We don't turn him down because he served in another branch. We consider him-we consider that any man who comes to the armory and wants to enlist in the Naitonal Guard and has had prior service, no matter in what branch or what service-the local company commander will be glad to take him. The fact remains that in any branch he served in the Army he had the same basic training and he will soon find an MOS that he can be used in in the company no matter what branch it is.

Mr. BROOKS. That works all right on a voluntary basis with the guard, but when you get to the Federal Reserve it is forced assignment sometimes. You may have an area with a naval reservist and no Naval Reserve unit. And you have to assign him-to what-the Army Reserve?

General ERICKSON. Of course, we can only get these men in the National Guard if they volunteer to enlist.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. That is all, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Winstead.

Mr. WINSTEAD. General, in connection with your statement on this drop of enlistments, how many-what is the percentage that transferred from the National Guard to the Regular services in this past year? I believe you gave a figure of about 29 percent when we had the original bill up, volunteering into the Regular services from the National Guard units. Didn't you have the figures for this past year? General ERICKSON. The figures for the first 6 months of this year are something like 12,000. The first 6 months of last year it was about 10,000.

Mr. WINSTEAD. You had a higher percentage the first 6 months this year to go into the regular services from the National Guard units, to volunteer for the regular services, than you did last year?

General ERICKSON. The percentage is about the same.

Mr. WINSTEAD. Oh, I see.

General ERICKSON. The strength has increased.

Mr. WINSTEAD. I see.

General ERICKSON. We had a higher average strength during this last period than we did a year ago.

Mr. WINSTEAD. Now, you require the States to take 1 out of 5, I believe you said.

General ERICKSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. WINSTEAD. Of prior servicemen. Do you require that they only take 1 out of 5 or do you permit them to take a higher percentage in case they have enough requests to go in the Army?

General ERICKSON. No, sir. We have not been holding them down to 1 out of 5. A few States haven't quite made it, but the national average is about 23 percent of those who enlisted since October 1, being men with prior service or men who signed up for the 6-month training program.

Mr. WINSTEAD. Now, if I understand you correctly, some of the States are not meeting their quotas. That is why you permit others to go up over and above quotas?

General ERICKSON. That is correct.

Mr. WINSTEAD. Now, if this new regulation is put into effect and you can't meet the quota-that is the thing that is concerning me, more than anything else. You know, I am a UMT supporter. I sup

ported 12 months and 6 months, and so on. So I am not against training. I don't think anybody else is. The thing that concerns me so much is how you fill your quota if this new regulation is carried out and you can't meet your quota in the National Guard.

General ERICKSON. Yes.

Mr. WINSTEAD. How will you get the manpower? That is the point I can't understand. I am somewhat confused on the testimony we have had here. Some of them feel like it will be just easy to do it, but you know they figured a few years ago that we would have a runaway program on this 6-month training.

General ERICKSON. May I put another chart on, please, or the same chart that was on before?

Mr. BROOKS. Put the chart back on.

General ERICKSON. If you, Mr. Winstead, will look at this chart, it shows the looses for the first 6 months of this fiscal year. The total losses are 79,145 for 6 months.

Mr. WINSTEAD. That is right.

General ERICKSON. Suppose we double that for this fiscal year and say 160,000. Now, if we doubled the figure of reenlistments, we have about 42,000. That brings us down to 118,000.

Now we are getting, I said before, about 18,000 men with previous military training. So we will take that 18,000 off. That brings us down to 100,000. We have in our budget for fiscal year 1958 money to support an input of 25,000 men into the 6 months' training program. Let's see if we can do that. I think we can do that. That brings us down to what-75,000? We will probably because of this new policy providing for signing up men to go after they graduate from high School-another 15,000 in that group. That brings us to what60,000?

Mr. WINSTEAD. 60,000.

General ERICKSON. Those 60,000 men have to be prior-service men that come from someplace, and that is our problem. Now with this forced participation of those men we will probably about triple the number of prior-service men that we get into the guard. It is just a guess.

So we will take another 30,000 off of that. It brings us down to around 30,000, that have to come from someplace. And those are optimistic figures.

Mr. WINSTEAD. And in case you do not meet the quota with all the plans you have, if that manpower pool of four hundred or four hundred and four thousand must be maintained by the National Guard as a part of the Reserve program-if you can't meet it through all these plans that have been suggested, there is no earthly way to meet it unless you revert back to the provisions in the bill in 1935 to carry them through selective service and assign them to the National Guard units, if you keep the strength up and all these volunteer plans and different programs fail to work. That is the point that is giving me quite a lot of concern.

General ERICKSON. Well, I think

Mr. WINSTEAD. Our Regular long-term enlistments in the Regular establishments are falling off. Your enlistments are falling off in this category with certain requirements you have. The Reserve is making considerable improvement in their enlistments. But I don't think we have a proven case as of today to say that this thing will work.

Now, I believe the Secretary, Mr. Wilson, stated-probably it would be better not to repeat it. But I was somewhat surprised to hear him say that if the National Guard had made an effort they could have gotten these 6 months' trainees and if they had cooperated, so could the Reserve program of 100,000 have been met.

I was surprised to hear that statement, but it was made nevertheless. But I am not very enthusiastic about this. But I am concerned-and may I say this: If we reach the point that we are to fill the National Guard units through the Selective Service System, then you more or less are getting another step towards final federalization of the National Guard of this country.

Frankly, I think that is just another step, when we resort to the plan as submitted by the Defense Department in 1955, to resort to the selective service for fillers for the National Guard. That is the main thing that is concerning me so much today.

