Mr. CONNERY. Yes, for the better care of the men, getting more doctors. I can understand the chairman's idea of a soldiers' home, where the men would have the ordinary care. For instance, you cannot get the doctors at Cushing to go out 20 miles.

Captain KIRBY. My observation has been pretty close as to Mount Alto clinic, and I say you would have a hard time improving that clinic. They have the best doctors that you can get from Hopkins and Georgetown and the city of Washington. In other words, consultants of a type that the average type of veteran could not begin to pay for.

The CHAIRMAN. Mount Alto would not be suitable for a soldiers' home.

Captain KIRBY. Obviously not.

Mrs. ROGERS. That would interfere with the care of the sick, too. The CHAIRMAN. Yes; these men in soldiers' homes are not supposed to be, all of them, seriously ill; that is, to the extent of needing operations, and so on. What they need is a quiet atmosphere and room to move around in, without being disturbed, and some place where they will not be disturbed by others, and where there is no danger of being run over by traffic, or anything like that.

Captain KIRBY. Yes; and with something to occupy their minds. Where do you propose this woman's soldiers' home?

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I do not know.

Captain KIRBY. While it has been our privilege over the years to collaborate in the closest and friendliest spirit with the members of this committee, we feel that the effectiveness of the committee would be far greater should authority be obtained to have subcommittees of this committee visit the facilities during the recess and return with proposals that may even improve conditions now existing. This plan was followed about 10 years ago and the members of this committee returned to Washington better equipped than ever before to discuss the matters foremost in the minds of these men who spent endless hours in hospitals in sincerely attempting to rehabilitate themselves physically. In other words, Congress should be asked to appropriate sufficient money to permit the members of this committee to inspect the hospitals in their own and adjacent States. Even the visits will act as a stimulus to the men to whom the Nation owes such an everlasting debt of gratitude, and when Congress convenes next year Congress may take any remedial action deemed necessary.

In closing, it is desired to invite to the attention of this committee the present unrest among a class of men who have properly been described as some of our worst battle casualties. Reference is made to the so-called double-amputation cases, meaning those who lost two legs, or two arms, or two eyes, or one arm and one eye, or one leg and one eye, or one leg and one arm. Through regulations the old Veterans' Bureau declared these men entitled to the right of undisturbed insurance benefits. In the Madison L. Miller case, decided some time ago by the United States Supreme Court, it was ruled that the Veterans' Bureau had no authority for such a regulation, as the test for insurance payments should rest on whether the man is employed. No doubt some of the members of this committee have seen some of these cases and, because of their knowledge, may feel that none of these men are capable of any duty. Nevertheless, included in the group are some who, in spite of their harrowing disa

bilities, are striving to work at some trade or profession. In the light of this condition, we feel that this Congress would be utterly derelict in its duty to fail to recognize the supreme courage of these severely disabled veterans in endeavoring to keep themselves occupied. The best recognition and the fair recognition would be to amend the law in such a way that any veteran in this group shall be paid full insurance regardless of what they may do in the way of any limited occupation. The CHAIRMAN. Captain Kirby, the best thing to do is to write that regulation into the law.

Captain KIRBY. Write into the law a regulation such as was killed by the Miller case.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that in the bill you present?

Captain KIRBY. No; but we have it in another bill.

The CHAIRMAN. Captain Kirby, the lady from Massachusetts wants to ask a question.

Mrs. ROGERS. Captain Kirby, some of the nurses feel that they would like to have a higher rate of compensation, in order that they might be hospitalized, because there are not enough beds for them, you know. At the present time, the Veterans' Administration has been very slow

Captain KIRBY. You mean hospitalized in other than Government hospitals?

Mrs. ROGERS. Yes; so they may have their compensation-get compensation and get certain allowances for care in some private hospitals.

