Less advance là gì

Page 2

my letter to the three veterans organizations and their responses be printed in the RECORD at the conclusion of my remarks and after the text of the bill itself is set forth.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, the most common reasons for delay cited in the AMVETS survey involved tie-ups at either the college or in the VA regional office which processes the claims. In my experience, these delays range anywhere from 1 to 6 months or more beyond a normal 1-month processing time.

For example, in October of 1969 I received a letter from Charles F. Herndon, director of financial aids at the College of Marin in Kentfield, Calif., which indicated just how serious the delays have been for some veterans. Mr. Herndon's letter said in part:

“Each year the processing of enrollment certifications takes longer and longer so that the typical date for receiving the first benefit check for the academic year is late in November or early December.

"As I am sure you are aware, the period when a student most needs money for education is at the beginning of a term in order that he may firmly establish his school residence, purchase his books, supplies, etc.

"Many colleges are striving to acquire funds to assist in the education of the many disadvantaged young people in our society. The college cannot set aside large sums of money for temporary loans to veterans who will receive aid when it means it will not then be available for needy students.

"May we please request that you investigate the possibilities of improved service to the veterans receiving educational benefits from the G.I. Bill."

Mr. President, an example of an excessively long delay and an interesting suggestion resembling the approach contained in the bill I introduce today, were described in a letter I received in September 1969 from a veteran's wife in Oxnard, Calif.:

"During the Nixon administration, there has been discussion about the veterans not taking advantage of their benefits. Time Magazine went so far as to infer that the veteran is apathetic about continuing his education.

"The red tape and time involved in obtaining veterans benefits is overwhelming. My husband applied for GI bill educational benefits the first of April, 1969, shortly after commencing studies at University of California at Santa Barbara. This past week [September 1969] he received authorization from Veterans Administration to University of California at Santa Barbara to begin payments. It will now be another four to six weeks until payments begin–a total of five to six weeks of waiting. During this time he attended spring quarter and summer session. It was necessary for us to borrow $350.00 to meet educational expenses because of delays involved in receiving benefits. My husband had planned to attend a private institution but we could not meet that institution's tuition payments without having first received GI benefits.

"If all states offered a lump sum payment to GI's returning to school, this would help bridge the gap until Veterans Administration benefits begin.

"Most veterans cannot return to school without having first received benefits of the GI bill but they cannot get these benefits until after they return to school. In order for more veterans to take advantage of these benefits, modifications must be made to provide for more rapid service from the Veterans Administration."

These incidents are not restricted to California, where more Vietnam veterans reside_340,000, about 11 percent of those discharged—and go to school-about 15.3 percent over the life of the post Korean GI bill program. Many other Senators have told me of receiving similar complaints.

The bill I am introducing today is cosponsored by five members of the Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee-Mr. Yarborough, Mr. Schweiker, Mr. Randolph, Mr. Mondale, and Mr. Hughes as well as by Senator Williams of New Jersey, Senator Kennedy, Senator Nelson, and Senator Eagleton. I am delighted to be joined in sponsoring this bill by the distinguished chairman of the full Labor and Public Welfare Committee, who is also the ranking majority member of the subcommittee, Senator Yarborough, and by Senator Schweiker, the ranking minority member of the subcommittee.

The bill would seek to overcome the delays I have just described in two ways. First, an advance payment of not more than $250 would be authorized for an eligible veteran applying for it in order to assist in meeting postsecondary education and living expenses during the first 2 months of a school year. The advance payment could be made up to 30 days before the intended date of regis tration, but would not be available to a veteran who intends to pursue a progran

Page 3

The VFW, in replying to my inquiry, suggested that, because it is so important for the veteran to have "a certain amount of capital to buy books, pay fees and tuition, and meet other expenses before he can actually become enrolled in school," consideration should be given to paying for the entire first semester, or as much as would be feasible, at the time of enrollment. I believe the advance payment system in the bill offers a feasible and truly beneficial response to this demonstrated need.

Enactment of this bill should thus help prevent a veteran from being placed in a precarious financial situation vis-a-vis his schooling or his personal life as a result of a delay, justified or not, in receipt of the first regular educational assistance allowance check.

