sirable discharges, less than dishonorable. It would bring in quite a few.

The reasons for a dishonorable discharge also had a bearing on the question. Most generally, serious acts are committed to bring about a general court-martial. Because of that, they felt that they would restrict it to other than those that received a strictly dishonorable discharge.

Senator HUGHES. Many of the acts that you mentioned—and I have no interest in debating the issue, but I want to clarify it-are probably the result of the addiction-that is, stealing, burglary, this sort of thing that would result in a dishonorable discharge, as resulting from the illness.

I would assume that if these could be separated out, perhaps you might temper your viewpoint on whether the addiction was the cause of the behavioral pattern that resulted in the dishonorable discharge. We have had many men with fine service records, who became addicted who wind up with an irrational behavioral problem.

One of the young men testified here today that he never had a problem until he got back to the States, because he could so easily supply his habit in Vietnam, and the pay was good enough that with the prices there, he could afford to keep it up in the way of stealing and selling drugs. But here it is a different question, so he wound up in all kinds of trouble.

I am not sure that these can be screened, but I have always had the opinion that there ought to be a review. I realize the burden on the VA. I am also realistic enough to realize that the VA cannot, under any circumstances that we now recognize in facilities, handle the massive problem without contracting for some sort of civilian response to this in addition to what we have.

My only concern, as yours is, and I think it is shared by all veterans' organizations, and hopefully by every citizen of the country, is that we can help these men fit into the social structure again. So I think this is a very progressive statement that you have made, again. I am very pleased with it.

Would you favor, again, amending the law to make detoxified addicted veterans eligible for chapter 31 benefits, which is the program for vocational rehabilitation, for as long as they remain clean from drugs?

Mr. HUBER. I have no position on that, because we did not address ourselves to that question. I am certain that, as I said in our statement, as we grow more concerned and learn more about the problem, perhaps our attitude will change, but at the moment we do not have a position.

Senator HUGHES. You have heard the testimony that a lot of the problem here is lack of job opportunity, lack of training, and inability to fit back in, to be integrated back into the structure, which is offering continuing problems to the addicted veteran.

There are two things, in my long range of public experience, that really damn a man from finding employment. One of them is rape and the other is heroin addiction. With either one of these, he is condemned for perpetuity. He is unable to find employment unless he loses that identity. It usually winds up in his changing his name and trying to run from the problem.

I think in a society such as ours, if we can open up these processes of training these men, it will be essential. I hope you will consider that the next time you get together with your group.

Mr. HUBER. Thank you, sir. I am sure we will.

I was greatly impressed, for example, I called Mr. Jordan and asked him to come in and give us his thinking on drug addiction. His first answer was, "Why don't you get an addict?" Well, an addict knows more about addiction than anybody else and it certainly seems reasonable to me that they should be in the program of rehabilitating

one another.

Certainly as part of the process of rehabilitation, jobs are going to have to be made available to them. We will call this problem to the attention of our convention.

Senator HUGHES. I want to thank you gentlemen very much for your statement and your willingness and patience in waiting here today for the opportunity to testify. I think the viewpoints that you have adopted in your statement, along with the resolution you have passed, are very helpful to this committee in addition to the legislation we will be considering in trying to implement a program in the military and VA and in the civilian sector to gear up to meet the problems we have completely across the board. Your continued help and expertise will be of great value to us in funding, and

so on.

Mr. HUBER. I might add further that we have no objection to a Federal program being established for the general public and funded by public funds. We feel that the dishonorable dischargees could come under that program. We certainly don't want them not to be treated.

Senator HUGHES. Well, we are going to pay for it somewhere. It is just a question of where we pay for it, because we have to help these men, whether they are dishonorably discharged or honorable. Somewhere we have to pick them up.

The Chair now calls Mr. Francis Stover of the legislative service of the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

Welcome to the subcommittee. Would you identify your colleague for the record?

