Thank you very much.

Mr. MEYER. Thank you.

Senator WILLIAMS. I have just received word that individual statements from Senators Thomas C. Hennings, Jr., Richard L. Neuberger, William Langer, Ernest Gruening, John O. Pastore, Gordon Allott, and Alan Bible will be filed in support of bills which they have sponsored and which are now pending before the Veterans' subcommittee. Senator Hennings' statement will be in support of S. 930 and S. 1138; Senator Neuberger's, Senator Langer's, Senator Gruening's, and Senator Pastore's statements will be in support of S. 1138; Senator Allott's will be in support of S. 270; and Senator Bible's in support of S. 750. All of these statements will be included in the record at this point. Also to be included in the record at this point are statements of organizations and persons who, for various reasons, were not able to present testimony, together with such materials as counsel has assembled or prepared for the information of the subcommittee.

(The matter referred to follows:)

STATEMENT BY SENATOR THOMAS C. HENNINGS, Jr., ON GI EDUCATION BENEFITS

Mr. CHAIRMAN. Not too many years ago the university campuses of this Nation were filled with young men wearing bits and pieces of uniforms which they had worn in the recent service of their country. At almost any university in the land one could see the insignia of some of the most famous fighting units our Nation has ever produced.

These young men *** even some young women *** were obtaining higher education because the Nation had been wise enough to grant to them educational benefits under the old GI bill of rights. That these returned veterans of World War II and Korea were improving their minds and themselves was, of course, of great individual importance to themselves. But, more important, it was of unmeasured and lasting benefit to the Nation. There is no profession, career, or vocation which today does not contain in its ranks a great many persons who received their education under the provisions of the GI bill of rights. Our hospitals, our defense industries, our building trades, our schools, our courts, and even our Congress are better staffed today because of the wisdom of that legislation.

The old GI bill expired on February 1, 1955. Since that time, millions of men and women have interrupted their private lives to serve the Nation in its Armed Forces, even though we are not and have not been at war. Because we are not at war, there are some who minimize the sacrifice these young persons make when they enter the armed services. But members of the armed services are constantly exposed to risk, either potential or actual. The Marines in Lebanon, the Army in Berlin and the Navy in the Formosa Strait all have been exposed to risks as genuine as those faced by the fighting men of World War II and Korea. Nor is today's training in the armed services of a type which would qualify a person as an excellent insurance risk. Live ammunition, supersonic aircraft, delicate and dangerous rockets are in wide use and there have been many accidental casualties. There is, perhaps, natural tendency on the part of those of us who served in our recent wars to minimize these training accidents. But, if we only stop and think for a moment, we soon realize that a wound suffered at an American training camp is just as painful as one suffered in the heat of battle.

Aside from the physical risk involved, there is a definite sacrifice on the part of every young man and woman who devotes a period of his or her life to serve in the Armed Forces. Since the GI bill expired in 1955, more than 63,000 young men and women from my own State of Missouri have interrupted their personal lives to serve. In all fairness, these men and women should be given the same educational opportunities as were given to the young men and women who served in World War II and Korea.

Many of the Nation's educators have testified before this Committee and pointed out that only about half of the best minds of our Nation's youth go to college. They also testified that between a third and a half of the youngsters who do not go indicate that lack of funds is the main reason for not attending.

Of course, we have sought to remedy this situation. The National Defense Education Act was passed last year by the Congress, but I am told that this act provides only a fraction of the loans needed by the Nation's students.

It is my belief that the Congress can benefit the Nation and play fair and just with the young people who served in the Armed Forces by approving the legislation needed to renew the educational benefits of the GI bill.

I might add that I am also in wholehearted support of the bill introduced by Senator Yarborough, the bill which calls for the extension of many of the provisions of the GI bill. However, I have limited myself to discussing the extension of the educational benefits only, and I urge this committee to favorably report the legislation.