Equally important, however, is the contribution I believe the work-study part of the bill would make to improving and expediting the regular processing and certifying of enrollment of veterans in order that educational assistance allowances may be received in timely fashion.

This is particularly critical for veterans with families and for the 27 percent of veterans who enroll in nonpublic schools. The recently enacted rate increase in Public Law 91-219 would provide $1,575 over a full 9-month period. Although this is sufficient to cover average tuition, room and board charges at a public institution, it is far less adequate in meeting the average costs at nonpublic institutions.

The proposed work-study program in the bill would enable full-time GI bill postsecondary trainees with a demonstrated financial need in geographic areas where such services are determined to be appropriate and desirable to increase their total school-year income by $250, while at the same time contributing to the improvement of the entire GI bill program through increasd efficiency and speed in certificate and claims processing and through outreach work performed by these student veterans. Students would be limited to an average over a semester of 15 hours per week of providing part-time services, and their educational institution would have to certify their ability to maintain good standing while performing such services.

The VA would be expected to establish equitable guidelines for determining financial need and need for the services and for selecting and using the services of veterans applying to "work off" their advances. Appropriate guidance for determining financial need should be available in the Office of Education's regulations for its work-study program under the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended.

Veterans performing such services would be deemed intermittent employees of the Veterans' Administration, serving without compensation-WOC-for all purposes—such as under the Federal Employees' Compensation Act and the Federal Tort Claims Act-except that they would not be considered VA employees for purposes of Federal employment laws administered by the Civil Service Commission—such as those governing application and selection for Federal employment, retirement and other length-of-service Federal employment benefits, and Federal employment fringe benefits such as group health and life insurance programs. Also, funds retained under the advance cancellation provision would be exempt from taxation as a “payment of a benefit under any law administered by the Veterans' Administration,” as provided in 38 U.S.C. 3101 (a).

A prototype for this kind of program exists at the University of Illinois, where two falls ago the Illinois Federation of Veterans in College organized 20 or so veteran students to accomplish the college's GI bill certification on the same day the veteran registered. This past fall some funds for part-time stipends for this work were squeezed from the university, but future prospects for funding this kind of program are not encouraging. The results, however, are encouraging: all veterans who registered promptly received their first checks in October.

In an effort to deal with these GI bill allowance delays, the VA allows collegiate veterans to obtain early certification for the coming school year at the end of the previous year or during the summer when the veteran completes preregistration and so notifies the VA by filling out the appropriate forms. This procedure, which is permissible at only a small number of colleges, is designed to minimize the delay in issuing the first check at the beginning of the year for which the veteran has preregistered. An effort should be made to encourage those veterans who preregister to utilize this new procedure to the maximum extent. · Finally, I want to focus on one other very important aspect of the work-study program. Veterans who have received advance payments could also work them off by performing outreach services under the just-enacted subchapter IVO chapter 3 of title 38. I tend to agree with the VA that using GS-12's or 13's to "pound the pavement" in search of educationally disadvantaged veterans is highly questionable on a cost-effectiveness basis. But this provision would make it possible and very economical, at $2 per hour, for the VA to improve substan. tially its existing program of contact and outreach.

Page 4

member. These persons have been college oriented since high school days. They prepared to go on, were counseled in this respect, and finally entered the world of higher education. Because of this atmosphere, or 'college orientation,' persons who today are in a position to effect the enrollment of veterans are also, through no fault of their own, overlooking the critical reason for what appears to be a lack of interest in the G.I. Bill.

“Many veterans indeed became veterans because of a poor economic back. ground or simply a lack of interest in their own education. The maturity, discipline, and motivation which they gain in the service still leaves them in the dark as far as college is concerned. If anything, college has become even more unknown. In short, many veterans want to go to college if someone would only show them how.

“For this reason, the veterans fraternities of Harrisburg Area Community Col. lege and the Capitol Campus, Pennsylvania State University, have initiated a program designed to recruit veterans into college. From discussions among ourselves, we have found that most of us had experienced the same problems when we were attempting to enter college.

