qualified to operate the vehicle; (6) to require that the veteran be furnished training in the operation of the vehicle. The existing law on this subject is contained in the First Supplemental Appropriation Act, 1947 (Public Law 663, 79th Cong.), approved August 8, 1946, which in pertinent part reads as follows: "Automobiles and other conveyances for disabled veterans: To enable the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs to provide an automobile or other conveyance, at a cost per vehicle or conveyance of not to exceed $1,600, including equipment with such special attachments and devices as the Administrator may deem necessary, for each veteran of World War II who is entitled to compensation for the loss, or loss of use, of one or both legs at or above the ankle under the laws administered by the Veterans' Administration, $30,000,000: Provided, That no part of the money appropriated by this paragraph shall be used for the repair, maintenance, or replacement of any such automobile or other conveyance and no veteran shall be given an automobile or other conveyance under the provisions of this paragraph until it is established to the satisfaction of the Administrator that such veteran will be able to operate such automobile or other conveyance in a manner consistent with his own safety and the safety of others and will be licensed to operate such automobile or other conveyance by the State of his residence or other proper licensing authority: Provided further, That under such regulations as the Administrator may prescribe the furnishing of such automobile or other conveyance shall be accomplished by the Administrator paying the total purchase price to the seller from whom the veteran is purchasing under sales agreement between the seller and the veteran.'

There accompanies this report a chart from which a comparison of the detailed features of the several bills may be easily ascertained.

Under date of June 19, 1946, the Veterans' Administration submitted an adverse report to the Senate Committee on Finance, Seventy-ninth Congress, on S. 2200, Seventy-ninth Congress, which was similar in some respects to certain of the bills now under consideration, particularly with respect to the inclusion of disabilities of the upper limbs and availability of the benefit to all peacetime and wartime veterans. This bill was not reported out by the committee, but the more restrictive provisions, quoted above, covering World War II veterans disabled by loss, or loss of use, of one or both legs at or above the ankle, were enacted as a part of the First Supplemental Appropriation Act, 1947, as incorporated in that act by amendment to House Joint Resolution 390, Seventy-ninth Congress, which amendment originated in the Senate, was revised in certain particulars in the House of Representatives, and agreed to by the Senate.

S. 54 and S. 65, identical bills, would amend the present law to provide that the maximum amount of $1,600 to be paid by the Administrator may be applied on the purchase price of a conveyance costing more than that amount. The practical effect of either of these bills, if enacted, would be that the veteran, if he so desires. could purchase a vehicle exceeding $1,600 in price, and the Government would contribute $1,600 for application on such purchase price. Although there are certain makes of automobiles in the low-priced field which, with attachments, sell for $1,600 or less, there have been some instances in which veterans have experienced delay in obtaining conveyances at or under the present cost ceiling. Furthermore, it may be desirable to allow some latitude in the matter of individual preferences with respect to certain popular makes. S. 54 or S. 65 would not materially increase the cost to the Government and would, it is believed, accomplish a desirable liberalization of the present law. However, it may be noted that these bills would merely amend the present law without extending it beyond the end of the present fiscal year. Some persons who would qualify for the benefit but for the fact that they are still in Army and Navy hospitals, will not be discharged from the service until after June 30, 1947. It is accordingly suggested that consideration be given to the enactment of permanent legislation similar to the provisions of Public Law 663, revised to permit the Administrator to pay a maximum of $1,600 on the purchase cost of a vehicle costing in excess of that amount. This would accomplish what is proposed by S. 54 and S. 65 and would also make the benefit available to persons, otherwise qualified, who will not have been discharged by June 30, 1947. No information is available as to the exact number in this group, but it is believed that relatively few would be involved and that the increased cost to the Govern ment would be small.

S. 606 would provide in permanent form substantially what is presently con tained in Public Law 663, but which is presently limited to the current fiscal year. This bill would accomplish the purpose suggested in the preceding paragraph if it is appropriately amended to authorize the payment of not to exceed $1,600 on the purchase price of a conveyance, with necessary attachments, which is being pur

chased by the veteran, without any limitation on the total purchase price. It is further suggested that the bill might well contain a provision limiting the time subsequent to enactment, or discharge, whichever is the later, within which the benefit may be obtained.

