Dr. TENBROEK. Some States do, I think, but that is a rather r provision in the States across the country. Mr. CURTIS. It certainly does not apply in the Federal-aid p grams. Dr. TEN BROEK. That is the point. Under the means test as p scribed by the Federal administrators, utilization of all property required to meet current needs and consequently may not be appl to furthering plans for self-support. Mr. CURTIS. There is no provision at all or no regard paid to pr erty that might be what we regard as tools of trade. Dr. TEN BROEK. NO. Mr. CURTIS. Thank you very much. (The following letter was later received from Dr. TenBroek:) THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND, Hon. THOMAS B. CURTIS, DEAR CONGRESSMAN CURTIS: At the end of my testimony last Monday, April on amendments to the aid to the blind provisions of the Social Security Act, asked me a question relating to the status of "tools of trade" as resources of blind individual applying for or receiving public assistance. The sense of y question as I understood it was whether tools of trade were as a matter of po exempted from consideration as resources available to support the individ when the amount of his need for assistance was being determined. I rep that as a matter of general policy the Federal Government required that resources, regardless of their nature, must be utilized by the individual to vide himself with the basic necessities before any assistance is given. 1 would include "tools of trade" as a usable resource. My response to your question accords with the facts of the general policy the Social Security Administration. It occurred to me after my testimony completed, however, that a full reply should have encompassed one situation which the common tools of trade are not directly required to be utilized a resource for supplying basic necessities. I should like to clarify this point w you in order that no possibility for confusion may remain in respect to my ansv You are aware that since 1952, as a result of an amendment by Congress, Federal program for aid to the blind has required the States to disregard first $50 per month of earned income in determining the individual's need financial assistance. The Social Security Administration's Bureau of Pu Assistance administratively has interpreted and defined the expression "ear income" to mean “net earned income” after deducting from gross earnings cost of tools, special materials or uniforms, etc. required by the employer to supplied by the employee. This of course parallels the definition of net wa used by the Internal Revenue Bureau in relation to income taxes. Tools of trade are therefore in a sense disregarded as a resource in cour tion with the exempt earnings under title X. But in reality that means only t the cost of acquisition of such tools is disregarded in determining the allowa exemptions of earnings. Once the tools are in fact acquired, however, a dif ent situation is held to exist. The tools of trade then become part of the I sonal property of the individual and as a result come under the general requ ment that all resources must be utilized by the individual in determining amount of need for assistance. In general practice the States exempt these tools from consideration when individual is utilizing them to produce income as in the case of earning the per month required to be disregarded. One State, Wisconsin, has made t explicit in its statute. However, these exemptions from consideration are 1 mitted only when they are modest in amount. If they exceed this, they t are treated as excessive personal property which may disqualify the individ for assistance until they have been utilized in providing him with basic nece ties. I hope this explanation of my reply to your question will serve to make record clear. I did not wish to leave my response incomplete or possibly subj to confusion Let me take this occasion to express our deep and genuine appreciation for your cordial interest in improving public assistance programs for the blind. With the understanding and vigorous support of men like you, we can look forward confidently to progress. Very sincerely and respectfully yours, Dr. JACOBUS TEN BROEK, President. The CHAIRMAN. We thank you, Doctor, for your appearance and the information given to the committee. Dr. TENBROEK. Thank you, gentlemen, for your consideration. The CHAIRMAN. The next witness is Mr. Nelson H. Cruikshank. Will you come forward, please, sir. Will you please give your name, address, and capacity in which you appear? You will be recognized for your prepared statement, without interruption, Mr. Cruikshank. STATEMENT OF NELSON H. CRUIKSHANK, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SECURITY, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR, AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS, ACCOMPANIED BY MRS. KATHERINE ELLICKSON, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR Mr. CRUIKSHANK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Nelson H. Cruikshank, and I am the director of the department of social security of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations. I am accompanied by the assistant director of our department, Mrs. Katherine Ellickson. On behalf of our 15 million members, we urge your support of improvements in the public assistance and child welfare programs which will be a worthy accompaniment for H. R. 7225, which you wisely recommended last year to improve the insurance program. We hope the Senate, like the House, will give these Old-Age and Survivors Insurance amendments overwhelming approval and that improvements in public assistance will supplement, not replace, that measure. The constitutional convention of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations unanimously affirmed support for expansion of both the public assistance and the child welfare laws. The convention statement on old-age and survivors insurance, disability insurance, and public assistance declared in part: While labor has emphasized the development of rounded social insurance programs under which benefits are paid