The income limitations of the Veterans' Benefits Act of 1957 are amended by deleting "1,400" and "2,700” and inserting in lieu thereof "1,800" and "3,000," respectively.

H.R. 10231 would grant increased benefits to 690,803 veterans that include 637,132, World War I; 50,023, World War II; and 3,648, Korean conflict.

Benefits for widows or dependents of these veterans total 282,949 and includes 263,640, World War I; 18,637, World War II; and 672, Korean conflict. These statistics were issued by the Veterans' Administration March 20, 1964.

It is estimated that the additional cost would be less than $231 million the first year. This cost would be reduced by a large amount each year due to the high death rate of these aged veterans.

In debate on the House floor in 1959, it was stated as need is one of the basic requirements for pension, we should know something about the income of pensioners from other sources. of the single veterans now on the pension rolls, 71 percent have annual income from outside sources of less than $400. Eighty percent have incomes of less than $600, while only 9 percent have incomes above $900.

Income of married veterans receiving pensions shows 58 percent have less than $900 yearly income. For 85 percent, annual income does not exceed $1,800 and only 15 percent are getting more than $1,800.

There were 802,198 veterans receiving non-service-connected disability pension on March 20, 1959. Of that number, 719,445 were veterans of World War I.

The veterans under the provisions of the "old part III law," with a few exceptions were over 65 years of age on June 30, 1960. The veterans under this law were required to undergo two strict medical examinations for a degree of physical disability, unemployability, service of more than 90 days, and were within the income limitations of $1,400 for single and $2,700 for married with a dependent. The last increase granted for this group was in 1952, and the high cost of living has advanced considerably since that date.

In the war against poverty, Mr. Walter W. Heller, Chairman of the President's Economic Advisers, reported a family having a cash income of less than $3,000 a year should be classified in the poverty group.

We would like to have this committee give careful and favorable consideration to H.R. 10231, for the service it would rightfully render in the relief of human misfortune and frustration for a million and a half veterans and widows and dependents.

Mr. KORNEGAY. Congressman Olsen, thank you very much.

We are pleased to have as our next witness, Congressman St. Onge. Congressman, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM L. ST. ONGE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

Mr. ST. ONGE. Mr. Chairman and member of the committee, I appreciate the fact that your committee is holding hearings on my bill, H.R. 11210 and want to thank you for the opportunity to present my views and comments on this bill.

H.R. 11210 seeks to amend title 38 of the United States Code by adding a new paragraph to section 503 of this title. The purpose of this amendment is to provide that in determining income of a veteran for pension purposes certain amounts paid by him in connection with the

last illness or death of his wife or a child shall not be included in his income.

As constituted now, section 503, subparagraph (7), provides that a widow or child of a deceased veteran be allowed to exclude expenses incurred for the veteran's just debts, the cost of his last illness, and the expenses of his burial in determining their entitlement to death pension. This is done, of course, to the extent where such expenses are not reimbursed under chapter 23 of title 38.

The same consideration, however, is not given to the living veteran with regard to his just debts and expenses for last illness and burial incurred by the death of his wife or a child. Oftentimes, when a situation of this sort arises, it creates a grave hardship and injustice to the veteran concerned. Permit me to cite a typical example:

A veteran receiving pension suffers the loss of his wife. Her death automatically establishes the veteran as a single man under the law and he is subject to lower income limitations prescribed for veterans without dependents. The wife may have had a $1,000 life insurance. policy, but the cost of her last illness together with the funeral expenses may have amounted to $3,000. The veteran may have to use up his last savings, if any or borrow money, in order to pay off the expenses, less the proceeds from the insurance policy.

Thus, the veteran has not only lost his wife, but may also wind up broke and in debt. But this is not all. At this point, the Veterans' Administration informs him that his pension for the current year is terminated because the $1,000 he received from his wife's policy is considered income and cannot be deducted from the expenses incurred by her illness and death. According to the law, the $1,000 so-called income, plus the fact that he is now recognized as single, brings his income over the limit set by law; hence the VA stops his pension.