General ERICKSON. I would like to say, Mr. Winstead, that our most optimistic estimates still give us a 30,000-man deficit for the end of fiscal year 1958. And I know that the Secretary of the Army plans to take steps to overcome that deficit. As you know, there are provisions in the law that he can implement to do that.

Mr. WINSTEAD. Well, how would he fill those vacancies?

General ERICKSON. Well, I believe he mentioned the prerelease plan as a last report, which is provided for under the Universal Military Training and Service Act, section 4 (d) (3) of that act.

Mr. BROOKS. Well, under the prerelease program he couldn't fail, could he?

General ERICKSON. No, sir. I am confident that he will take whatever steps are necessary to do what he said he would do to keep the guard from falling down below 400,000.

Mr. WINSTEAD. Assign certain individuals to the National Guard in order to keep the quota up?

General ERICKSON. What that entails is offering a man his release from the active Army short of the 2 years that he is expected to serve, if he volunteers to enlist in his local National Guard unit.

Mr. WINSTEAD. Well, what about the armory construction program that the Bureau of the Budget held up? I believe they released probably those contracts that were already

General ERICKSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. WINSTEAD. Where bids were taken for.

General ERICKSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. WINSTEAD. And maybe made some concession to the National Guard on an 80-manpower unit instead of 200 which applies to the Reserve.

Is this improving our recruitment, to increase the construction of these armories throughout the country? It seems to me that would be a great asset. We still have lots that haven't been constructed yet. That should improve the National Guard.

General ERICKSON. All our records show that when a unit gets a new armory, it immediately picks up in strength and interest.

Mr. WINSTEAD. Well, is it your opinion--what about the number 80? Is that too high to meet or is that some reasonable

General ERICKSON. I am not sure that that has been settled yet. Mr. WINSTEAD. Oh, that is under consideration. I will say to you, frankly, that if the Bureau of the Budget, which speaks for the Presi

dent of the United States-I notice he is speaking on a lot of other things. I wish he would come out on this. The Bureau of the Budget who speaks for the President of the United States still is set on the 200man armory and if that is carried out, there is no question in my mind that it is just another move to get their hands on the National Guard. I can't buy that provision. After we authorized and appropriated money for this purpose, I think they should get some more consideration in trying to get something done, without compulsion. I grant you if this thing goes through that next year they will be right back here asking us for the authority to use the draft to fill the 6 months' enlistments for the Regular Reserve and also to channel through the National Guard through the draft. Wait and see a year from now if they carry out that policy.

You have further comment on that armory construction?

General ERICKSON. Well, I would just like to say that that 200 restriction has been removed.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. He testified to that the other day?

Mr. BROOKS. Yes.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. It has been removed.

Mr. WINSTEAD. Why do they always want to confuse the issue? That is one of the things that he had to confuse the rest of the issue. That is not your problem. I am just fed up with some of it.

Mr. BROOKS. I want to ask the gentleman this, though: If you put in universal military training, wouldn't you have compulsion? It would take care of everything.

Mr. WINSTEAD. Certainly, if you put in universal military training. And I want to say this, that the opposition to universal military training have not about unsold me on universal military training. (Laughter.)

Mr. WINSTEAD. Universal military training would not fill your National Guard units, and that is the point I am coming to, that I think there is a certain amount of planning to channel the National Guard personnel through the Selective Service System.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Chairman.

Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Devereux.

Mr. DEVEREUX. General, you made reference to citizen-soldiers in connection with the National Guard. Are we to infer that the other people in the military service are not citizens?

General ERICKSON. Oh, no, sir.

(Laughter.)

Mr. DEVEREUX. I think we are getting back-▬

General ERICKSON. I would say that the marines are citizen-soldiers. Mr. DEVEREUX. Good.

(Laughter.)

Mr. DEVEREUX. Now in seriousness, do you know the percentage of young men in this country who go on to college?

General ERICKSON. No, sir, I have not that figure.

Mr. DEVEREUX. Do you know how many colleges do not have a 1⁄2year term?

General ERICKSON. No, sir.

Mr. DEVEREUX. All right.

Now, do you know-I would like to get those answers from somebody at some time. Now, do you know the number of 6-month trainees from each State?

General ERICKSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. DEVEREUX. Guard trainees I am talking about, of course. Well, if you could furnish that for the record, then we could look it over. (The information requested is as follows:)

Hon. OVERTON BROOKS,

FEBRUARY 8, 1957.

Chairman, Subcommittee No. 1, House Armed Services Committee,

Old House Office Building, Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. BROOKS: In response to the request made by Mr. Devereux at the hearings before your subcommittee on February 7, 1957, following is the input of, Army National Guard men by State into the 6-month training program from October 5, 1955, through February 3, 1957. The estimated number to enter February 17, 1957, is also reflected.

All persons in the program were young men, under age 20 who had enlisted between the ages of 17 and 184 under the provisions of section 6 (c) (2) (A), Universal Military Training and Service Act.

Major General, Chief, National Guard Bureau.

Mr. DEVEREUX. Also, do you know how many of these administrative posts have been filled or how many vacancies occur in each State, that we referred to yesterday? I thought they were National Guard officers who could be called on permanent active duty. I was corrected by General Abrams. He said they can be called into a position of comparable responsibility, but they are employed as civilians.

General ERICKSON. We have a list. I don't have it with ine.
Mr. DEVEREUX. Do you know-

General ERICKSON. Of the National Guard technicians.

Mr. DEVEREUX. Do you know of any States where they have not taken advantage of that provision?

86066-57-No. 22-12