STATEMENT OF FRANCIS W. STOVER, NATIONAL DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATIVE SERVICE, VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS; ACCOMPANIED BY COOPER T. HOLT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WASHINGTON OFFICE OF VFW

Mr. STOVER. On my left is Mr. Cooper T. Holt, executive director, Washington office of the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

Senator HUGHES. Thank you. We want to express, in the beginning, our great admiration for your patience in waiting here today. I know it has been a long day today, and I am doubly grateful because of the urgency of the problems. Thank you very much.

You may proceed with your statement as you desire.

Mr. STOVER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the joint committee, for the privilege of appearing before this distinguished joint committee to present the views of the Veterans of Foreign

90

Wars of the United States, respecting drug use and drug addiction among veterans and active duty servicemen.

My name is Francis W. Stover, and my title is director of the national legislative service of the Veterans of Foreign Wars. The membership of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States is currently about 1.7 million; one-fourth, or more than 400,000 of these members, are Vietnam veterans.

The commander in chief of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, H. R. Rainwater, has been to Southeast Asia on many occasions during the last several years. He has talked with servicemen and military and civilian leaders about the marihuana, cocaine, and heroin problems. Commander in Chief Rainwater has spoken out on the growing menace of widespread use of drugs among our servicemen and what this cancerous-like growth is doing to the effectiveness and morale of our Armed Forces.

Our commander in chief, during the course of his worldwide trips, has obtained much valuable information on drug use among servicemen. Commander in Chief Rainwater has also visited many military and naval bases, VA hospitals, and other facilities where he has had the opportunity to talk with military, veteran Government and VFW leaders about drug problems and suggested solutions. This statement, therefore, reflects the views of Commander in Chief Rainwater, based on worldwide trips, observations, and discussions of the drug problem. Mr. Chairman, this is a sad occasion. For the last several years we have known about the growing drug problem among servicemen and veterans. Many of us have hoped it was untrue; others that it would go away. But each morning, each day, there it is, the problem of drug use and addiction camped on our doorstep, bigger than ever.

The drug problem is now so widespread it has reached epidemic proportions. We can no longer ignore it. It is a serious problem of such magnitude that it will require a total crash program similar to the Manhattan project of World War II fame. We must marshal the best brains, experience, and know-how and provide them with the latest facilities and adequate funds. If we don't do something soon, the cancer of drug addiction may well be the cause of loss of health or life of your friends and neighbors, or even you and me.

One of the most serious issues of our times is law and order. Violent crimes in the streets have changed the character of American neighborhoods, cities, and suburbs. Thousands have been yoked, robbed, left with grave bodily injuries, or killed. Stores, shops, gas stations, hotels— you name it-have been robbed. The evidence indicates there is a new breed of robber who has emerged in American society in the last few years. He is the dope addict, the narcotics user, who has got to have narcotics to satisfy his insatiable appetite.

When the craving hits this addict, he doesn't care what time of day it is or who his victim may be. Most narcotic addicts seem oblivious to the consequences of their yokings and robberies. Unfortunately, many of this new breed of violent criminals striking innocent victims are veterans. They acquired the habit while serving in the Armed Forces.

This is, indeed, a sad occasion, Mr. Chairman, but this is not the time for sermons, lectures, and theories. For the sad fact is that over

50,000 veterans are estimated to be drug users or addicts, and that a conservatively estimated 30,000 to 60,000 active-duty servicemen already have the drug habit. We are confronted with these facts, Mr. Chairman, and action is needed now before it is too late; too late that is, not only for the narcotics addicts, but perhaps thousands of innocent people whose health, liberty, and safety will be violated by a great many of this group as they seek to satisfy their insatiable appetites for narcotics.

First, it should be the declared policy of the Congress that this is a veterans' problem. We are talking about 50,000 veterans and another 30,000 to 60,000 servicemen who, upon discharge, will be veterans-a total of close to 100,000 Americans. It should be the declared policy of Congress, and the Nation, that this approximately 100,000 are the responsibility of the VA.

The VA has always taken care of the aftermath of war. The VA has done a remarkable and successful job of binding up and healing the wounds and disabilities incurred by the millions of veterans who have served in our wars all over the world.

We have a new phenomenon, drug addiction, and the VFW is highly confident that the VA can do its usual successful job of meeting the drug abuse scourge, provided the Congress authorizes and the administration approves additional adequate funding and staff to meet the problem.