A situation of this sort makes the veteran a triple loser at a time when he is undergoing severe emotional strain and mental anguish. He has lost his wife, he has lost his savings or gone into debt, and he has lost his pension. I believe that this is too harsh. We cannot do anything about the loss of his wife, but we can at least help ease the burden of his other two losses, particularly to make certain that he does not lose his pension which might cause severe financial strain in his advanced years.

This is what my bill aims to accomplish. I want to amend the current law, so that when a veteran loses his wife or a child, his expenses incurred for any just debt, last illness, and funeral can be deducted from his income for that year, and thus enable him to continue to receive his pension.

Mr. Chairman, I urge you and the members of this committee to give earnest consideration to the proposal contained in my bill, which geeks to correct this situation.

Mr. KORNEGAY. Congressman St. Onge, thank you very much.

We are pleased to have as our next witness, Congressman Trimble. Congressman, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES W. TRIMBLE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS, REGARDING H.R. 2332

Mr. TRIMBLE. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I wish to appear here in behalf of H.R. 2332. It has been a long, hard fight for the veterans of World War I, and I want to lend my full support to this piece of legislation. I hope it can be favorably reported."

Mr. KORNEGAY. Congressman Trimble, thank you very much. We are pleased to have as our next witness, Congressman Charles Wilson of California. Congressman, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES H. WILSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Mr. WILSON. Mr. Chairman, and other distinguished members of the committee, I appreciate this opportunity to add my few words for your consideration while you are weighing the merits of H.R. 2332 and other pending veterans' aid bills.

I have been greatly disturbed by the lack of a significant boost in veterans' aid so far during the life of this 88th Congress. I am convinced that many veterans are in great need of increased assistance, and none are more in need than the older veterans of the First World War.

The planned "war on poverty" will soon begin to take legislative shape, and there can be very few who doubt the necessity of the programs and projects contained in that bill. In addition, there is once again real hope that a realistic medical-care program may be approved before adjournment this year.

If a strong veterans' aid bill can also be enacted, Mr. Chairman, this Congress will take its place in history as one of the most productive and pace setting of all time. I would like to return home this year with that feeling of accomplishment, and I am sure every member of this committee shares my desire.

H.R. 2332 may not be the best possible bill the commitee could enact. I, of course, am not familiar with all the pending veterans' aid measures. However, H.R. 2332 is the purpose of the hearing today, and if the committee can accept the principle involved in this present bill and other related proposals to help our older veterans a major step forward will have been taken.

Something more has to be done for all our veterans, and in particular for the veterans of World War I. It may be this present bill-or another bill-or it may even be a combination of several bills. This judgment I leave to the members of the distinguished Committee on Veterans' Affairs, but I do believe that more assistance is needed and must be supplied.

I know that this committee will fully consider each and every pending proposal, and I also know that the members of this committee have the best interests of all veterans at heart. Whatever in its wisdom this committee sends to the floor of the House will have my full support, and I am convinced it will have the support of a majority of our colleagues in both parties. I thank the committee for the opportunity to place these words in the record.

33-917-64-16

Mr. KORNEGAY. Congressman Wilson, thank you very much.

We are pleased to have as our next witness, Congressman Burkhalter. Congressman, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF HON. EVERETT G. BURKHALTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Mr. BURKHALTER. Mr. Chairman, as the Representative of the 27th Congressional District of California I am proud to be here before the Veterans' Affairs Committee to speak in support of my legislation which would provide pensions for certain veterans of World War I.