STATEMENT BY SENATOR RICHARD L. NEUBERGER IN SUPPORT OF THE RESTORATION OF VETERANS EDUCATIONAL BENEFITS FOR PERSONNEL OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES BEFORE THE VETERANS' AFFAIRS SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I appreciate very much this opportunity to present my views to the subcommittee on this vital legislation.

The United States today is faced with a crisis in education which must be dealt with promptly and effectively or the machinery which sustains our material prosperity will begin to slow down, endangering not only our standard of living but also our position in the world. We are engaged with Russia in the cold war of the classroom.

We cannot afford to lose the cold war of the classrooms to the Communists; however, we are falling behind in the race for trained and skilled manpower. Let me quote briefly from the speech by the former Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, as reported in the hearings entitled "Shortage of Scientific and Engineering Manpower," conducted by the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy of the Congress.

"The emphasis which the Soviets are placing on science, and particularly on the training of new scientists and engineers, presents a real and growing challenge to us and to the free world. Today their technical schools and universities are turning out scientists and engineers who are well trained and highly competent. Since Geneva we know this. ***The facts and figures speak for themselves and they are not pleasant facts and figures. *** We require from 45,000 to 50.000 new trained engineers every year. We are getting half that number. Last June's crop was around 23,000. Russia, at that same time, produced 53,000 new engineers, and is expected to substantially increase that number next year and each year thereafter. She is graduating 120,000 new scientists and engineers of all types this year, which compares with our total of 70,000 graduates. Between 1950 and 1960, which may be the most critical decade of our national existence, Russia is expected to produce 1,200,000 trained engineers and scientists, against our 900,000."

Such are the hard facts which could threaten our national prosperity, our national defense, and even our very existence as a nation.

In the 84th and S5th Congress I sponsored legislation to restore the Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1952, which includes the veterans educational benfits. I was indeed pleased to join this year with the distinguished chairman of the Senate Veterans' Subcommittee, Senator Ralph Yarborough of Texas, in sponsoring S. 1138 to restore educational benefits to those who served in the Armed Forces after the Korean conflict. Our bill is sponsored by 25 Members of the Senate and has bipartisan sponsorship.

The so-called GI bill was allowed to die, and those who entered military service after January 31, 1955, are not receiving the benefits of the Veterans' Readjustment Act of 1952.

First and foremost of all the aspects of the GI bill of rights, the educational benefits should be restored. Let me explain why this program should be restored.

In the first place, it is a matter of simple equity to our present servicemen. We still are drafting men for duty with the military. We are still sending them to such remote and potentially dangerous outposts as Okinawa, the Aleutians, northern Alaska, Greenland, north Africa, our zone of Berlin, and to many other spots which are either unpleasant as localities in which to live or in close juxtaposition to our possible foes.

Why should these boys, dispatched to lonely outposts, be denied the GI bill benefits which went during World War II to many servicemen who never left the shores of the United States? Can such discrimination be defended? I think not.

Furthermore, think of the vast benefits which the GI bill brought to the United States as a whole while it was still in effect.

This measure raised the average educational level of millions of World War II veterans by three full grades-from the second year of high school to the freshman year of college. If better education is good for our Nation-and who would dispute this premise?-then this program was of incalculable good.

Consider the miraculous way in which the GI bill of rights has helped to produce the skills which America needs. It trained 180,000 doctors and registered nurses, 113,000 physical and research scientists, 450,000 civil engineers, 36,000 clergymen, 83,000 policemen and firemen, and 711,000 skilled mechanics. Can money alone even commence to measure the real wealth which these trained and skilled people have added to the productive resources of this country?

About 50 percent of the high school students who graduate in the upper 25 percent of their classes are not now receiving a college education. To lose the mental ability and alertness of these students is as much a wasted resource as if a forest burns or topsoil is washed away; perhaps more so. Let us send to college as many of our talented young people as possible.

The GI bill of rights, while not a panacea, will by the sheer law of averages add to the Nation's human resources the full capabilities of many of the gifted young men and women who might otherwise be permanently lost to college classrooms.