without a needs test, our unions have also favored improvements in the public assistance provisions of the Social Security Act designed to provide decent incomes for those not adequately reached through social insurance. In many States payments to the aged, dependent children, and other groups are pitifully small, and the terms for qualifying are too harsh. Proposals such as those of the United States Chamber of Commerce for eliminating Federal grants for public assistance overlook the common national interest in the health and welfare of old people. Some attention to the public assistance programs must be given by Congress this year because of the coming expiration of a special $5 a month Federal grant * * * We favor continuation of Federal grants for the public assistance programs, more adeguato assistones indi to eligibility and residence. (Official proceedings, first constitutional con tion of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Orga tions, New York City, December 5-8, 1955.) The resolution entitled "Children and Youth" declared our wh hearted support for programs which strengthen and safeguard far life and help to assure to each child the fullest healthy, mental physical development. The resolution also urged expansion of programs providing maternal and child health services and spe welfare services for children, including aid to crippled children. I am appending these two resolutions in full and would like to them included as part of the record of this hearing. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it is so ordered. (The document referred to follows:) AFL-CIO RESOLUTIONS ON SOCIAL SECURITY WELFARE AND RELATED ISSU (Adopted by the First Constitutional Convention of the American Federatio Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, December 1955) OLD-AGE AND SURVIVORS INSURANCE, DISABILITY INSURANCE, AND PUBLIC ASSIST During the 20 years it has been in existence, the national system of old and survivors insurance has fully proved its worth. Most Americans are contributing regularly to the trust fund, and over 7 million persons are rece benefits. Our members are well aware, however, of serious limitations that rema the OASI legislation. In spite of amendments which organized labor help secure in recent years, benefits are still too low, no insurance payments are for permanent and total disability or temporary disability, and many wo do not receive any protection. The Lehman-Dingell bill, which both the AFL and the CIO supported in would have substantially remedied these shortcomings. The House this year passed a bill (H. R. 7225) which was supported by o ized labor and which embodies important though restricted forward steps would initiate the payment of benefits to the permanent and totally disabl age 50, with the same eligibility requirements now provided for freezing pension rights of such disabled persons. For women, the bill would lowe qualifying age for OASI benefits to 62 years in recognition of the fact that 1 wives are younger than their husbands and that older women have even gr difficulty than men in obtaining steady employment. The House bill would likewise extend coverage to additional groups, inclu employees of the TVA and many self-employed professionals. It would con benefits for disabled dependent children of beneficiaries after age 18. To finance these improvements, a one-half-percent contribution by empl and employees would be added to the schedule previously enacted. An adv council on social-security financing would be established to review the stat the trust fund in relation to the long-term commitments of the program. provisions are consistent with the historic position of American labor in su of a social-security system soundly financed on a long-term basis. This House bill is now awaiting action by the Senate Finance Comm Unfortunately, powerful groups, including the United States Chamber of merce and the American Medical Association, are planning a strenuous against these long-overdue changes, especially the provision for disability ber While labor has emphasized the development of rounded social-insurance grams under which benefits are paid without a needs test, our unions have favored improvements in the public-assistance provisions of the Social Sec Act designed to provide decent incomes for those not adequately reached th social insurance. In many States payments to the aged, dependent chil and other groups are pitifully small, and the terms for qualifying are too h Proposals such as those of the United States Chamber of Commerce for elin ing Federal grants for public assistance overlook the common national int in the health and welfare of old people. Some attention to the public-assis programs must be given by Congress this year because of the coming expir of a onaniol 85-9-month Fodorol erant: Now therefore be it Resolved, This convention supports comprehensive expansion and improvement of the existing system of old-age and survivors insurance to provide adequate benefits as a matter of right to the aged, the permanently and totally disabled, and those suffering from temporary illness or accident. The provisions for improving benefits should include the following: 1. An increase in the wage base to keep pace with rising wage levels. 2. An annual increment of one-half of 1 percent of the primary benefit for each year of contributions. 3. A 2-percent increase in the primary benefit for each year of continued employment beyond age 65. 