1 The range in benefits is due to the variation in formulas among the States and the personal employment history of each retirant.

2 From American Hospital Association, Research Services, Chicago, Ill. Expenses shown reflect costs to institutions, not charges to patients.

Computed from average daily expenses as shown.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, sir.

We also include the tables that you had submitted here for the record. I think that they are tables which very well document your

case.

Mr. MONDANI. Thank you, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Many thanks.

Our next witness will be Mr. John Doyle Elliott, secretary of the Townsend Foundation.

We are pleased to have you, Mr. Elliott.

STATEMENT OF JOHN DOYLE ELLIOTT, SECRETARY, TOWNSEND FOUNDATION

Mr. ELLIOTT. Mr. Chairman, I am Mr. John Doyle Elliott, secretary of the Townsend Foundation, founded by Dr. Francis E. Townsend, quite a while ago, not exactly a come lately interest in social security legislation.

In summary, the first and most salient thing, we feel, is to keep track of just what has happened to the key group in social security legislation, the elderly retired.

In testimony, as I have submitted to the committee, from the Census Bureau's annual surveys on consumer income, we find that since the end of World War II, starting with 1947 and coming up through 1969, the position of the retired people in the country has, if anything, slightly declined, not improved.

Last year the average elderly man over 65 had an income of $2,828. The average man between 50 and 64, right behind him in life, had an income of $4,451 higher than that. This, inferiority of income is the heart of the whole problem.

We feel very sincerely in our proposed legislation and attitudes and suggestions regarding social security amendments, they are based upon the proposition that this gap, this inferiority of income, this loss of

command of the license to live, money income, is the essence of the whole problem.

Now, nothing has actually been accomplished by all of our legisla tion, by all of our policies, public and private, group and individual investment and savings, in this most prosperous period, since World War II of our history, right here; nothing has been accomplished against this.

The ratio between income of these people back in 1947, the inferiority factor was about 145 percent that of their income, and by 1969 it was 157 percent. There is actually an income decline; and when we throw into the picture some of the special things that have been achieved by some groups in a command position, like certain elements of labor, certain positions of people in life, public and private, to command retirement income of a prosperous order, it simply means that for the greater bulk of the population the decline has been more serious in face of the fact that not even a holding of the original line has been achieved.

We, of course, do approve the adoption of any improvements as far as they go, such as the presently proposed House-passed amendments on the ground, and simply on the ground that to go ahead for the next year or two without them would be heaping a very serious injury on top of the original tragedy.

In that sense, of course, we endorse them, but we do not hold them to be any answer, just another ripple in the passing of time, just a repetition of the same failing policy.

I do not know how to put it in a few words, but I think I could leave it this way on that count: what we have been doing and are continuing to do, in action, in policy, in attitude, in viewpoint, is to mismanage the abundance over which we have gained control and command, mismanaging it under the rules, under the views, of scarcity.

It won't work, it has not worked, and we do wish seriously to admonish that what we need is an end of contrasts, an end of discrim inations, and I do not know just where we could start if we do not start with this area of the poverty problem in the social security beneficiary

area.

There is no sound reason why people living in the retirement years of life, why the standard of those lives and those years should be beneath, at least seriously beneath, the going standard of the rest of the population. It is not to take a nickel out of our national economy or country or its overall life in any week or month or year; it is simply an adjustment process.

Therefore, we suggest legislation which is presently embodied in H.R. 1205 to institute a universal contract in the country which would do for all the people substantially what, for example, the United Auto Workers' program does for the 30-year man. In principle of o cupation, not necessarily being in one job, like the 30-year automobile man all his life, but in reality they are all 30-year people, we need a universal contract which will do this job now. Theoretically, old age and survivors and disability insurance, and so forth, might, by a certain analogy, approach that contract, but it would certainly need an awfully lot of fundamental major overhauling to reach or approach that standard.

Therefore, we suggest that the payroll taxes, and so forth, are not the means of doing it, and in my testimony I outline that, but I do suggest that very seriously we recognize that ground has not been gained at all, but fundamentally lost under the policies, programs, views that have been followed. The ground has actually been lost.

There is little sense in talking about ratios between old living standards and wage standards and price standards, cost-of-living standards, unless referred to the original impoverished standard of failure and misfortune economically that lies at the root of this whole problem.

Without taking into account a purpose of remedying that in a major degree, at least, there is not much sense in making the other comparisons. On the whole question, as of 2 years ago, the Special Committee on Aging finally concluded, after several years of hearings and study all around the country, that income lack is the major problem of Americans living in retirement. That remains unchanged, Mr. Chairman, and we respectfully submit the bill and the proposals and this testimony embodying and defining a universal national contract designed and capable of ending that inferiority, H.R. 1205.