This legislation has been introduced in one form or another for the past several years. I am pleased to see that the committee now will take it under consideration during this session of Congress. As you know, the legislation which I, and several other Members, have sponsored would provide for a $100-per-month pension for certain World War I veterans and their widows and dependents. It is estimated that less than 3 million veterans or their widows or dependents would be eligible for this pension. I do not see how any valid argument can be made against this legislation. The veterans who fought and defended this country in the First World War are dying at the rate of about 300 per day. Many, many of them are forced to live at an almost substandard level because of an inadequate level of income. How anyone can deny these veterans a pension which would help to ease their last years is inconceivable to me. The relief of human discomfort, and in many cases outright misery, is justified no matter what the cost. The men who were willing to offer their lives for the country in the great debacle of World War I did not receive any of the benefits that veterans who fought in subsequent wars received. There was no GI bill for college, home, or business loans, vocational training, or any of the other enlightened programs of veteran rehabilitation that we developed for our soldiers of World War II and the Korean war. It is a matter of simple justice to our soldiers of the First World War that a pension for their relief be passed by the Congress. The best they have received in the past was a $60 "discharge bonus" and veterans' hospital-medical service when a veteran proved unable to bear the costs of his medical expenses. While defending the country the average enlisted man of World War I received a monthly pay of $30 which was hardly enough to cover his living expenses let alone leave any money to be saved for the future. Too quickly and too long has the veteran of World War I been the "forgotten man." Even his efforts for fair treatment when he conducted his "bonus march" on Washington in 1932 resulted in only a slight improvement of his condition.

Mr. Chairman, in light of our past history of neglect and inconsideration of our soldiers of World War I, in view of the need by many of them at present along with their widows and dependents, in consideration of proper honor and respect for the men who so gallantly defended the Nation when they were called on to do so, and in the name of simple humanity and justice to the long ago warriors of our great country I urge that the Veterans' Affairs Committee and the Congress favorably pass on this legislation so that the just debt of the Nation to our remaining World War I veterans will be honorably repaid. I thank you.

Mr. KORNEGAY. Congressman Burkhalter, thank you very much. We are pleased to have as our next witness, Congressman Curtin. Congressman, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLARD S. CURTIN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, REGARDING H.R. 6713

Mr. CURTIN. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, 1 appear before you today in support of H.R. 6713, a bill which I introduced to provide a pension for veterans of World War I, and which is but one of many bills which have been introduced on this subject.

Many, many U.S. veterans, and especially the veterans of World War I, are extremely pleased that these hearings have been scheduled and that this matter will be given the attention of your committee. Ever since I have been a Member of the Congress, I have voted for all legislation which would benefit the veteran, as I have long felt that our war veterans are richly deserving of anything we can do for them. However, I have, at the same time, always felt that the veterans of all of our wars should be treated equally. It has seemed to me that the veterans of World War I have not received as many benefits as have the veterans of later conflicts. For these earlier veterans, there was no GI bill of rights, no veteran housing, or small business loans, et cetera. I certainly do not begrudge these benefits to our veterans of later wars; my only feeling is that we must try to equalize the treatment of our veterans, so that the veterans of World War I, who, I believe, received only $60 on discharge, should now get some further benefits.

President Theodore Roosevelt spoke of the veterans in 1901. His statement at that time, although speaking of the veterans of the Civil War, is equally appropriate today when he said—

No other citizen deserves so well of the Republic as the veteran. They did the one deed which, if left undone, would have meant that all else in our history went for nothing. But for their steadfast promise, all our annals would be meaningless and our great experiment in popular freedom and self-government a gloomly failure.

The veterans of our wars are a class of our citizens who are especially deserving of our thanks and gratitude, and there is certainly no doubt that those who risked their lives and limbs in the preservation of this Nation are entitled to a pension. I feel very deeply that our veterans of World War I are deserving of the pension called for in my bill. However, whatever is done for these men must be considered quickly, because time is fleeting. There were approximately 5 million men in World War I, but there are only about 2 million veterans left today. Their average age is approximately 70 years. Therefore, in our discussion about these pensions, let us be thorough and fair, but, above all, let us hurry to a final conclusion, so that as many as possible of this group of veterans may be helped.

Therefore, I respectfully request your early and favorable consideration of this legislation. Thank you.

Mr. KORNEGAY. Congressman Curtin, thank you very much.

We are pleased to have as our next witness, Congressman Short. Congressman, you may proceed.