older, retired citizens to enjoy the social security benefits which they have earned, and that they not be taken into account in determining their eligibility to receive pension benefits as veterans of World War I. I thank you. STATEMENT OF GEORGE M. RHODES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the members of this distinguished committee for the privilege of presenting my views in support of H.R. 5853, which I introduced. My proposal would provide a pension of $100 a month to veterans of World War I who have reached the age of 65. There is little doubt that among the most worthy proposals considered in this session of Congress are bills to provide adequate pension benefits to our 21⁄2 million fellow citizens who served their country during the First World War. |