S. 691 would amend the present law by making the appropriation of $30,000,000 available for obligation until June 30, 1948. It is considered preferable that any extension of the effective period of the authorization contained in the present law should be cast in the form of permanent legislation, with a reasonable limitation, as suggested above, on the time after enactment or discharge in which the benefit must be obtained. Some World War II veterans under treatment for qualifying disabilities may not be discharged from the service by June 30, 1948. As of March 31, 1947, 14,461 persons had been certified as eligible, by reason of their disabilities, to receive benefits under Public Law 663; 10,069 of these had procured conveyances and their cases had been certified for payment in the aggregate amount of $15,984,725. If the remaining number of the 14,461 qualify as drivers and acquire vehicles at a cost of approximately $1,600 each, the cost for the group approved to March 31, 1947, will exceed $23,000,000. With the additional cases which will be processed by June 30, 1947, it is anticipated that very little of the appropriation will remain.

S. 555, S. 690, and S. 1033 would render certain classes of veterans with disabilities of the arms and with visual defects eligible to receive this type of benefit. The variances in these bills are detailed in the accompanying chart.

Certain general considerations should be taken into account in connection with proposals to enlarge the disabled class eligible for a conveyance at the cost of the Government. Liberal benefits in form of prosthetic appliances, hospitalization, and medical treatment are already available to veterans with service-connected disabilities of the kind in question. Veterans with service-connected blindness may receive seeing-eye dogs and mechanical electronic equipment and under Public Law 16, Seventy-eighth Congress, approved March 24, 1943, as amended, veterans are entitled to vocational rehabilitation training where needed to overcome the handicap of disability incurred in or aggravated by service on or after September 16, 1940, and prior to the termination of World War II. Greatly increased compensation rates are payable to veterans with service-connected disabilities involving the loss, or loss of use, of the extremities or of the eyes. Such rates range as high as $318 and $360 monthly in wartime cases and $238.50 and $270 in peacetime cases. The extent of these rates is realized when compared to the normal rate of $138 a month for wartime service-connected total disability and $103.50 a month for peacetime service-connected total disability. While there is a natural tendency to view with favor any proposal designed to express the deep sympathy which exists for those who have suffered severe physical losses in their country's service, this problem cannot be considered apart from the welfare of veterans generally, and the reasonable obligations of the Government to veterans as a whole. Experience strongly supports the established concept that the most practicable and equitable general method of providing for the continuing needs of seriously disabled veterans is regular monthly payment of compensation. It would seem unwise to institute a policy which by logical progression, and to avoid discrimination, might ultimately demand that all seriously disabled veterans be supplied with automobiles in addition to compensation and other benefits. A sound approach to this problem requires that any proposal to extend the present law to additional selected classes of disabled veterans be carefully examined to determine whether the necessities of those to be benefited are peculiar and urgent in relation to the benefits proposed.

Limitations contained in the present law suggest that the basic purpose was to provide rehabilitative assistance to returning veterans of World War II who have sustained a material impairment of mobility by injuries to the lower limbs. The requirement of an operator's license also suggests a purpose that the conveyance be regarded as having the nature of an additional prosthetic appliance for the direct use of the veteran.

The problem of mobility is not present to a serious degree where veterans have sustained disabilities due to the loss, or loss of use, of one or both of the hands or arms. Many other veterans, not included in the present law or the proposed bills, are more gravely handicapped in their ability to move about. It is believed that there exists very little justification for concluding that veterans in this group have a distinctive claim to the kind of benefit which would be accorded by S. 555, S. 690, and S. 1033.

Veterans who have lost their eyesight are most certainly deserving of the utmost consideration. However, it is believed that the welfare of such veterans 62247-47-2

is best served by their fullest possible development of a sense of self-reliance. Liberal provisions giving them a considerable measure of economic independence have already been made in the form of monthly compensation rates approximately twice the normal rates payable to other totally disabled veterans. Guide dogs and mechanical aids for their own operation are provided where appropriate. Many of them are given vocational training from which they develop substantial earning power. In the case of the blinded veteran, the automobile cannot be regarded as a prosthetic appliance and it is open to serious question whether his development of initiative and self-reliance would be stimulated by granting to him, in addition to the many other benefits now available, a free automobile which must be operated by another. Moreover, there would seem to be little 'purpose in encouraging the blinded veteran to become habituated to his own automobile as a primary means of transportation without also providing allowances for the hiring of drivers and periodic replacements of the conveyance. No such provisions are made by these bills and for sound reasons of policy that would not be desirable.

It is specially noted that the broad definition of visual defects contained in S. 1033 would include a substantial number who are awarded compensation based on a disability rating of less than 100 percent, and who can see well enough to move about with reasonable safety and rapidity. It would seem to be incongruous for the Government to provide the purchase price of automobiles in such

cases.