“I cannot over-emphasize the value of the human aspect of our approach. We are veterans talking to veterans. We speak the same language, and through this means we first describe our own experiences in college and generally try to reduce the fear of the unknown. We then describe different courses and methods of scheduling to fit jobs or other situations. We try to answer any questions about college and we even help to submit applications. We also have an unwritten code that once a veteran becomes a student, our best students in any particular course will tutor any G.I. who is having trouble in that particular course. In other words, when we council, we tell veterans, 'If you go to school, we'll make sure you stay.'

"I feel that our methods would be highly successful nationwide with an adequate program. I am enclosing a few items about us with the hope that we may shed some light on the current problems connected with the G.I. Bill. As veterans who are now college students, we do know what others are up against and we hope to help them overcome these problems by using our experiences.

"Concerning the current proposals, I have noticed that Senator Cranston's bill would provide finances for special, or developmental courses. This is most important particularly to our fellow veterans belonging to minority groups or from poor economic backgrounds. In many cases, these special courses are their only hope to be able to compete academically in the classroom with the younger students.

"I would welcome the opportunity to expand on these and many other areas at your request, and hope that I have been of some assistance. “Respectfully yours,

"ROBERT D. FORD."

"[From Business Week, Mar. 21, 1970) "A NEW GI BILL FOR VIETNAM VETS

“A new, broadened version of the GI Bill was headed toward Congressional passage this week as a House-Senate conference group came to agreement on its features—a 35% boost in basic benefit levels and a number of highly innovative provisions to attract educationally disadvantaged veterans to the groves of academe.

“The measure grows out of concern over Vietnam veterans' half-hearted involvement in the government-sponsored educational program as compared with the enthusiastic participation of the education-hungry vets of past wars. Aided by the GI Bill, almost half of all World War II veterans enrolled in some sort of training program-including 450,000 future engineers, 360,000 future teachers, and countless aspiring doctors, lawyers, businessmen, salesmen, and mechanics. About 45% of Korean veterans also went back to school. By contrast, only about 23% of Vietnam's crops of ex-servicemen have made use of available educational benefits thus far.

"BLACK AND DISADVANTAGED VETS HAVE SPURNED THE GI BILL OF RIGHTS

“Particularly disturbing has been the failure of black and disadvantaged GIS to seize the educational opportunities offered them. With the unemployment rate

Page 5

The material presented by- Mr. Cranston is as follows:

“VETERANS' ADMINISTRATION,

“Washington, D.C., April 16, 1970. "Hon. SPIRO T. AGNEW, "President of the Senate, "Washington, D.C.

"DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: There is transmitted herewith a draft of a bill 'To remove time limitations on the duration of eligibility of veterans for guaranteed and direct loans', with the request that it be introduced in order that it may be considered for enactment.

"Prior to July 6, 1961, World War II veterans, as well as Korean veterans, were limited in their use of VA loan benefits to a period terminated by a fixed date. This terminal date had been extended several times so that as to World War II veterans it was then fixed at July 25, 1962, and as to Korean conflict veterans at January 31, 1965.

“Public Law 87–84, approved July 6, 1961, established a phase-out formula, gearing the entitlement period to the length of the veteran's war service and the date of his discharge, with emphasis on those who served longest and were most recently discharged. Under the formula, each veteran was given entitlement of ten years from date of separation from his last period of duty which included service in the war period, plus an additional period of one year for each three months of active duty performed during the war or conflict. Under current law (38 U.S.C. 1803), the eligibility of World War II and Korean conflict veterans cannot extend beyond July 25, 1970 and January 31, 1975, respectively.

"The foregoing entitlement formula applies also to veterans of the post-Korean period having loan entitlement under section 1818 of title 38, except that the final date within which the phase-out formula operates for that group is twenty years from the date of the veteran's separation from his last period of active duty.

"Terminal dates for the eligibility of World War II veterans have been extended several times. Extensions have been made at or just prior to the statutory cut-off dates which has created a strong climate of uncertainty for veterans and other program participants. Removal of the phase-out criteria and the group cut-off dates would eliminate the element of urgency by veterans in using their eligibility, which becomes critical in periods of credit stringency.

“Elimination of the delimiting dates on eligibility for the GI loan program would be in line with the eligibility criteria for the FHA veterans' loan program. Such a change would also simplify the administration of the VA loan programs. Further, veterans could adjust the timing of their home purchases and mortgage credit needs to coincide with favorable private market conditions, when sellers and lenders are willing to participate in the loan guaranty program. No veteran would be denied use of his entitlement because it had expired at a time when guaranteed loans were unavailable.