In the name of the movement, now over 35 years' old, originally conceiving this viewpoint to start with, I want to thank you very much for the privilege of presenting my testimony in these few moments. (The prepared statement of Mr. Elliott follows. Hearing continues on page 891.)

TESTIMONY OF JOHN DOYLE ELLIOTT, SECRETARY, TOWNSEND FOUNDATION, ECONOMIC CONSULTANT AND NATIONAL PENSION LOBBYIST

SUMMARY

Mr. Chairman, I am John Doyle Elliott, Sec. of Townsend Foundation, founded by the late Dr. Francis E. Townsend, 5500 Quincy St., Hyattsville, Md., 20784. Since World War II, each Congress has had more broadly to amend the Social Security Act. Now, Congress is amending it in successive sessions! After 35 years of it.

It's gratifying, in the last two years, that at long last both House and White House have reversed views and adopted our 35-year-old critique of evil, misnamed "welfare"-and the Senate Committee on Aging has marked income-lack "more than ever" the "major problem" of retired Americans, saying only a federal plan can meet it. On each count, now, they thus honor our original key positions and principles.

Now, I call up Census Bureau's yearly surveys on money-income distribution, showing the income-position of the aged steadily declining—not improving— despite all our public and private works, programs and policies. A total, unanswerable failure.

With the enclosed complete copy of H.R. 1205 (with explaining articles) embodying up-to-date application of the Townsend Plan's principles to the problems of social security and poverty-I present the thesis that it's past high time Congress (and everybody else) turn to a great, national pension for ALL Americans equally and alike, providing PROSPEROUS instead of impoverishing retirement. Stop mismanaging abundance under the mean, obsolete rules of scarcity.

H.R. 1205 is specifically designed to implement this thesis, including the financial mechanism to support it. All alternatives, fully exhausted, have worse than failed-even failed to prevent the problem's worsening. Authentic FACT despite all earnings, investments and public and private programs-ALL COMBINED! The people and our country's economy and prestige have suffered and lost mightily from this worsening instead of solving problem. In the last three decades, no other investment-economically, socially, or politically-would have benefited the people and profited the country so vastly as this great pension.

Further, I contend, the longer we go without it, the mightier become both the loss and the NEED for the profit which can be gained from no other source, or action.

A system making social security a living fact of life in our land wil not take money out of our economy, or out of the overall lives of honest people, business or interests-in fact, quite the contrary. BUT, IT WILL SOLVE PROBLEMS OF THE GREATEST IMPORT—problems not otherwise to be solved—problems which must be solved if we are to achieve the faith, harmony and unity neces sary for the world-inspiring society we ought, by every right, to be.

My testimony also presents steps to amend present Soc. Sec. to help prompt transition to the system we ought to have. Most important, H.R. 1205 provides the specific financial mechanism—financial technology—to implement this matchless contribution towards perfected human prosperity, equality and freedomSOCIAL JUSTICE-the essential demonstration to all Mankind of the incom parable ability and beneficence of our American Way honestly applied.

As a few industries have contracts providing decent retirement for those who've spent their lives with them-I hold it's more than high time we instituted such a contract for ALL our people, in ALL occupations, ALL the time. H.R. 1205 is that contract.

Shall the great mechanisms of science serve man-or man serve the machines? Mr. Chairman: Our Country, born in a new vision of just freedom and equal rights for all men, inspired world-wide faith and hope in honest hearts. Despite our matchless achievements, the vision's fogged, fulfillment of our promise ta God and Mankind faltering by default here in our own national house. I proposa through perfected Social Security the ways and means to unfog the vision and resurrect the promise-by fulfillment here in our own land, renewing Mankind's faith and courage by our success.

It's preposterous to expect success against our pyramiding problems and ob ligations unless dominant confrontations in our land are replaced by the faith and harmony only full social justice enthroned as unanswerable reality can ever make possible.

Otherwise, greed, waste and corruption, the real INFLATORS, will increasingly decay our material and spiritual resources-ordaining doom. Our skyrocketing producing power must promptly be fully employed, even strained in support of honest prosperity, justice, freedom, health and wisdom-not INFLATING greed. waste and the damning corruption they breed.

Census Bureau's yearly surveys on money-income distribution show Social Security and misnamed "Welfare" monstrously failing to support that necessity. To wit, the FACTS:

Note: Add this fact: Persons over 65 increased in numbers 3.5 times faster than persons 25 through 64, in those same years.

