Mr. CURTIS. I was wondering whether you had a party organization consisting of the people who are actually in the administration dealing with it.

Are they located throughout the country? Are there chapters throughout the country?

Mrs. EPSTEIN. We have no chapters.

Mr. CURTIS. Your only chapter is in New York City?

Mrs. EPSTEIN. We used to be called American Association for Old Age Security before the Social Security Act. We changed the name then.

Mr. CURTIS. But you do not have local chapters?

Mrs. EPSTEIN. No.

Mr. CURTIS. For example, in the city of St. Louis, do you have members in St. Louis?

Mrs. EPSTEIN. Yes; but I could not give you the names.

Mr. CURTIS. Well, of course you could not. I did not happen to be familiar with the organization and I wanted this information for the record.

Mrs. EPSTEIN. We have done a lot of work. Mr. Epstein has published a good many books on this subject. Of course, for a long time we did publish a magazine which lack of funds did not permit us to continue.

Mr. CURTIS. What is your membership now? Have you any idea? Mrs. EPSTEIN. I do not know exactly.

Mr. CURTIS. Would it be 4,000?

Mrs. EPSTEIN. Perhaps less than that. It is the quality that counts

most.

Mr. CURTIS. Thank you.

Mr. MACHROWICZ. Thank you very much.

This will conclude today's hearings, and the committee stands adjourned until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning.

(Whereupon, at 6:10 p.m., the hearing in the above-entitled matter was recessed, to be reconvened at 10 a.m., on the following day.)

UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION

THURSDAY, APRIL 16, 1959

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, Washington, D.C.

The committee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to recess, in the Ways and Means Committee room, New House Office Building, Hon. Wilbur D. Mills (chairman) presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will please be in order.

Our first witness this morning is our colleague from Wisconsin, the Honorable Henry S. Reuss.

Mr. Reuss, will you please come forward to the witness table? We appreciate having you with the committee this morning, Mr. Reuss, and you are recognized.

STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE HENRY S. REUSS, OF WISCONSIN

Mr. REUSS. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity afforded me by the Committee on Ways and Means to express my support of the pending legislation to improve our unemployment compensation system by establishing additional minimum standards which each State must meet. I refer specifically to H.R. 3547, and the bills identical to it, introduced by Congressmen Karsten, Machrowicz, and many others.

The people of Wisconsin would benefit directly from this legislation, together with the rest of the Nation.

The committee is fully aware of the principal new standards proposed: Weekly benefits equal to at least 50 percent of the worker's wages, up to a maximum of two-thirds of the State's average weekly wage; payment of benefits for 39 weeks to the eligible unemployed; and extending protection to many employees of small firms not presently covered.

Wisconsin was one of the States which extended the duration of unemployment benefits last year, under the temporary unemployment compensation program. But the workers of Wisconsin deserve the protection of permanently increased benefits for the 39 weeks established in this legislation, as against 2612 weeks in the basic Wisconsin statute. Had H.R. 3547 been law last year, even with the temporary change in unemployment compensation made by the Wisconsin Legislature, a Wisconsin worker unemployed for 9 months would have collected $249 more than he did.

It is also important to Wisconsin that realistic Federal standards be set for all States. Since Wisconsin has established higher unemployment compensation benefits than most States, Wisconsin runs the

risk of losing industry and jobs to other States with lower standards. This possibility can be removed only with establishment of nationwide standards.

It is essential that we now make permanent improvements in the Federal-State unemployment compensation system-not only to assist the jobless and their families, but to give the Nation a more solid foundation upon which to combat the damaging effects of future economie decline.

An effective unemployment compensation program requires realistic, uniform minimum standards in every State. This will come about only through the enactment of Federal legislation, just as it required Federal legislation to bring about the start of unemployment compensation programs in every State in the 1930's. Wisconsin enacted the first unemployment compensation statute in 1931, but it was not until Congress enacted the Federal-State system as part of the Social Security Act in 1935 that every State followed suit.

Some States have kept their unemployment compensation programs relatively up to date. Most have not. In relation to original benefits and coverage established in the 1930's, we have fallen far behind. A general, permanent uplifting is needed. Congress must do it.

It is interesting to note that the administration advocates improvement in unemployment compensation, and, in many respects, calls for the same standards embodied in H.R. 3547. But the administration would leave the changes up to the individual States. We will never have realistic nationwide minimum unemployment compensation standards if the question is left to the States.

Recovery from the recession has been uneven to say the least. Much-publicized gains in certain segments of the economy do not offset the poor performance in others. We still have well over 4 million Americans unemployed.

The administration has demonstrated no real effort to achieve the goals of the Employment Act of 1946-maximum employment, production, and purchasing power. It is not a hopeful thing to say, but it seems a distinct possibility that we will have an unemployment rate approximating 6 percent of the labor force for some time to come, unless the administration actively strives to meet the Employment Act's goals.