"Our legislative proposal would amend 38 U.S.C. 1803(a) to eliminate the basic phase-out criteria and cut-off dates for World War II and Korean veterans and would make similar changes in 38 U.S.C. 1818(c) for veterans who serve after January 31, 1955. Corresponding changes would be made in section 1802(b), 1811 (h), and 1818(e) to delete secondary references to the entitlement expiration dates thus eliminated. The terminal date for the direct loan program (January 31, 1975) now prescribed in section 1818(c) has been retained by incorporation in section 1811(h) which deals specifically with the driect loan program.

"If this proposal is enacted, it is estimated that in the first year there would be 35,000 loans closed which otherwise would not be made under the VA loan program. In five years, the cumulative additional loans would approximate 179,000. It is estimated that the additional cost for the first year, i.e., administrative expenses and operational losses and expenses, would be about $5.3 million and that the aggregate cost for the five year period would approximate $26.5 million.

"We are advised by the Bureau of the Budget that there is no objection to the presentation of this proposed legislation and that its enactment would be in accord with the program of the President. "Sincerely,

"DONALD E. JOHNSON, Administrator."

Page 6

"5. Claims for apportionment: where payment to vet have been interrupted, apportionment will be effective the day following the date of last payment if a claim is received within one year after that date.

*6. Disability or death due to hospitalization : benefits payable from the date the injury was suffered or from the first of the month of death if claim is received uithin one year after that date.

“7. Annulled marriage: death benefits are resumable from the date the annullment decree becomes final if a claim is filed within one year after that date.

*8. Child's helplessness: in continuation of payments, from the 18th birthday if claim is received prior to or within one year after the 18th birthday.

“Although this proposed change is a simple one, it is vital, I have seen hundreds of sad cases where veterans missed months of benefits for dependents because they did not realize they had to file a claim the day the event occurred in order to get benefits for that dependent from the earliest possible date.

“When a guy is getting married or having a child, can you expect him to remember to send us a claim that day or even within the week thereafter? Yet the burden of financial support falls on the veteran from the date the event occurred.

"It seems reasonable in the light of the other similar VA laws that this law should be as considerate, so that benefits for a new wife or child, would be payable from the day the dependency began, if a claim is filed within a year of the marriage or birth.

"Please seriously consider this proposal to sponsor and support such a measure. I have no selfish ends in requesting this. Because of a physical disability I could not serve in the armed forces and so I am not a veteran. I only make this request because I am dedicated to helping veterans. The inequitable law which now exists rubs my conscience every day as I see it deprive veterans of benefits which they need due to dependents and which they deserve in the light of other similar Veterans Administration laws.

"In sum, please help to change the law so that benefits for wives and children would be payable not from the date we receive the claim, but from the date of marriage or birth, if a claim is filed within one year of the marriage or birth. "Sincerely, A Concerned Citizen.

ROBERT COLVIN. Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, I wish to point out that the bill I am introducing would change the dependency status effective date for GI bill purposes only and not for disability compensation purposes. Although I fully recognize the desirability of uniformity in these two areas, the Subcommittee on Veterans' Affairs, of which I am chairman, has no jurisdiction over the compensation program. I would urge, however, that the Veterans' Legislation Subcommittee of the Finance Committee and the House Veterans Affairs' Committee, give serious consideration to an amendment to section 3010 to change the dependency status effective date across the board, in which event my bill would not be needed.

Senator CRANSTON. Before introducing our first witness, I want to receive for the record the statement of Senator Hollings, of South Carolina, in support of S. 3556. I have been privileged to work closely with Senator Hollings on the Banking and Currency Committee on a good many housing bills and particularly on his mobile homes amendment, which I cosponsored, to the bill that became the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1969, which permitted mobile home loan guarantees under the FHA program. So when Senator Hollings speaks about mobile homes, we should pay close attention.