4. The inclusion of "tips" as wages. The success of the OASI program and of other social-insurance systems which provide disability benefits has amply demonstrated the practicality and value of such measures. We likewise favor use of OASI funds to aid in vocational rehabilitation of disabled persons so that they may become self-supporting. We favor continuation of Federal grants for the public-assistance programs, more adequate assistance payments to indiivduals on a basis consistent with human dignity and self-respect, and removal of harsh requirements with regard to eligibility and residence. We shall continue our efforts to achieve adequate social security both through collective bargaining and through Federal and State legislation. Increases in workmen's compensation payments since 1940 have been at only one-half the rate of employer contributions to all other social-insurance and related programs during the same period. Abuse of workmen's compensation insurance by private insurers has continued. By design, workmen's compensation premiums set aside as much as 40 percent for "overhead." In practice, workers often receive even less than half of the premiums in benefits. CHILDREN AND YOUTH Our Nation must be ever aware of and responsive to the needs of our young people, for our future rests in their hands. They are entitled to the best the Nation can give them. Sound child development requires a decent family and community environment. Failure to meet this need adequately has too often prevented youngsters from maturing to their full capacity and has been a major contributing factor to juvenile delinquency. A well-rounded program to meet the needs of our youth also requires special services to meet particular problems. Our unions have supported many programs which have proved valuable in advancing child welfare. These include the child labor laws, health measures to aid mothers at childbirth and children in infancy, welfare programs to give crippled children a chance to grow whole and to aid in the placement of orphans and abused children in good homes. The Children's Bureau of the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and the Bureau of Labor Standards of the United States Department of Labor have helped to develop such programs in cooperation with State and local governments and voluntary agencies; now, therefore, be it Resolved, The AFL-CIO declares its wholehearted support for programs which strengthen and safeguard family life and help to assure to each child the fullest healthy mental and physical development. Since child development is rooted in family and community standards, we can best serve our youngsters by working to assure an economy in which families are financially secure, by making available to all families the opportunity to live in homes and neighborhoods which are adequate and comfortable, by developing topflight school and recreational facilities, and by providing parents with knowledge of how best to protect the child's personal well-being. Trade unions are doing and will do their utmost in these essential areas. Our efforts to develop and sustain improving standards of living for American families are at the very heart of trade union activities. We urge our affiliated unions to expand their efforts to aid the young people of their communities through active participation in local programs. We have insisted that the Federal Government along with State and local governments and private organizations, fulfill their essential responsibility to act ties and mental institutions, but through the greater positive contribution t community by youngsters who develop into healthy and responsible adults. In the areas of specialized child needs, we commend the United States dren's Bureau and the Bureau of Labor Standards for their efforts in adva the welfare of children and in helping to limit child labor. We urge expansion of the programs providing maternal and child health ices and special welfare services for children, including aid to crippled chil We support expansion of research and education in child life which will parents understand better what makes for healthy, happy childhood. The problems of juvenile delinquency can be met better also by expa programs to improve procedures for spotting and aiding maladjusted chi and to handle constructively those who get into trouble with the law. programs should be given full support by our affiliated unions. Mr. CRUIKSHANK. In the interests of brevity, we are concentra most of our testimony on the administration's proposals and on Boggs bill, H. R. 10457, which is directed toward more generous eral matching grants for public assistance. We likewise explain support of the Forand bill, H. R. 10302, as going much further ward achieving our objectives. ADMINISTRATION PROPOSALS ON PUBLIC ASSISTANCE The administration recommendations on public assistance, in porated in H. R. 9091 and H. R. 9120, have some desirable feat but would leave payments at pitifully low levels. We strongly oppose the section which would limit to 50 per Federal matching of payments to persons added to the old-age as ance rolls after July 1, 1957, who also receive old-age and survi insurance benefits. Why discriminate against aged persons w insurance benefits, for some reason, are inadequate so that sup mentary public aid is needed? Even with more adequate pensions, which we favor, some b ficiaries will have unusually heavy expenses for such purpose medical care or nursing. The Federal Government should share erously in payments to such persons on the same basis as to o aged people who may need amounts to supplement too scanty sions which they receive from private pension plans or other p programs. I would like to add beyond what is said in this statement th seems to me that the proposal to so limit grants in the case of sup mentary payments has very far-reaching effects. It really w tend to undermine rather than strengthen our whole social-insur approach to this problem. We and people in the Public Welfare Service, as has this comm and the Congress generally, have all felt that the primary attac the need should be through our social-insurance programs. Now, if we recall that very many people who are receiving p assistance have some source of income, though inadequate, then the source of income which comes through social insurance in a sp category so that the Federal Government could only aid to 50 per of the first part of their program of supplementary aid, you are r putting a premium on the kind of need that is different from social insurance program. That is a subtle, but nevertheles effective, attack on the whole social insurance approach. It would be a reversal of the policy of our Government as st |