III PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE WAR-RISK INSURANCE ACT. SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE, The subcommittee this day met, Hon. Burton E. Sweet, presiding. Mr. SWEET. The committee will please come to order. Mr. Green, of Iowa, may make any statement that he desires in regard to the bill that he has introduced, H. R. 5165. STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM R. GREEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF IOWA. Mr. GREEN. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I had expected a witness here from the War Risk Bureau this morning, but he does not seem to be here. There seems to have been a little difficulty about getting from the War Risk Bureau any information except that which they want to furnish. I want to say, although it may have nothing to do with this hearing, that every department ought to be perfectly willing to send any witness before a committee that may be desired, but there seem to be a disposition on the part of the various departments to consider themselves somewhat superior to Congress in certain respects. Being somewhat old-fashioned myself, I am inclined to think that Congress is the superior authority. I have introduced two bills, but the chairman has correctly called your attention to the one I want to have considered. The first one I introduced was in accordance with the plan of the original bill— that is, the compensation was to be fixed upon a certain percentage of the total disability, but upon more careful study I became convinced that this method would not be satisfactory; that it would always cause the War Risk Bureau trouble and cause trouble in a great many other ways. I originally introduced these bills for the reason that I had discovered, in common with the committee, that the amount allowed the soldiers of this war for certain disabilities, particularly in cases where amputation had occurred, was very much less than that allowed to the soldiers of the Civil War and to soldiers in the Regular Army. I wanted this witness this morning in order that I might show exactly what the War Risk Bureau had been allowing in the past and show more definitely just the difference between the allowances made to the soldiers of the Civil War, soldiers in the Regular Army, and soldiers of the Spanish War. Mr. STINESS. Is the witness you want a member of the War Risk Bureau or is he an employee.of that bureau? Mr. GREEN. Yes; he is an employee of the bureau. 51 Mr. GREEN. No; I do not think he has definitely refused to come. I asked Mr. Sweet to request him to come and, of course Mr. SWEET (interposing). I will say to Mr. Green that I requested him to come, but I am not informed as to whether he received my written communication. However, I telephoned directly to him, and I expected he would be here, and he may be here yet. Mr. DEWALT. Suppose Mr. Green goes on with his statement. Mr. GREEN. I can go on with the main part of it, and perhaps this witness is not so very important in view of the fact that the committee understands that this difference exists. The last bill which I introduced, H. R. 5165, fixes the rate of compensation for disabilities in which amputations have occurred. It fixes the rate of compensation at exactly the figures which are now prescribed in the Army and Navy pension laws which apply to soldiers of the Civil War and, it is my understanding, also applies to soldiers of the Spanish War and soldiers in the Regular Army, although I am not positive about that. I am inclined to think that the rate of compensation ought to be higher than fixed in my bill and fixed in the pension laws. The pension laws were adopted a number of years ago, the last act being 1904. Of course, the amount necessary to support a person at that time or the compensation to be given him by reason of his disability would naturally be very much less than would be required now. On the other hand, I think the committee will find, at least I am in hopes it will find, that we ought to have one uniform compensation for our soldiers of the Civil War and our soldiers of this war. If you do not do this you will have constant complaint from one side or the other. As I have said, I think the compensation which I have fixed in my bill, being that which was established in 1904 for the Civil War veterans, is not high enough. Mr. RAYBURN. You mean, that was the compensation established for the men who had lost limbs in the Civil War? Mr. GREEN. Yes; men who had lost a limb or an arm. Mr. RAYBURN. In the Civil War? Mr. GREEN. Yes. I think that is not high enough. Mr. RAYBURN. Have you an estimate of how many of those cases there are growing out of the Civil War? Mr. GREEN. Now? Mr. RAYBURN. Yes. Mr. GREEN. I could not give that, but there must be only a very few now, probably not more than 100, I would estimate; but that is just a guess of mine as to the number still living. The compensation for them could probably be changed by a special bill; but certainly this committee does not want to have the compensation any less than they receive, unless it is considered that the rate is estimated on a wrong basis. Mr. RAYBURN. You have read the bill I introduced, have you? Mr. RAYBURN. I think the officials of the bureau stated the other day that the rate for total disability under the War Risk Insurance act is $100 a month, and they rate them on the percentage of disability. I understand that their rate for a man who has lost an arm is going to be about 65 per cent, from 55 to 65 per cent, which would be from $55 to $65, and the rate for a man who has lost a leg would be less; that is the way they have it figured out, and it would be about $50 for a man who has lost a leg. Of course my bill applies principally to those men who are temporatily totally disabled and who are trying to get back to a condition which will enable them to place themselves in some gainful occupation, those who may be partially rehabilitated. I think we have a definite understanding with these folks, where a man has lost a limb, who has an artificial arm or leg put on and who can go back and earn the same amount of money, or more, than he did before he lost the limb, that they will rate him pretty high, anyhow, on account of having given a limb in this war, and I think that their percentages are going to run, for a man who has lost an arm, to about 65 per cent of the total disability and about 50 per cent for a man who has lost a leg. Of course, a man who lost a leg below the knee would be in bad shape, but if he lost a leg 3 or 4 inches below the body, there might be difficulty in putting an artificial limb on, although, I understand that now, if a man has from 4 to 6 inches of the leg left, they can do a pretty good job in putting an artificial leg on. Mr. DEWALT. If that is so, Mr. Green, your bill as now drawn would really be Mr. GREEN (interposing). It would really provide for less than they are proposing in some cases as drawn. Mr. DEWALT. You provide $100 per month for a man who has lost both feet, and we have already introduced a bill providing that where a man has lost both eyes or both feet it shall be considered a total disability and that the allowance shall be $100 per month, and besides that he gets $57.50 insurance, making $157.50, so that your bill really provides less than the amount already contemplated for a total disability. Mr. GREEN. In some respects; yes. My bill fixes the rates and I will read it, as it is very brief. It adds a provision to section 302, as follows: Provided further, That all persons entitled to compensation under this act who, while in the military or naval service of the United States and in the line of duty, have lost one hand or one foot, or been totally disabled in the same, shall receive a compensation at the rate of $40 per month; that all persons who, in like manner, shall have lost an arm at or above the elbow or a leg at or above the knee, or been totally disabled in the same, shall receive a compensation at the rate of $46 per month; that all persons who, in like manner, shall have lost an arm at the shoulder joint or a leg at the hip joint, or so near the shoulder or hip joint or where the same is in such a condition as to prevent the use of an artificial limb, shall receive compensation at the rate of $55 per month; and that all persons who, in like manner, shall have lost one hand and one foot or been totally disabled in the same, shall receive compensation at the rate of $60 per month; and that all persons who, in like manner, shall have lost both feet shall receive compensation at the rate of $100 per month. That is copied from the pension law, and I did not add any provision covering the case which is provided for by the bill introduced by Mr. Sweet because I knew that had already been reported or would be very soon reported by your committee. I think the War Risk Bureau is quite right in raising the rates above the amount stated in my bill, and I came to that conclusion after I had examined the matter. Mr. RAYBURN. You understand, Mr. Green, that it is always the policy of this committee, when they can, to report an omnibus bill and not a lot of bills. You would be entirely satisfied, I am sure, if the matter in your bill is covered in the bill which is reported by |