What I am saying, Mr. Chairman, is that drug addiction among servicemen and veterans is a veterans' problem. It is the responsibility of the VA. The root cause of drug addiction and use among the majority of veterans is service in the Armed Forces. The Congress should make it clear that this veterans' problem be the responsibility of the VA, the agency of Government created specifically to care for those who have fought our Nation's battles and his widow and orphan.

Regardless of our views respecting drug addiction among servicemen, these veterans have served during a period of great peril, and it is our responsibility to rehabilitate them. The VA is the best possible agency to carry out our Nation's responsibility in this area.

It is a problem which transcends the veteran's own individual health. Drug addition is not limited to veterans; it concerns us all. The public interest deserves a solution to this problem. Congress must act swiftly to preserve and protect the public safety, the public welfare, and public comfort and convenience. That is what is meant by the public interest. The VFW believes these are trying times which demand new and solid solutions to a very sophisticated problem. We must reexamine ourselves. We must think anew.

With this background, the VFW proposes a two-part solution to the narcotics and drug problem of servicemen and veterans.

One part involves the estimated 30,000 to 60,000 active duty servicemen. The other part involves the 50,000 veterans who are classified as drug users or addicts. Both groups would be taken care of and rehabilitated by the VA.

First, the DOD has no facilities for treating such a large number of servicemen. The VFW proposes these active-duty servicemen be identified and classified as drug addicts, and if they do not respond to normal care by the Armed Forces, then transfer these addicted servicemen to a VA hospital with drug treatment facilities.

69-311 0-72-pt. 1-7

The active-duty servicemen would not be discharged or separated from the service. He would remain on active duty but be transferred in a legal sense to a VA hospital for care and treatment. He would remain the responsibility of the VA until rehabilitated, cured, or declared hopeless.

He could be returned to the Armed Forces and pronounced fit for return to active duty, or be separated or discharged. It would necessarily be a controlled situation for the VA, which could call upon the resources of the DOD and all other Government agencies to rehabilitate these active-duty servicemen who are drug addicts.

There is much precedent for this kind of operation. The DOD has been transferring active-duty servicemen to VA hospitals since World War II. Many active-duty servicemen during World War II ended up with a transfer to a VA hospital.

For example, this occurred with many severely disabled veterans, or veterans suffering long-term disabilities, like TB or neuropsychitric conditions. It has been standard practice to transfer severely disabled veterans, particularly amputees, to VA hospitals for rehabilitation, including fitting and training in the use of prosthetic devices. So this is not new, and would be an extension and expansion of a longstanding practice of cooperation between the Armed Forces and VA.

There are over 50,000 veterans who are drug users or addicts. Many are denied treatment because of the nature of their discharge or separation. As previously stated, we must think anew. These are troubled times that try men's souls.

Every one of these veterans must be treated, must be rehabilitated within our capacity to do so. They must be taken off the streets. The public interest demands it. It is in our own self-interest to treat them, before it is too late for the veteran and for some innocent victim. The VFW recommends that these veterans be treated. Let's not quibble about legalities. If the veteran has a drug problem, is a drug user or a drug addict, then the Congress should authorize that they be taken care of by the VA.

Senator HUGHES. Could I interrupt you and ask you a question there? Maybe you don't have a viewpoint, but I would be interested in finding out.

If we did pick up these men, or they volunteered to come back in for treatment and apparently in the last 2 calendar years there have been 11,000 of those men who have received less than honorable discharges and others receiving honorable discharges with these problems if these men come back and are reviewed, do you think we ought to give them treatment as a result of this investigation? You heard these veterans testify that they had honorable discharges, yet they proceeded to the hell of the streets of America.

Mr. STOVER. Yes; I certainly do. The VFW has always given all aid and assistance to all veterans who come to us for discharge review. We have had much success with many of them, but not much success in the drug abuse area. Certainly in the light of the information that is being obtained by this committee meeting here today, I think there will be a new illumination on the subject. There is a new light being shone on the subject, which makes people more compassionate, even those who review the military and naval discharges.