Captain KIRBY. There are cases of nurses really needing treatment. Mrs. ROGERS. Yes; really needing treatment. I know of one pathetic case, and in that case the woman's compensation was cut very unjustly, she was not hospitalized in a contract hospital, as she should have been. But, of course, she is entitled to that by law, whether it is service connected, or not.

Captain KIRBY. I think General Hines has ample authority to do that.

Mrs. ROGERS. Yes; I know he has.

Captain KIRBY. That is an administrative rather than a legislative proposition.

Mrs. ROGERS. That this is a very unjust case.

The CHAIRMAN. Captain Kirby, you are the last witness for your organization. We are going to thank you for this very enlightening statement and your courteous answers to all of these questions. I think your statement has been of a great deal of assistance to the committee.

Now, let me say to the membership of the committee, I am not going to hold a hearing tomorrow

Captain KIRBY. May I say, Mr. Chairman, I will be available at any time.

The CHAIRMAN. We may recall any of you later.

Captain KIRBY. I appreciate this opportunity.

The CHAIRMAN. We want to arrive at some conclusions as to what we want to report out and what we can get passed.

(Here followed discussion off the record as to adjournment.

The CHAIRMAN. If there is no objection, we are going to stand adjourned until 10:30 Wednesday morning.

(Thereupon a recess was taken in the hearing until 10:30 a. m., Wednesday, Mar. 3.)

TO AMMEND CERTAIN LAWS AND VETERANS' REGULATIONS EFFECTING WORLD WAR VETERANS AND THEIR DEPENDENTS

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 3, 1937

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON WORLD WAR VETERANS' LEGISLATION,

Washington, D. C. The committee met at 10:30 o'clock, Hon. John E. Rankin (chairman) presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. We will hear this morning the representatives of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and will first have Mr. Rice, their legislative representative. You may proceed, Mr. Rice, and put your men on in the order that you desire.

STATEMENT OF MILLARD W. RICE, LEGISLATIVE REPRE

SENTATIVE, VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS

Mr. RICE. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, last week, I made a general statement before the committee relative to the several objectives in which the Veterans of Foreign Wars are interested; that is, so far as veterans' legislation is concerned.

Now, I would like to discuss those various objectives and the bill in somewhat more detail, which I understand I am in order to do, except as to the insurance bills, which are being heard by a separate subcommittee.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, that insurance subcommittee will meet tomorrow morning in this room.

Mr. RICE. But it is as to the other veterans' bills and their objectives that we may have discussion before this committee?

The CHAIRMAN. That is right.

Mr. RICE. Our organization, this year, has divided its objectives and policies into five main points, the first three of which pertain to veterans. May I first state what the first three points in our general program of objectives are, so that you may get the philosophy that motivates our various veteran objectives.

Point 1 is adequate pensions for widows and orphans of all deceased war veterans, and increased pensions for dependents of deceased service-connected disabled veterans.

Point 2 is adequate benefits for disabled veterans, with due consideration for the length, type, and circumstances of the veterans' service, especially for men who served overseas; and point 3 is more effective Federal, State, county, and municipal employment, and civil service preference laws, which of course do not come before this committee.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Rice, you understand this committee cannot handle pensions.

Mr. RICE. Yes, that is right.

The CHAIRMAN. We are precluded, under the rules, from entertaining pensions.

Mr. RICE. I will not discuss that part of point 2 that pertains to pensions.

The CHAIRMAN. That will be all right.

Mr. RICE. Nor will I discuss point 3, at all, but I wanted you to have a coordinated idea of what our objectives are, and why we should give greater preference to some matters and less to others, dependent upon the other objectives.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you a bill that contains the provisions of point 2?

Mr. RICE. Yes, I have several bills that I propose to discuss. May I first discuss our point no. 1, relative to adequate pensions for widows and orphans of all deceased war veterans, and increased pensions for dependents, that is, widows and orphans and mothers and fathers of deceased service connected disabled veterans. We have embodied all of the objectives that we have in mind relative to pensions for widows and orphans in H. R. 2005, introduced by the chairman of this committee. I would like to insert that in the record at this point.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it is so ordered.