Mr. Chairman, we have heard the testimony of administration leaders in opposition to the restoration of the veterans educational benefits. While our country is falling behind in the cold war of the classrooms the administration has failed to present alternatives to the veterans educational program which would help give our country the lead in the training and education of skilled manpower, of the scientists and engineers which we so desperately need.

While the administration talks of the dollars-and-cents cost of the veterans educational program, without such a program there is a great human loss of potentially skilled and trained manpower. It is also a matter of record that the training of skills that such a veterans educational program would develop contribute a great deal to our society and to the Government through the increased earning power of the individual veteran. The cost is in the failure to have a veterans educational program.

The military opposes the veterans educational program because they say it will cut down on reenlistments in the Armed Forces. The military needs trained and skilled manpower to handle the complex weapons of modern warfare, and a scientist or engineer is worth much more to the military than an untrained person.

Mr. Chairman, the need for scientists and engineers and other trained and skilled manpower is clearly recognized. The veterans educational program after World War II and the Korean veterans educational program provided thousands of young men and women with the skills vital to our country. The reenactment of the GI educational benefits would be a great step forward and contribute greatly to the wealth and strength of our Nation.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to present this statement to your committee.

STATEMENT

OF WILLIAM LANGER (REPUBLICAN, NORTH DAKOTA) BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS, SENATE COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE, IN SUPPORT OF S. 1138

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee on Veterans' Affairs, Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, I urge the passing of S. 1138, a bill which provides educational and other readjustment benefits for post-Korean veterans.

I am one of the cosponsors of this bill, since I feel very strongly about giving every possible aid to the veterans who have given so much of themselves for the defense and the security of our Nation.

Mr. Chairman, since there will be numerous Senators and witnesses appearing in behalf of this measure, I shall not review an explanation of this GI bill for post-Korean veterans. Since Congress has previously passed GI bills similar

to S. 1138, we are all aware of the many excellent reasons why such bills should become law. The necessity of this bill is to make eligible for educational and vocational training assistance the veterans who first enter the active duty of the Armed Forces between January 1, 1955, and July 1, 1963, persons who do not qualify under previous legislation.

I would like to add one thing more, Mr. Chairman, and that is a letter that I have received from Mr. Ernest L. DeAlton, State supervisor of agricultural education, North Dakota Agricultural College, Fargo, N. Dak. In his letter he states as follows:

"This bill, if passed, should be of real help to farm veterans and others in North Dakota. I am glad to know you are one of the sponsors. What Congress does on the bill will make considerable difference in our plans for statewide supervision of institutional-on-farm training, which is gradually drawing to a close. Any enlightenment you can give us regarding the possible outcome of the bill will be appreciated.

"The institutional-on-farm training program has been very helpful to farm veterans in North Dakota.

"Present plans are to move the Veterans' Administration vocational rehabilitation and education division from Fargo to Fort Snelling. If Senate bill 1138 becomes law, I hope these offices will remain in Fargo. Moving them to Fort Snelling would complicate carrying out the program in our State."

I am sure that Members of Congress have received similar letters from institutions from their State who point out the need for this important bill. I conclude by urging favorable action be taken by this committee on S. 1138.

STATEMENT OF SENATOR ERNEST GRUENING, BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS, IN SUPPORT OF S. 1138, VETERANS' READJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1959

As a cosponsor of S. 1138, I wish to urge the passage of the Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act as soon as possible.

The continued need for maintenance of our Armed Forces by means of the drafting of men for service has been recognized by the recent enactment at this session of Congress of legislation extending the induction provisions of the Universal Military Training and Service Act.

Since the passage of the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, it has been recognized by the Congress that a special responsibility exists to make up, in some measure, to men who are drafted into the armed services, the loss they suffer because of the time they are required to spend away from their careers and their preparation for careers.

So, with the continued recognition of the need for extension of universal military training and service there should be continued recognition of responsibility for assistance to the men whose services are required by the Armed Forces. Although no current armed conflict exists for which our forces are required, the interruption to a man's career is no less serious when his services are needed by the Armed Forces during a period of cold war than during a period of actual conflict.