STATEMENT OF HON. ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, A U.S. SENATOR FROM

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Senator HOLLINGS. Mr. Chairman, I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to make a statement before your subcommittee. Although I

Page 7

STATEMENT OF DONALD E. JOHNSON ADMINISTRATOR OF VETERANS' AFFAIRS

BEFORE THE SUBCOMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE UNITED STATES SENATE

ON s. 3656, s. 3657, S. 3683, and S. 3907, 9186 CONGRESS

JUNE 9, 1970

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

I am pleased to have the opportunity to appear here this

morning and to discuss with you the bills you now have under

consideration relating to the veterans educational and home loan

The principal purpose of these bills 18 the

implementation of those recommendations of the President's Committee

on the Vietnam Veteran, that can only be accomplished through

Some of them, however, deal with other aspects of

the veterans' educational assistance and loan guaranty programs .

Mr. Chairman, as you and the other members of the Sub

committee know, on June 5, 1969, President Nixon created a cabinet

level Committee on the Vietnam Veteran to evaluate how well the

nation is meeting its debt to today's veterans.

of chairing that Committee and had serving with me the Secretary of

Defense, the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, the Secretary of Labor, the Postmaster General, the Director of the Office

of Economic Opportunity, and the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission. The report of the Committee was presented to the

President and was approved by him on March 26, 1970, at the time

he signed into law the Veterans Education and Training Amendments

Act of 1970 (H. R. 11959, now Public Law 91-219). A copy of this

report has previously been furnished to each member of this Sub

committee and, with your permission, I would l1ke to file a copy

at this time, for inclusion in the record as a part of my remarks.

Some of the recommendations of the Committee were

accomplished by the enactment of Public Law 91-219, while others

can be accomplished administratively.

Four recommendations, however,

will require the enactment of legislation.

enter and follow through with a training program by pro

viding an advance education assistance payment to help

the veteran meet the initial costs of entering training.

program to assist servicemen to prepare for post-secondary

of mobile home financing in order to promote an adequate

supply of low cost housing for low and moderate income

s. 3683, the "Vietnam Veterans A88 18 tance Act of 1970"

would accomplish all four of these recommendations.

accomplish the advance payment recommendation (No. A-1) and would

establish a Work-Study program for the repayment of the advance

S. 3656 would authorize guaranteed loans for

the purchase of mobile homes (Recommendation No. C-2) and, in addt

tion, would authorize direct loans for the purchase of mobile

homes and provide for the payment of certain closing costs on direct

As mentioned earlier, s. 3683 would accomplish all of the

recommendations of the President's Committee which still require

It is identical to a draft bill which I sub

mitted to the President of the Senate on April 1, 1970.

(1) revise the eligibility

criteria for in-service educational assistance to permit servicemen

to prepare'for post-secondary training while on active duty by

participating in such programs following the completion of six

To some extent, this would be an extension

of the Predischarge Education Program (PREP) enacted by Public Law

Under the PREP program, educationally deficient servicemen

may pursue courses leading to a high school diploma, needed refresher

deficiency or certain other special courses, after six months of

active duty without charge to their earned educational entitlement;

(2) permit cooperative GI bill educational training for disadvantaged or minority group veterans in qualifying for a Small Bus iness Adminis

tration loan; (3) authorize guaranteed loans to purchase a mobile

home; (4) authorize an advance payment of the educational assist

ance allowance to veterans enrolled in an educational institution

on a half-time or more basis, for the initial partial and the first

full month of training upon submission of proof that the veteran

has been accepted for enrollment in an approved educational institu

tion. Subsequent payments would be made each month in advance.

I would like to move now, Mr. Chairman, to a more detailed

examination of the provisions of S. 3683 dealing with advance payment

of educational assistance allowances and s. 3657.

S. 3657, would authorize an educational

assistance advance payment

not to exceed $250 to an eligible

veteran intending to pursue a course of education on a full-time

basis, and a lesser amount for half-time or more pursuit, immediately

prior to, or at the beginning of, any school year in order to assist

such veteran in meeting his education and living expenses during

pur.sue an approved course of education after receiving an advance,

the Administrator would prescribe the manner of repayment.