Many other disabled veterans not included in the bills, such as those with serious heart and lung conditions, are also handicapped as to self-transportation, and unwarranted discrimination would inevitably result from the enactment of S. 555, S. 690, or S. 1033.

Certain provisions of the bills would increase the amount to be paid by the Administrator on the purchase price of a vehicle. S. 357 would amend the present law to authorize payment not to exceed $1,600 where the veteran does not require controls to enable operation of the conveyance solely by hand, but would authorize the payment of $1,800 where such controls are required. S. 1033 would authorize the payment by the Administrator of $1,900 on the purchase price of a suitably equipped vehicle.

At the present time several established and desirable makes of automobiles in the low-price field may be purchased with special driving controls at or under the $1,600 ceiling, now prescribed. While it is true that the average price of automobiles has increased since the enactment of Public Law 663, there appears to be no sound reason for adding to the Government's obligation. The experience to date under the existing law indicates that as a general rule veterans have been able to acquire conveyances at a cost not exceeding the $1,600 limit without great delay. It is believed that low-priced vehicles will become increasingly available in all sections of the country. In this connection the recommendation heretofore made with respect to liberalizing the present law by permanent legislation so that the $1,600 may be applied upon the purchase price of a vehicle costing in excess of the amount is repeated. This is in recognition of the fact that many veterans prefer certain popular makes of cars which are priced at more than $1,600 and the further fact that there have been some instances in which veterans have encountered difficulty in promptly obtaining an automobile within the limit of the present cost ceiling.

S. 1033 would make the benefit available to veterans of all wars and to peacetime veterans. S. 1113 would make World War I veterans eligible along with World War II veterans for a conveyance if entitled to compensation for loss or loss of use of one or both legs at or above the ankle. Neither the present law nor any of the bills would authorize replacement of the conveyance. Hence, a basic purpose appears to be the granting of assistance to veterans in their rehabilitation problems, both economic and psychological. In the cases of veterans of wars prior to World War II these problems have already been largely met. The nature of the disability involved further suggests that the benefit is directed primarily to combat cases. Its extension to peacetime cases is not believed, therefore, to be indicated. The Congress has ordinarily given substantial preference to wartime veterans in both the matter of increased disability compensation rates and the conferment of special types of gratuities.

Some of the bills (S. 357, S. 555, and S. 1933) would dispense with the require ment that the veteran be qualified to operate the vehicle. The absence of such a requirement marks a radical departure from the theory of the present law that a conveyance should be provided by the Government for the personal opers: tion of the veteran as something in the nature of an additional prosthetic appli

ance. With the removal of this limitation there would cease to exist one of the primary reasons for confining the benefit to a selected disabled group. Many other severely handicapped veterans who are likewise unable to drive an automobile will no doubt feel unduly discriminated against because, not having disabilities affecting the limbs or the eyes, they would not be eligible.

S. 555 would require that the Veterans' Administration furnish training in the operation of the vehicle to veterans in need thereof. As a practical matter, it is believed that the great majority of those affected by the bill, who proposed to operate the conveyance, will have already received adequate training as drivers either in the process of their hospitalization, or by private training in their own home localities. A few who might not have received such training could acquire it at little or no expense to themselves. It is, therefore, deemed inadvisable to require the Veterans' Administration to set up throughout the country the additional procedures, with trained personnel, which would be necessary in providing such training.

ESTIMATED COST OF THE BILLS

The enactment of either S. 54 or S. 65 would not materially increase the cost to the Government of the present provisions of Public Law 663, Seventy-ninth Congress, because each of these bills would simply amend that law to authorize payment of not to exceed $1,600 on the purchase price of a vehicle where the veteran purchases a conveyance costing in excess of that amount. The existing limit of $1,600 on the obligation of the Government would not be raised.

The Veterans' Administration is unable to furnish a worth-while estimate of the cost of S. 357 which would amend Public Law 663, to make the $30,000,000 appropriation available until expended, to dispense with the requirement of driver's license, and to authorize payment by the Administrator of as much as $1,800 on the purchase price of a vehicle where the veteran requires special controls to enable him to operate it solely by hand. Data with respect to the number who would be brought in by such bill because of the absence of a requirement for driver's license is not available and information is likewise unavailable with respect to the number who might require driving controls for hand use only, such as would permit the payment of the increased sum of $1,800 on the purchase price. It is believed, however, that the increased cost of this bill would be comparatively small.

