recent trend is to grant the benefits of increased wartime disability rates to all veterans serving in the unsettled atmosphere of a recently quieted battlefront, and who must continue on as an army of occupation in foreign lands unsettled and tense as a result of wartime destruction and suffering. Indeed, if any discrimination is to be found, it already exists against the World War I veterans with the earliest termination date of all the three modern wars. In my opinion, the recent trend to extend wartime termination dates beyond the actual cessation of hostilities for the purpose of paying wartime disability benefits, coupled with the decreasing numbers of World War I army of occupation veterans whose earning capacity diminishes each day, afford excellent arguments in favor of the passage of H. R. 4668. Hon. EDMUND P. RADWAN, CONGRESS OF THE UNITED. STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Chairman, Subcommittee on Compensation and Pensions, Washington, D. C. DEAR COLLEAGUE: Thank you for the opportunity to submit a statement in behalf of H. R. 1065, introduced by my predecessor, Hon. Norris Poulson. The purpose of this legislation is to recognize naval service performed in sweeping the North Sea of mines in 1919 as service in World War I. During the year following the end of World War I, it was necessary for our Navy to perform the great and most hazardous task of sweeping 56,000 mines which had been planted in the North Sea during the previous year. The sweepers which performed this task were manned to some extent by young men who had joined the United States Navy shortly after November 11, 1918. These men, therefore, under the present law enjoy no recognition or status other than that of members of our peacetime Armed Forces. The officers and men in this sweeping operation were exposed to great hardships along with a higher percentage of fatal accidents and permanent injuries than had been the average experience in the United States Navy during the fighting of World War I. This service for our country was performed without extra pay or bonus of any kind. As wartime benefits and status were granted to men who joined our Armed Forces during the 2 years following the surrender of our last recognized enemy of World War II, it seems that minesweeper men of 1919 should be given similar treatment. H. R. 1065 is intended to correct the situation which now exists by providing a change from peacetime status to wartime status for the great service they rendered to their country. I respectfully ask that the committee give favorable consideration to this legislation. GLENARD P. LIPSCOMB. Hon. EDMUND P. RADWAN, CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Chairman, Subcommittee on Compensation and Pensions, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Washington, D. C. DEAR COLLEAGUE: In reply to your letter of March 19 regarding H. R. 1930, which is now pending before your Subcommittee on Compensation and Pensions, I am enclosing herewith a short statement in behalf of the legislation. I have no desire to appear before the subcommittee in person and trust you will give full consideration to H. R. 1930 on its merits. Sincerely yours, CHARLES B. HOEVEN, 45583-54-12 Member of Congress, Eighth District of Iowa. STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES B. HOEVEN, MEMBER OF CONGRESS, EIGHTH DISTRICT OF IOWA, SPONSOR OF H. R. 1930, SUBMITTED TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMPENSATION AND PENSIONS, COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS H. R. 1930 would grant disability ratings to veterans suffering from severe industrial inadaptability as a result of war service. It will be noted that under the terms of the bill, the Veterans' Administration cannot grant permanent and total disability ratings to this type of veteran unless there is sound medical evidence and/or examination and other evidence which establishes that a veteran's serviceconnected disability has caused a severe industrial inadaptability rendering him unemployable or incapable of following continuous and gainful occupation. Such evidence most certainly will disclose whether or not there is reasonable certainty of continuance of permanent disability throughout life. If it is determined that medical treatment cannot overcome the disability within a reasonable time, the veteran should not be penalized because he cannot go to work in industry. If the veteran is totally unable to work on account of war injuries, the Veterans' Administration should classify him as totally disabled. A competent industrial worker who is permanently and wholly disabled as a result of war injuries should not be penalized in any way. The bill also provides for other evidence to determine whether a veteran's disability has caused a serious industrial inadaptability which makes him unemployable. Each individual case must be fully investigated on its own merits. The bill contemplates that whenever it is found that a veteran is so incapacitated that he cannot during the remainder of his natural life engage in his continuous and gainful occupation in industry he should be granted a permanent disability rating. The procedure in determining the facts amply protects the Veterans' Administration. By the same token, a full investigation will give justice to the individual veteran involved. The legislation has considerable merit, and I recommend that H. R. 1930 receive your favorable consideration. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C., March 24, 1954. Hon. EDMUND P. RADWAN, Chairman, Subcommittee on Compensation and Pensions, Washington 25, D. C. DEAR ED: In connection with H. R. 3916, I introduced same at the request of some interested veterans from New York. I trust that your subcommittee will give the bill serious consideration. Sincerely yours, PAUL A. FINO, Member of Congress. STATEMENT OF HON. PATRICK J. Hillings, Member of Congress, 25th DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Mr. Chairman, I wish to submit to the committee, a letter I received from one of my constituents, Mr. George W. Cochrane, of Pico, Calif. My bill, H. R. 7436, was introduced at the request of Mr. Cochrane. The letter follows. Hon. PATRICK J. HILLINGS, Washington, D. C. PICO, CALIF., December 10, 1953. DEAR SIR: During the Spanish American War, the Government asked for medical_men for Puerto Rico. I was a student at Tufts Medical College at the time. I volunteered and was enlisted as an Army contract nurse. I took the Regular Army oath and was put under Army orders and discipline. I served from August 30, 1898, to January 31, 1899, when my contract was annulled and I was honorably discharged. While in the service, I contracted malaria, then an almost fatal case of typhoid. I was left with a persistent malaria and amoebic dysentery. I was not able to resume my studies or even to live at home, as the climate brought on recurring malarial attacks. Doctors ordered me west, where the malaria left me, but the dysentery grew worse, until I had no control over my bowels. In my desperate search for health, I read about a new and radical French treatment, and asked for it at the Presbyterian Hospital in Bismarck, N. Dak. I was cured there-after living 16 years with my malady. Two years later, I volunteered in World War I and served for more than a year as a secretary in the YMCA overseas. Now I am 78 years of age and at any time may have to give up work. I have been penalized by the above-described disability during the years when a man should be establishing himself for his future. Women nurses have been allowed pensions, but the male nurses were overlooked. We volunteered our services at $30 a month, which was sergeant's rating, when the Nation needed our special work. I am thanking you in advance for your consideration of this matter. Respectfully yours, GEORGE W. COCHRANE. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, Hon. EDMUND P. RADWAN, House of Representatives: HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, DEAR COLLEAGUE: Thank you for informing me that my bill, H. R. 3372, will come before the Subcommittee on Compensation and Pensions at 10 o'clock on Wednesday, March 31. I will try to be there to present my personal views on the bill. If I am unable to appear personally, I will submit a statement for the consideration of the members. With kind regards, I am, CHARLES R. HOWELL. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, Hon. EDMUND P. RADWAN, Chairman, Subcommittee on Compensation and Pensions, DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: In introducing H. R. 3372, I have two objectives in mind. The first is to increase by 10 percent the monthly rates of compensation for service-connected disability or death payable on the effective date of this act. This increase I believe is justified because of the continuing rise in the cost of goods and services needed to sustain veterans and their survivors. I strongly urge consideration of this portion of the bill by the members of the subcommittee. The second objective of the bill is to relate the rate of compensation paid for service-connected disability or death to some economic index that will fluctuate as the prices of goods and services fluctuate. The model I have chosen to follow is the so-called escalator-clause agreement used in many labor contracts, relying on the Consumers' Price Index of the Bureau of Labor Statistics as the economic indicator. In operation, the Secretary of Labor would report to the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs the change in percentage points of the Consumers' Price Index, averaged for the 6 months previous, as compared with the Consumers' Price Index averaged for the period January to June 1953, which period would serve as a base. For each percentage point increase in the CPI over the base period, the amount of compensation payable for service-connected disability or death would be increased by 1 percentage point over the amount payable at the time of enactment of this act. In the event a decrease should occur, there would be a corresponding decrease of 1 percentage point in the compensation payable. I have introduced this suggestion because I feel veterans and their survivors are entitled to some protection against shifts in prices they pay for goods and services of an essential nature. When prices of these items rise-sharply or suddenly, the veterans are without recourse, except by action of the Congress. The device I have proposed will supply some needed flexibility to adjust to change. I want to call to the attention to the subcommittee that the feature of flexibility extends in two directions. Compensation will rise as the cost of living rises, but compensation can also fall as the cost of living falls. It seems to me that this feature of adjustment operating in two directions has the advantage of protecting the veteran against increases in the cost of living for which he is not responsible. The feature also affords the Government some protection against continuing in operation abnormally high rates of compensation. We are living in a time when our economy is characterized by swift changes, both up and down. I sincerely believe that veterans and their survivors, dependent as they are upon fixed levels of income, merit some form of insurance against the fluctuations of our present day economy, and I recommend the bill as one form this insurance can take. With very kind regards, I am, CHARLES R. HOWELL. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Mrs. EDITH NOURSE ROGERS, Chairman, Veterans' Affairs Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MRS. ROGERS: I have studied H. R. 2469, to increase the rates of serviceconnected death compensation payable to dependent parents, and believe it to be worthy legislation. I would like to request that the committee take favorable action on this bill. With kindest regards, I am Sincerely yours, JAMES C. DAVIS. REMARKS BY CONGRESSMAN WILBUR D. MILLS IN REGARD H. R. 7705 Mr. Chairman, under the provisions of Veterans Regulation I (a), part III, as amended by Public Law 357, 82d Congress, pension may not be paid to any unmarried person whose annual income exceeds $1,400, or to any married person or person with minor children whose annual income exceeds $2,700. The law makes no provision for applying the higher income limitation in the case of a single veteran with a dependent parent. My attention has been called to cases wherein single veterans have been denied pensions they formerly received when their income exceeded $1,400 when these veterans were caring for dependent mothers or fathers who had no other place to live nor others to turn to in their hour of need. A single veteran might well be able to get by on the limitation in existing law applicable to single veterans, but I am sure the members of your committee will agree that a single veteran supporting a dependent parent is in no better financial position making $1,500 a year and caring for a dependent parent than is a veteran with a minor child. Actually the expenses of caring for such a dependent because of age and the need for medical attention may well exceed the cost of caring for a minor child. Under the internal revenue laws, recognition is given to this situation by providing a double personal exemption to those of 65 years of age. One veteran I have in mind particularly receives a salary of $1,800 per year as secretary of the draft board in his county. He has the responsibility of caring for his widowed mother. The office of the Veterans' Administration at Little Rock, Ark., denied him pension when it became aware of the fact that he had accepted this position. In reality, he accepted the job more or less as a patriotic duty because it was the desire of the members of the draft board that he serve in this capacity. He became greatly experienced in this field generally working as a service officer with the local American Legion post during the years he drew pension for non-service-connected total and permanent disability. He is still so disabled, and his responsibilities at home are far greater now since his mother is residing with him. It is my thought that we can well decide to amend paragraph II (a) of part III of Veterans Regulation I (a) by inserting immediately after "minor children" the following: "or a dependent mother or father." We will thus give full recognition to the established practice in the United States of children caring for their parents when necessary and not deny jobs to veterans who assume this laudable responsibility. The careful attention of the committee to this matter will be deeply appreciated. STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN A. BLATNIK TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMPENSATION AND PENSIONS OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I appreciate having an opportunity to submit this statement in support of H. R. 4445, a bill introduced by me to provide a special pension to holders of the Congressional Medal of Honor. It is my sincere hope that your committee will act favorably on this bill and that the Congress will enact it into law. The provisions of this bill can be easily explained. H. R. 4445 provides that a special pension of $100 per month shall be paid to all holders of the Congressional Medal of Honor, such special pension to be in addition to and not in lieu of, any other pension or veterans' benefit. It case the Congressional Medal of Honor was awarded posthumously, the special pension would be paid to the next of kin, to the widow if there is a widow, and if there is no widow living, then to the children of the decedent, and if there is neither a widow nor children, then to the parents of the deceased holder of the medal. At the present time holders of the Congressional Medal of Honor receive a special pension of $10 per month. H. R. 4445 would merely increase the amount to $100 per month. I am sure that no Member of Congress will disagree with the underlying philosophy of this bill. As you know, the Congressional Medal of Honor is awarded to those fighting men who have displayed exceptional bravery on the field of battle in defense of his country, to those who have acted beyond the call of duty in behalf of America. The purpose of this bill is to give greater substance to this honor than Congress has already bestowed upon these gallant men. I think that such an additional benefit is most appropriate and fully in accord with the policy of Congress in awarding the medal itself. It should also be pointed out that the cost of carrying out the purposes of this bill are relatively minor. As of June 24, 1953, only 3,122 Medals of Honor had been awarded by the Congress, and many of these holders or their next of kin have long passed from this world. I strongly urge the subcommittee to give favorable consideration to this measure, and thus give concrete evidence of the gratitude of our Nation to the brave men who offered their lives so freely in the defense of the United States. You may be sure that H. R. 4445 will receive enthustastic support from many of our colleagues when it comes to the House floor for debate. STATEMENT OF HON. HAROLD C. HAGEN, MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM MINNESOTA Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the Subcommittee on Compensation and Pensions, I am grateful to have the opportunity to appear before your committee this morning in behalf of my proposal, H. R. 2101. The purpose of the bill is to provide compensation for service-connected disability incurred in peacetime service at the same rate as the compensation now or hereafter payable for the disability had it been incurred in or aggravated by active military or naval service during wartime. The bill would accomplish this purpose by amending paragraph II, part II, Veterans Regulation No. 1 (a), as amended. Under existing law compensation for a service-connected disability incurred during peacetime is fixed at specific rates equivalent to 80 percent of those authorized for such disability incurred during wartime. I believe that most of our Members of Congress are anxious and willing to rectify the injustice from which the service-connected peacetime veteran is now suffering. Prior to the 20-percent |