Men now drafted into the Armed Forces are still in need of assistance in obtaining an education which will prepare them for the careers of their choice. Men whose service has been required during the period since the Korean conflict should not be discriminated against with respect to Government assistance for education merely because of the dates during which they served. It is just as true of post-Korea service as of any other period of service in the Armed Forces that the time spent as a soldier, sailor, airman, or marine could not have been spent achieving an education. It is just as true that men whose service has occurred since the Korean conflict require education and training to prepare them for jobs as was the case for men whose service occurred at an earlier date.

Vocational rehabilitation assistance is, also, as important to men now serving who suffer disabilities during their time in the Armed Forces as it was to those whose service came at an earlier date.

Also, with respect to Government assistance in obtaining loans for the purchase of homes and farms, the post-Korean GI is as much in need of such help as was his older brothers who served at a different date. The interruption of a man's career which occurs when he is called to duty with the services results in

as much economic dislocation in 1959 as it did in 1954 or 1949. It is just as important now as it was at those earlier dates to minimize this economic hardship by making available special loans and loan guarantees which will enable a veteran to obtain the housing he might otherwise have obtained without assistance had he been allowed to continue his work during the years he was in the service of the United States.

The justification for this legislation is clear. There is no need for delay in its passage. Let us act as soon as possible to eliminate existing discriminations in benefits for veterans based on the period of time of their services.

Hon. RALPH YARBOROUGH,

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,
JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY,
May 12, 1959.

Chairman, Subcommittee on Veterans' Affairs, Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR YARBOROUGH: It has been a privilege for me to be a cosponsor of S. 1138, a bill to provide readjustment assistance to veterans who serve in the Armed Forces between January 31, 1955, and July 1, 1963.

Because of the starting date, it is familiarly known as the bill for postKorean veterans.

It is for service veterans of a period in which they serve without the drama of war but suffer all the frustrations of interruption to their normal opportunities as free individuals. They experience all the handicaps of lost years of education, all the feeling of bearing unequal burdens, as youth of equal age are excused from similar service.

The excuses are for valid reasons-for lack of physical or mental fitness, or because the youth are entered upon college careers, or if by reason of marriage they now bear the responsibility of a home.

The validity of all these reasons does not repair the damage of the time loss suffered out of the life of the serviceman.

It is no compensation to him that a state of war does not exist. He is required to be trained to wartime efficiency. He is deprived of the enjoyment of home and of normal family life. His schooling is interrupted. His life's work is suspended. He is "on the ready" as though war might be declared in the next hour. All this sacrifice he makes in our name in the name of our security.

The Nation has always recognized this spirit of sacrifice. It has always given suitable recognition for such service in time of war. This has been an instrument of good citizenship. The opportunities for further education so granted have enriched our economy. The encouragement of homeowning and the start on a business career have paid tremendous dividends to America.

This bill is similar evidence of our country's appreciation. It is a document of dignity based on conditions of honorable service. It is an act of equity spelled out in specific terms of educational and vocational training, of rehabilitation for service-suffered disabilities, with loan assistance for homeowners or ambitious young farmers, or mustering-out pay to give veterans a fresh start in civilian ways.

It is a thoroughly digested document of more than 50 pages intended to do a masterful job in a masterly way. You have already had many elaborations of the purposes and machinery of this measure. It would be superfluous for me to retell them count by count.

In summary, it is a sensible, practical approach to bridging the gap that comes into the career of a youth chosen to meet a Nation's necessities.

For a nation to insure its own life, it needs to ask some of its youth to risk life and time and opportunity.

This bill is sort of an insurance to that same youth-the help of a grateful Government to get the individual's life back on the civilian track with a reasonable chance of overcoming the handicap of the delayed start.

The measure deserves universal support.

With kindest regards, I am,

Sincerely,

JOHN O. PASTORE, U.S. Senator.