Under these circumstances it is in the best national interest to enact permanent improvements in the unemployment compensation system as contained in H.R. 3547. I urge the committee to act favorably upon this legislation.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Reuss, we thank you, sir, for coming to the committee and discussing these problems with us. You have made a very fine statement. We appreciate it.

Mr. REUSS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Any questions?

Thank you, sir.

We will now hear from our colleague from New York, the Honorable Herbert Zelenko.

Mr. Zelenko, will you please come forward to the witness table? We appreciate having you with the committee this morning, Mr. Zelenko, and you are recognized.

STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE HERBERT ZELENKC, OF NEW

YORK

Mr. ZELENKO. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I wish to thank you for permitting me to speak in behalf of H.R. 3591, a bill which I have introduced to provide unemployment reinsurance grants to the States, to revise, extend, and improve the unemployment insurance program, and for other purposes. This bill is one of over a hundred similar legislative proposals introduced by my distinguished and forward-looking colleagues. This legislation is long overdue. It not only will provide temporary sustenance for the working American and his family during periods of unemployment, but will equalize his rights and equities with his working brothers and sisters in all of the other States.

We of the Congress during the recent past have enacted legislation giving constitutional equality and protection in the fields of civil rights, social security and old-age benefits, property rights, security in savings and in other fields, but have not done so in the area of the economic illness of the worker. This legislation will not only rectify these inequities but will afford a semblance of temporary alleviation of monetary hardship.

I urge the favorable consideration of H.R. 3591 or any other similar legislation as soon as possible.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Zelenko, we thank you, sir, for coming to the committee and discussing these problems with us. You have made a very fine statement. We appreciate it.

Mr. ZELENKO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Any questions?

Thank you, sir.

We will now hear from our colleague from Wisconsin, the Honorable Robert W. Kastenmeier.

Mr. Kastenmeier, will you please come forward to the witness table? We appreciate having you with the committee this morning, Mr. Kastenmeier, and you are recognized.

STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE ROBERT W. KASTENMEIER, OF

WISCONSIN

Mr. KASTEN MEIER. Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee on Ways and Means, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you to ask your full consideration of a group of nearly identical bills to provide for unemployment reinsurance grants to the States and to revise, extend, and improve the unemployment insurance program. In 1931 the State of Wisconsin, which I have the privilege of representing in the House of Representatives, was the first to adopt an unemployment compensation act. Since that historic date, the State of Wisconsin always has been among the leaders in providing realistic benefits for those unfortunate enough to be unemployed.

However, experience has shown that not all States will act on their own to meet the problem confronting them in this area of unemployment compensation. Therefore, I believe it behooves the Federal Government to provide the leadership in order to assure a uniform rate of minimum standards that are in line with the needs of our unemployed men and women.

The bill which I introduced along with some 120 of my colleagues provides for several changes in the existing act. The bill, among other things, would-

(1) Establish benefits equal to not less than 50 percent of the weekly wages so long as that amount is not more than two-thirds of the average weekly wage in the State.

(2) Establish a uniform benefit period of 39 weeks.

(3) Permit States free choice in providing for uniform rate reductions to employers as well as individual experience-rated reductions.

These are worthy improvements which are much needed in the light of the failure of many States to face up to the problem of unemploy

ment.

My bill, however, differs from the others in one important respect. I have retained the "four employees or more" section on coverage. The other bills have extended coverage to those employing one or

more persons.

It is my feeling that extension of coverage would place an undue hardship on the rural shopkeeper who works a long day himself and employs one or two persons to assist him. This small merchant already has a multitude of records to keep for himself and his Government-local, State and Federal.

Although there has been some talk in my own State of Wisconsin of extending the coverage to some extent, I believe that our present minimum of four employees is adequate and provides a realistic distinction in the size of the business operation. The shopkeeper who works a full day himself and employs one or two persons to meet the peak demands for service or the dentist or lawyer who has one assistant to do his routine record keeping and typing functions in a markedly different manner than the merchant doing business on a larger scale and with a full staff of employees.

Mr. Chairman, this bill requires no appropriation of funds by Congress, and it does not change the present Federal-State relationship in the operation of the unemployment compensation system. Furthermore, it does not call for any increase in the present Federal tax upon payrolls.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Kastenmeier, we thank you, sir, for coming to the committee and discussing these problems with us. You have made a very fine statement. We appreciate it.

Mr. KASTENMEIER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Any questions?

Thank you, sir.

The Chair has just been advised that the Governor of Michigan will be delayed momentarily, so we will call the next witness and take the Governor following this witness.

Mr. James J. Maher, please come forward.

Mr. Maher, will you identify youself for the record by giving us your name, address, and capacity in which you appear?