The advance payment would be made to the veteran not

more than 30 days prior to his expected date of enrollment if the

veteran submits evidence to the Administrator showing him to be an

eligible veteran, and certifies that he is enrolled in, or has

applied for, or has been accepted by, and in

approved course at a specified educational institution, the date of

enrollment, the number of hours and that he has at least six months

The bill a 1.30 provides for a Worli-Study program for those

who receive an advance educational assistance payment.

trator is to utilize, to the maximum extent practicable, the services

of any veteran who has received an advance who 18 pursuing a full

time course and, who agrees to work, not in excess of 15 hours per

week, in connection with processing applications or other documents

at educational institutions, VA regional offices, or in connection

with the outreach services program.

work program must be in need of augmentation of his educational

assistance allowance, and be capable of maintaining good standing

while performing these services.

In return the obligation of the

veteran would be reduced or canceled at the rate of $2 per hour

of work performed. While performing services,

would be deemed to be intermittent employees of the United States

serving without compensation; except that for the purposes of

laws administered by Civil Service Commission, such veterans would

not be deemed to be employees of the United States.

Currently, under section 1681(e) of title 38,

States Code, the educational assistance allowance is required to be

paid to the eligible veteran as soon as practicable after the

Administrator is assured of the veteran's enrollment in and pursuit

of the program of education for the period for which such allowance

These payments do not begin, however, until after

the veteran has enrolled and completed each month of training. Public Law 91-219, however, modified this procedure by providing for a lump sum payment of the educational assistance allowance payable

to veterans who are attending school on a less-than-one-half-time

basis and to eligible servicemen for the entire quarter, semester,

or term during the month inmediately following the month in which

enrollment certification is received.

The advance payment provision

of each of these bills (s. 3657 and s. 3683) would complement the

Public Law 91-219 amendment so that veterans attending school on a

half-time or more basis would receive an advance payment prior to

their enrollement in school.

We favor the enactment of an advance payment plan.

view, section 3 of s. 3683 is better designed to aid the veteran in his attempt to obtain an education than the comparable provision in

The amounts advanced would ģenerally be greater, consider

ing dependents and beginning dates of school.

sion would not work a hardship on the veteran since he would be

receiving his benefit payment in advance and no loan indebtedness

his entitlement to the advance payment for each month.

There 18 merit to a Work-Study proposal. It would appear,

however, more beneficial to the veteran if it were not connected to

the advance payment repayment plan. Under the plan as provided in

S. 3657, some veterans who could least afford to devote extra curricular time would feel obligated to work for the Veterans Admin

istration in order to repay the advance.

The Veterans Administration does have certain peak loads

of paper work during which it could utilize the services of these

We believe that instead of limiting the employment

of these students to the programs set forth in S. 3657

applications for advance and regular educational assistance allow

ance payments and in connection with the outreach services program

it would be better to give the Veterans Administration general

Page 8

forth in the measure, but for other programs as well, such as the

income questionnaire program which we are required to conduct

each year in conjunction with our pension program, thus affording

an additional source of monetary assistance to those veteran

students who need to supplement their educational assistance

Provision for these employees could be accommodated in

our budget since we are presently using temporary help and over

time to perform these jobs.

We would have no objection, therefore, to a provision in

line with the present language of subsection (e) of S. 3657, grant

ing general authority for the Administrator to employ students

enrolled under the G.I. bill as intermittent employees, without

regard to any other provision of law, and for a maximum number of

hours of employment per week.

Such amended provision could, of

course, specify that payment at a certain hourly rate be paid, but

we believe it would be preferable to pay such students in accord

ance with the going rate for the job classification.

are presently more than the proposed $2 per hour as provided in

As a technical matter, we note that paragraph (c)(1) of

the new subsection 1688 created by S. 3657 provides that the

advance payment may be made to any eligible veteran who submits

evidence that he is an eligible veteran as defined in section

1652 (a) (1) of chapter 34 of title 38. This could include an indi

vidual who has the status of an "eligible veteran" by reason of a

previous discharge from active duty even though he may now be on

We do not believe it is the intent to prepay addi

tional living expenses to a veteran on active duty. This could be

clarified by adding the words "not on active duty" immediately

following the words "eligible veteran" on page 3, line 21 of the bill. While we had

no experience with advance payments to

eligible veterans to serve as a basis for estimating the number who might request an advance and thus qualify to work in order

to cancel their loan, our best estimate of the cost of direct

benefits is $14 million in fiscal year 1971, totaling approximately

$80 million for the first five years.