There is the problem-measured-growing constantly greater-not being over come. Steadily deepening financial depression for that ever greater part of our adult population-to whose membership all are desirably destined-the elderly Money-income, the very license to live, is excuselessly denied Americans in retirement. While the final reward in life excuselessly remains financial failure and dependency, so long will our other works and glories stand vain and mocked by history's mark of sin.

All our works, policies and programs, public and private combined, have failed to prevent the financial plight of the aged from worsening-never mind better ment. The median income for men over 65, from 1947 to 1969, rose 196%-while their inferiority to men 55 to 64 rose 221%. For women the figures are 154% an! 239%. The inferiority of the elderly to still younger adults is even more marked Over two years ago, the Special Senate Committee on Aging named income lack "more than ever" the "major problem" of the old, saying only a federal

plan can meet it. A full endorsement of this Movement's 35-year-old position. Last year the Senate passed a $100 minimum Soc. Sec. benefit; killed in Conference. As yet, neither House nor White House has lifted a finger. Pray the Senate requires a very meaningful raise.

The elderly's financial misfortune is duplicated for the disabled, for families bereaved of natural breadwinners and for those mentally and physically competent who are unemployable because the changes of history and progress render their skills unworthy of hire. They are unjustly misfortuned by mismanagement of the very progress which so wondrously benefits most of us-and so richly promises a posterity.

Last year's 15% Soc. Sec. benefit raise and the contemplated 5% will make but a passing ripple, like their predecessors. Proposed national standards for Welfare hint commendable awakening-30 years late! It's ironic that every delinquently mean penny of such overdue "improvements" is avidly precious to the hungered victims of our feeble policies. No decent heart can deny them the pittance, now. But, in no sense can they contribute to the full justice on which depend the faith and harmony we must have. For that they are less competent than were the original enactments and their long list of amendments to them, in their times. The plan we need exists. To discern it, you need only examine what the difference would be IF, somehow, we'd never encountered the problem. No elderly, no disabled, no bereaved families would be in poverty. Those whose skills technology's changes make unworthy of hire would be protected-pending their acquiring needed abilities.

It's self-evident-had we never encountered the problem, that happy prosperous state for the people and the country would be "costing" dollar for dollar exactly what an honest plan to wipe out the evil would cost. "Cost" is relevant only in the sense of measuring the value of the benefit AND of the loss from the evil. "Cost" is irrelevant in the sense of burden, or loss; but, it's fully relevant measuring a highly profitable, prospering investment for every honest, human interest.

That difference between how things are and how they ought to be and would be if we'd never met with the problem-that difference meticulously defines, measures and spells out what's necessary to fill the gap-to change the shaking society around us to the happy, unchallengeable America which should exist by every good reason.

No project, no investment can so mightily profit us and all mankind so much as filling that gap. The priceless prize of peace unanswerably requires it.

One thing can wipe out that gap-a great, national pension sufficient to bar poverty even for those caught with no other resource as the equal, inherent right of every American in retirement, or encountering any of the other misfortunes noted above. The injustice which only just Soc. Sec. benefits can wipe out is authentically measured by the Census Bureau data above. Today, that pension would have to be over $300 a month. The measure of the shaking, evil problem we harbor.

The great pension is the one thing which could have made the difference in the past. It's the ONE THING which ever can. Without it, the inferiority of the old and others will remain and grow-the forebodings of the Riot Commission come to pass. Without it we can spend trillions to rebuild rotted cities-only to populate them with paupered legions, making future slums out-horroring the most nightmarish imaginings.

Mr. Chairman, I anxiously adjure we must have a drastically reformed, freedom and equality reflecting definition of the so-called poverty-line. Medicare recognizes you can't relate treatment to wage-records-you can't give somebody half an appendectomy! Poverty exists unless a person can reasonably finance fully healthful diet, respectable clothing and housing, full medical and health insurance and care (including preventive needs)-and normal participation in recreational, social, cultural and public life and affairs. A whole, not part treatment on these counts, too!

Lacking this minimum participation in up-to-date prosperity-the minimum requirements of freedom and equality are financially precluded-and all other works in vain.

The great pension must be a floor of prosperity below which we won't allow human living because of financial lack-with earnings deducted so the benefit exhausts close to the up-to-date average. We mustn't hang people under a -ceiling (as proposed) to which earnings barely raise them from a benefitp in poverty, leaving them in its mire. We must prevent people getting actual poverty.

b.