(H. R. 2005 is as follows:)

Mr. RICE. The bill might be said to be divided into four principal parts. The first section would provide for an increase of substantially 50 percent over and above the amounts now provided for widows and orphans and the dependent parents of those veterans who died while in the military service.

Mr. SAUTHOFF. Mr. Chairman, pardon my interruption, but what bill are you referring to?

Mr. RICE. H. R. 2005.

Mr. SAUTHOFF. I do not happen to have it before me.

Mr. RICE. And of those veterans who were suffering with serviceconnected disabilities and who died by reason of the service-connected disabilities. We would refer to that as class 1. The widow, without dependents of such veteran is now receiving $30 per month, and we would increase that basic amount up to $45 per month. A widow with one child is now receiving $40 per month. We would increase that up to $60 per month, which would be a 50-percent increase, and so on all the way through for these dependents under the present rates. At increased ages we would increase the present rates by 50 percent over and above what they now are; stating the amounts specifically in the bill.

As justification for our request in that respect, I might cite the fact that, since March 1933, the cost of living has increased by more than 30 percent and is still on its way upward.

Now, the rates have always been inadequate. Dependent widows, with children, find that it is almost impossible, under the present rates, to take care of the bare necessities of life and must receive some supplemental assistance, either from the veterans' organizations, other charitable organizations, or from the county or State relief able to take care of the bare necessities, let alone any of the minimum comforts of

life. Such a situation should not be. All of the necessities of life required for the widow and orphans of a deceased service-connected disabled veteran, or one who was killed in action, should be made possible out of the pension which she receives from the Federal Government, without the necessity of any supplemental assistance from a private charitable agency or the local government.

That, briefly, states the justification for our request for increasing this amount by at least 50 percent over and above what it now is. We consider that request as being very conservative, and would not feel that it was amiss if the amounts now provided were to be more than doubled over what they now are.

Our particular bill would increase, by 50 percent, the amounts now paid to a dependent mother or father. That is perhaps entirely too conservative, and we would like the committee to give consideration to increasing that amount even more; particularly in view of the fact that the dependent mother or father, particularly the mother, the Gold Star Mothers of those veterans who were killed in action, and who have received insurance payments-that those payments are about to be discontinued this year and next year and the year following. That is true also as to the widows of those men who were killed in action.

There are, however, more dependent mothers in that classification than there are widows. On the other hand, we do want to emphasize to this committee that such increases may be granted to the dependent mothers or fathers of veterans who were killed in action, or who died by reason of service-connected disabilities, as well as such increase for the widows of such classified veterans, should apply as to all within that classification, whether or not they had any Government insurance payment benefits.

In other words, we believe that a dependent mother of a veteran who was killed in action is deserving of the increase to the same extent, whether or not her son was sufficiently thoughtful to provide the insurance benefits for her in the event of his death. Most such veterans did have insurance policies, but some of them did not.

However, we do want to call attention to the fact that such insurance payments are now about to terminate in such cases, making it particularly desirous that a substantial increase should be granted at this time.

Class 2, or section 2 of our bill, would provide for approximately 50 percent increases for the second class of widows and orphans and

The CHAIRMAN. Before you leave that, Mr. Rice, would it disturb you to ask you questions?

Mr. RICE. I would be very happy to have you do so.

The CHAIRMAN. Of the dependent parents, the Gold Star Mothers, of course, the ones whose insurance payments expire, are the ones who are the most pressing, and it is, to my mind, the most pressing problem that we have. Now, in case this increase were not made, I will say, a horizontal increase of those compensations, what would you recommend with reference to those Gold Star parents whose insurance payments begin to expire in the spring? Have you any definite suggestion on that point?

Mr. RICE. Mr. Chairman, we agree with you that the problem is pressing, but it is pressing not only for the dependent mothers of

133654-37- -8