The administrative costs are

estimated to total at least $9.6 million in fiscal year 1971, total

ing approximately $55 million for the first five years.

detailed explanation of the basis for these estimates has

furnished to the Committee as an enclosure to our report on s. 3657.

Before getting into the provisions of the pending bills

pertaining to the Veterans Administration home loan program, I

would like to discuss 5.3907, which would amend

title 38, which currently provides that effective dates relating

to the award of educational benefits under chapters 31, 34, and 35

of title 38, shall, to the extent feasible, correspond to effective

dates relating to awards of disability compensation.

amendment would provide an exception to that law for the effective

date of increases in such subsistence and educational assistance

payments by reason of marriage, or the birth or adoption of a

In those cases the date of increase would become the date

of such event if proof is received within one year from such

marriage, birth or adoption. An adoption would be recognized from

the date of the interlocutory decree of adoption unless and until

that decree is rescinded, provided the child remains in the custody

of the adopting parent or parents during the interlocutory period.

or adoption of a child to be the date of such event if proof is

received within one year.

Under current law, the effective

the date of the receipt of a claim for an increase based

With respect to several other benefits adminis

tered by the Veterans Administration, effective dates have been

provided for in section 3010 of title 38.

pensation by reason of section 351 of title 38 shall be the date

such injury or aggravation was suffered if an application therefor

is received within one year from such date; and subsection (e)

makes the effective date of an award of dependency and indemnity

compensation to a child, the first day of the month in which the

child's entitlement arose if application therefor is received with

in one year from such date.

Therefore, s. 3907 would appear to be a logical extension

tee on the subject bill, this expansion could be accomplished by

deleting all of the language of the subject bill after the enacting

clause and inserting an amendment to section 3010 of title 38,

adding at the end thereof a new subsection to read as follows:

"(1) The effective date of the award of additional bene

fits or any increase therein by reason of marriage

or the birth or adoption of a child shall be the

date of such event if proof thereof is received

The Chairman of this Subcommittee upon the . Introduction

of S. 3907, while recognizing the desirability of uniformity in the application of the award of Veterans Administration benefits,

took cognizance of the limited jurisdiction of the full Committee

in the area of veterans benefits. Nevertheless, we would hope

that the jurisdictional problems in connection with the consider

ation of the enlarged amendment we have suggested can be resolved.

Subject to the foregoing comments, we would have no

objection to the favorable consideration of s. 3907.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to turn to those provisons of

S. 3683 and s. 3656 which pertain to our Home Loan Program.

S. 3683 would add a new section 1819 to chapter 37 author

izing the VÀ to guarantee loans for the purchase of mobile homes by

eligible veterans as recommended by the President's Committee on

The section provides for guarantee loan

financing for such purchases on more liberal terms than those

obtainable on a conventional basis.

It will permit the guarantee

of a loan of up to $10,000, repayable over a term as long as twelve

Also, the loan may include an additional $3,000 to finance

the purchase of a lot on which to place the mobile home.

interest rate on these loans will be established by regulation at

the lowest possible level necessary to assure a reasonable supply

of private lender financing. And further, the use of this special

mobile home benefit will not bar the veteran from using his GI loan

benefit later on to acquire a conventional type home when he can

afford to do so providing his mobile home loan has been repaid in

The mobile home provisions of S. 3683 parallel s. 3656 in

many respects, but there are important differences.

will comment principally on the points of difference, keying the

discussion to the order in which the items occur in the proposed

home loan entitlement to any veteran who has not previously

used his home loan guaranty entitlement, and it would not

require any charge against the veteran's home loan guaranty

entitlement for future purchase of a conventional home.

would simply suspend the use of the latter until the mobile

It would allow guarantee up to 30 percent

Although not entirely clear from the wording,

it would appear that s. 3656 requires a charge to the veteran's

entitlement and limits the guaranteed portion to $2,000 or

50 percent of the loan amount whichever is lesser,

used mobile home provided it is presently the security for

a loan guaranteed by the VA or guaranteed or insured by

Although we anticipate that the

percentage of such refinancing would be small, we think that

it should be provided for.

It would, for example, be diffi

cult to justify the denial to a veteran of the opportunity

to purchase a used mobile home which is the security for a

VA or FIA guaranteed of insured loan.

