Veterans who were receiving compensation for service-connected disabilities, showing degree of impairment, and monthly value of awards as of Dec. 31, 1953

Veterans who were receiving compensation for service-connected disabilities, showing degree of impairment, and monthly value of awards as of Dec. 31, 1953-Con.

Mr. BIRDSALL. There is one more insert that I thought possibly you may want. We have inserted it in the prior hearings, and that is a tabulation of expenditures, by object, for Spanish War, World War I, and World War II, veterans and their dependents, showing the exact expenditures, the cumulative amount that has been spent on those benefits. It covers all the various programs that we have. Mr. SAYLOR. Without objection, that study will be made a part of the record.

Mr. BIRDSALL. This covers the situation through June 30, 1953. (The matter referred to is as follows:)

Disbursements for veterans' benefits made by Veterans' Administration through June 30, 1953

1 Includes disbursements for veterans with service after June 27, 1950.

2 Includes central office medical administrative cost. Applied also to trust fund and other appropriated accounts not listed above.

3 Includes medical administrative cost at field stations.

Included in the total of $926,849,619 is $436,623,692 obligation authority transferred to Corps of Engineers.

Mr. BIRDSALL. The proposed increases in, or liberalization of, statutory rates, gets into the field of comparative disabilities. For example, we have the incidence of the loss of use of an eye, in combination with the loss of use of a hand or foot, where it is desired to place that into the category which now contemplates the need for an attendant. Under that concept, you are confronted with whether or not you would want to liberalize as to other equally meritorious conditions besides the one specified.

Mr. SAYLOR. Of course, Mr. Birdsall, I only speak for myself as a member of this committee. I might say to you that since most of these bills are actually dealing with the field in which you are now testifying, with service-connected cases, it has always been my opinion that it is our duty not only to see to it that they receive the minimum that they are entitled to, but the maximum to which these men who sacrificed for our country should receive.

Mr. BIRDSALL. I just mentioned the fact that you may want to look into the basis for the rates that are in a specific category, so that you can compare the various proposed conditions.

I do not think it will be necessary to go further into the presumptive service-connected question, because it is covered by the reports and the comparative charts will enable you to discern the distinction between the bills.

There are several bills on your agenda that will be very difficult to administer. They are very, very broad with reference to the acceptance, for example, of an affidavit of the veteran, and things of that

sort.

We have gone into those very completely, and I think with that statement that I will go into the pensions subject.

With reference to pensions, you have increased rates proposed in varying amounts, and we have given the estimates of cost, and have commented upon the merits of the bills in our reports to the committee.

On the increases of the permanent and total rates, and the aid and attendance, the Veterans' Administration report was unfavorable, and the Bureau of the Budget recommended strongly against favorable consideration.

There are bills, also, on the income limitations, which contain various types of liberalizations. This digest, I think, will be convenient to you, in comparing the various proposals.

The costs are given for the bills and on the question of income limitations, in our report on those, the Administrator stated that in view of the recent liberalization of the income limitations and because of the potential cost involved, it was his opinion that the enactment of such legislation would not be in the best interests of the Nation as a whole, or veterans and their dependents in particular. The Bureau of the Budget advised that the enactment of this type of bill would not be in accord with the program of the President.

We have other eligibility requirements which would be changed. We have one bill, for example, which would have the effect, really, of granting a pension based on age 65, and there, of course, you get into the matter of costs. The estimated cost of that bill runs $90 million the first year.

There is another chart here which I think I should insert into the record, showing the age projection of World War I and World War II

veterans, and it shows by the various years the total number of living

veterans.

Mr. SAYLOR. Without objection, those charts will be made a part of the record.

(The matter referred to is as follows:)

Projected number of living World War I veterans, by age: 1955–95, as of June 30 1

1 Estimated by a chain computation starting with the 1950 age distribution and involving the use of 5-year survival rates (low mortality) for native white males shown in the Bureau of the Census publication, Forecasts of the Population of the United States, 1945-75. The age distribution for 1950 was estimated by the application of appropriate 1-year survival rates for white males (derived from Bureau of the Census life tables for 1919-21, 1920-29, 1929-31, 1930-39, and 1939-41) to the 1918 distribution of World War I veterans by year of age based on records of 3.7 million war-risk insurance applicants (U. S. Army Medical Department, The Medical Department of the U. S. Army in the War, vol. XV, Statistics, Part I: Army Anthropology).

2 Less than 1,000.

Source: Research Division, Coordination Service, Veterans' Administration.

Projected number of living World War II veterans, by age: 1955-2000, as of June 301

1 Estimated by a chain computation starting with the 1950 age distribution of males and females involving the use of 5-year survival rates (low mortality) for native white males and females shown in the Bureau of the Census publication, Forecasts of the Population of the United States, 1945-75. The 1950 composite age distribution was estimated by application of appropriate survival rates (computed from 1947 and 1948 mortality data for white males compiled by the National Office of Vital Statistics and from Bureau of the Census 1939-41 life tables for white females) to the male and female components of the "potential" World War II veteran population as of July 25, 1947, i. e., persons who served in the Armed Forces at any time between Sept. 16, 1940, and July 25, 1947, including those still in service on the latter date.

2 Less than 1,000.

Source: Research Division, Coordination Service, Veterans' Administration.

Mr. BIRDSALL. You also have bills that would reduce the number of days of service required. At the present time it is 90 days, or discharge for disability incurred in line of duty. Of course, as to that, you have your precedent of prior legislation, and there being an exception in the case of the Spanish-American War veterans, where the period involved is 70 days, but the widow and children cannot take pension if that particular veteran dies.

The general requirement is 90 days. With reference to the Indian wars, because of the nature of those hostilities, there was required service through a campaign or an expedition or 30 days.

There are additional groups proposed to be added for pension purposes.

We have, then, a group that could be referred to as the Mexican border group. That particular period during which service was rendered there is considered a peacetime period. Disability incurred during the period is compensable, and at wartime rates if the disability was incurred under extrahazardous conditions, or conditions simulating war.

That period of service has not been considered as war service.

The war service begins with World War I-April 6, 1917-and then you have the hostilities terminating on November 11, 1918, and if they are in service by that date, then service any time before July 2, 1921, is counted.

You also have a group here that would be made eligible for Indian war pensions. The group consists of some persons who served in the regular forces in Montana, Wyoming, or South Dakota, in October or November of 1906, in a Ute uprising.

The present laws do not recognize any Indian campaigns or expeditions beyond 1898.

There also is a bill to bring in male nurses. That bill is not new in the history of veterans' legislation. It has been brought up a number of times. These men had a civilian status, as contrasted with the female nurses who became part of the Armed Forces in 1901. The Congress later recognized the service of female nurses, and gave them pension and other benefits.

Mr. SAYLOR. I notice that you did not comment on the bill of Mrs. St. George.

Mr. BIRDSALL. We have that included in the statement, and it is down near the end, Congressman. However, I can go to that right now, if you desire.

Mr. SAYLOR. No; it is perfectly all right; I just happened to see that you did not cover it.

Mr. BIRDSALL. We have several WAAC bills.

The proposed Pension Act of 1954 is a bill that is designed to establish a uniform pension law, and apply it prospectively a certain period of time after its enactment, and it would, for the most part, really restate part III of the pension program, as contained in the Veterans Regulations.

It would also apply to the Spanish-American War veterans. It is only for disability. It does not take in death cases, and these SpanishAmerican War cases, as to new claims, following the effective date of the act, they would have to go on under the proposed law involving permanent and total disability, and income limitations; whereas, at