Years of school completed by the male civilian noninstitutional population 18 years old and over, by veteran status and age, for the United States, October 1952 [Median not shown where base is less than 100,000] 1 Includes males 18 years and over who were not veterans of World War II, and males 18 to 34 who were not veterans of service since July 1950. Source: Bureau of Census Population Reports, Series P-20, No. 45, Oct. 22, 1953. Median income of men 25 to 34 years old by veteran status, for the United States, 1947-51 WORLD WAR II VETERANS RETAIN LEAD OVER NONVETERANS Between 1947 and 1952, the median income of World War II veterans in the 25 to 34 year age group (which includes most veterans) increased by about 50 percent (from $2,400 to $3,600), whereas the income of nonveterans in this age group increased by only about 20 percent (from $2,600 to $3,100). As figure 2 shows, the median income of nonveterans was slightly higher than that of veterans in 1947, and in 1948 the income of both groups was about the same. By 1949, the fourth full year after the end of the war, the median income of veterans was higher than that of nonveterans, and it has remained higher ever since. Source: "Bureau of Census Population Reports," series P-60, No. 14, Dec. 31, 1953. Median income of men 25 to 44 years old, by World War II veteran status, for the United States, 1947-53 25 to 34 years 35 to 44 years Source: Bureau of Census Population Reports, Series P-60, No. 16, May 1955. VETERANS' INCOMES RISE MORE RAPIDLY THAN NONVETERANS Between 1947 and 1953, the income of World War II veterans In 1947, shortly after the end of World War II, the median 1 Median not shown where there were fewer than 100 cases in sample reporting with incorne. Source: Bureau of Census population reports. DEAR GENERAL HERSHEY: I am writing with reference to Senate bills S. 1138, S. 270, and S. 930, which are now pending before the Senate Subcommittee on Veterans' Affairs, and which would provide certain readjustment benefits to postKorean veterans. As you probably know, the existence and operation of the selective draft system is inextricably linked with the problems of this group of veterans. It is therefore necessary for the subcommitte to evaluate, as precisely as possible, the impact of the compulsory military obligation upon these young men, and to obtain facts showing the degree of uniformity with which the system now operates. In this regard it would be very helpful for the subcommittee to have a status report on the operations of the Selective Service System, including the specific items indicated below: (1) Outline the history of the Universal Military Training and Service Act since 1948. (2) Comment on the order of induction of 1-A registrants. (3) Analyze by tabular form the number of persons practically available to serve a military obligation, under existing laws and regulations, as constructed to those not practically available under such laws and regulations. The report you provide on these matters will be most deeply appreciated and will, I am sure, be very valuable to the subcommittee in its deliberation on the pending legislation. Sincerely, RALPH YARBOROUGH, Chairman, Subcommittee on Veterans' Affairs. NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS, SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM, Washington, D.C., May 15, 1959. Hon. RALPH YARBOROUGH, Chairman, Subcommittee on Veterans' Affairs, DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: In response to your letter of May 1, 1959, I am pleased to furnish the information you requested concerning Selective Service. I turn first to the history of the Selective Service Act and operation since its enactment June 24, 1948. On March 17, 1948, the President recommended to Congress the prompt augmentation of the standing military forces of the United States. In the House of Representatives Report No. 1881 of May 7, 1948, 80th Congress, 2d session, the Committee on Armed Services expressed the belief that this recommendation of the President correctly reflected a serious deterioration in the international |