It is estimated that approximately 6,100 veterans of World War II who are receiving service-connected benefits administered by the Veterans' Administration, not including those eligible under Public Law 663, Seventy-ninth Congress, might qualify for a vehicle under S. 555. This would represent approximately the number, on Veterans' Administration rolls, who would be brought in by virtue of having sustained the loss, or loss of use of one or both forearms at or above the wrist or permanent blindness of both eyes with visual acuity of not more than 5/200. At $1,600 each the additional cost for this group of 6,100 would be $9,760,000. This does not include those veterans of World War II who might qualify under the bill but who are still in Army and Navy hospitals or who are receiving benefits admiinstered by the War and Navy Departments, as to the number of whom no data are available. The cost of training veterans to operate conveyances as provided by S. 555 cannot be estimated with any degree of accuracy.

S. 606 would enact in permanent form substantially the provisions of Public Law 663 covering the World War II group disabled by loss, or loss of use, of one or both legs at or above the ankle. The principal item of increased cost under this bill would be that occasioned by those who would be brought in at the time of their discharge but who cannot qualify under Public Law 663 because they are still receiving treatment in Army and Navy hospitals. The Veterans' Administration has been unable to procure information on the number of persons in this category, and no estimate of the increased cost of the bill can be supplied. It may be stated that such increased cost would probably be small.

The additional cost of S. 690 would be represented by the inclusion in the present law of World War II cases involving the loss, or loss of use of one of both arms at or above the wrist. Confining the estimate to this group, without including the group already eligible by reason of leg disabilities under Public Law 663, approximately 5,300 veterans of World War II who are receiving benefits administered by the Veterans' Administration might qualify under S. 690. The cost of furnishing automobiles at $1,600 each to this group would amount to $8,480,000. This does not include veterans still in Army and Navy hospitals or those receiving benefits administered by the War and Navy Departments who might qualify under the bill, as to whom it has not been possible to obtain information.

S. 691 would simply extend the effective period of the $30,000,000 appropriation contained in Public Law 663 to June 30, 1948. For reasons heretofore indicated, the Veterans' Administration is unable to estimate the number of additional persons who would be brought in by this extension, or whether there will remain any substantial portion of the existing $30,000,000 appropriation for obligation after June 30, 1947.

The additional cost to the Government of S. 1033 would arise from the fact that this bill would make the benefit available to veterans of peacetime and wartime service and in addition to cases involving the loss, or loss of use of one or both legs at or above the ankle, it would cover the loss, or loss of use of one or both arms at or above the wrist and permanent impairment of vision of both eyes under the broad criteria specified in the bill. Closest available and assembled figures with relation to these matters cover the slightly larger group of veterans who have suffered the loss, or loss of use, of one or both hands or feet and the more restricted group who have incurred permanent blindness of both eyes of 5/200 visual acuity or less. Based upon the number of veterans receiving serviceconnected benefits administered by the Veterans' Administration for these lastmentioned types of disabilities, and excluding those World War II veterans now eligible under Public Law 663, Seventy-ninth Congress, it is estimated that approximately 12,900 additional cases would be involved. These include 6,100 additional veterans of World War II, 5,700 veterans of World War I, 1,000 veterans of the Regular Establishment, and 100 veterans of the Spanish-American War. If each of approximately 12,900 qualified under S. 1033 at the full amount of $1,900 per person the cost for this group would aggregate $24,510,000.

It is estimated that approximately 3,400 World War I veterans who incurred loss, or loss of use, of one or both legs at or above the ankle and who are receiving service-connected benefits from the Veterans' Administration, might qualify under S. 1113, at a cost, based on $1,600 each, of $5,440,000.

CONCLUSIONS

For the foregoing reasons the Veterans' Administration is unable to recommend favorable consideration by your committee of S. 357, S. 555, S. 690, S. 1033, and S. 1113.

The Veterans' Administration would not object to the enactment of S. 54 or S. 65, amending the present law to authorize the Administrator to pay not to exceed $1,600 on the purchase price of a vehicle exceeding that amount in cost. Neither does it consider S. 691, which would amend the present law to make the $30,000,000 appropriation available for obligation until June 30, 1948, objectionable. However, as heretofore indicated, it is recommended that in lieu of either of these three bills S. 606 be amended to authorize the Administrator to pay not to exceed $1,600 on the purchase price of a conveyance, with necessary attachments, which may cost in excess of that amount and to require that the benefit be obtained within a specified period after date of enactment or date of discharge, whichever is the later. If so amended, the Veterans' Administration would recommend S. 606 to the favorable consideration of your committee.

Advice has been received from the Bureau of the Budget that there would be no objection by that office to the submission of this report to your committee.

Sincerely yours,

OMAR N. BRADLEY, General, United States Army, Administrator.