Prior suproval of loans and lenders

Page 9

The lender approval provision of 6. 3683

ties in with the provision that all such loans be submitted

necessitates submission of loans to the VA for prior approval

but we would not object to the insertion of language in S. 3683

that would authorize the VA on a discretionary basis to permit

lendees to process on other than a prior approval basis when

we deteçmine such to be warranted.

S. 3683 specifically provides for guaranty of 30

percent of the unpaid balance of the loan as of the date of

the first uncured loan default.

specified because it is the approximate equivalent protection

which a lender making a conventional loan secures by re

quiring a downpayment, which usually averages from 20 percent

Under S. 3656, however, no percentage of

guaranty is specified and, as we interpret the bill, it

becomes necessary to apply the provisions of section 1803

in the existing law in respect to amount of guaranty.

are 50 percent, but not to exceed $2,000, in the case of a

non-real estate mobile home loan and, if the loan includes

funds for acquisition of a site, 50 percent but not to exceed

We do not believe that a guaranty

of this type would be acceptable to lenders from a risk

llence we recommend that the provisions of S. 3683

in respect to percentage of guaranty be adopted.

Liquidation of Luan Security

would not'be in a position to obtain payment of their net loss

until after the security liquidation the deferral of the

guaranty payment should be a factor that will motivate the

lender to act promptly when liquidating the security:

The Administration proposal contemplates a departure

from the concept embodied in existing law (and in s. 3656) of

determining the reasonable value of the conventional type

home as a means of arriving at a maximum permissible loan.

S. 3683 with respect to mobile homes, would establish a maximum

loan amount, insofar as the mobile home itself is concerned,

based upon or keyed to the manufacturer's invoice cost to the

dealer from whom the veteran purchased it. We contemplate a maximum loan amount of not to exceed such invoice cost plus a

We are thinking in terms of a figure

ecjual to the manufacturer's invoice cost plus a percentage

factor to cover miscellaneous costs, e.g., set-up costs,

transportation and sales tax.

We believe that a 15 percent

factor would have the effect of reducing the average down

payment to about 10 percent of the cost to the veteran.

contrasts with downpayments of 20 percent to 30 percent customarily

required in conventional financing of new mobile homes.

invoice cost method of arriving at maximum loan amount is

similar to the formula used by the Federal Home Loan Bank

Board and by the FIA in its Title I Program.

is accumulated, we find it necessary to revise the amount of

downpayment upward or downward, the percentage portion of our

proposed formula can be adjusted accordingly.

s. 3683 proposes a maximum loan maturity of 12 years

and 32 days, the same as the FHA Title I program.

studies lead us to believe that 15 years is more than necessary

for straight (non-real estate) mobile home loans and that

monthly payments will work out at reasonably low amounts within the 12 year limitation. The purpose of the 32 day provision

is to permit the lender to set up the first installment

period between 30 and 60 days from the date of the loan.

consider that there would be justification for the 15 year

maturity of s. 3656 where site acquisition is also involved.

The portion of the loan to secure a lot could be amortized

on a 15 year basis while the mobile home portion of the loan

would be limited to a 12 year amortization,

It appears that the maximum loan limits of the two

bills are essentially the same.

There are, however, some minor

The Administration bill allows a degree of flexi

bility to permit the loan holder to make advances of funds

to protect the loan security.

s. 3656 would permit an increase

in the maximum in those instances involving site acquisition

by an amount determined by the VA to be necessary to cover the

cost of site preparation.

The Administration proposal contains

no corresponding provision. After careful consideration we

believe both the advance provision and the allowance for site

preparation expense merit adoption,

The Administration biļi specifies that the loan be

repayable in approximately equal monthly installments. Although it might be permissible for the VA to provide for

this by regulation under S. 3656, we consider it advisable

to have this condition in the law.

Certification of Occupancy

s. 3683 specifically makes applicable to mobile home

loans the existing requirement applicable to other home loans

that the veteran certify he will occupy the property as his

home. S. 3656 has no comparable provision. Its inclusion would remove any doubt there might be as to whether mobile homes consitute "pesidential property."

The Administration bill proposes to set the maximum

interest rate by regulation.

In the absence of a comparable

provision in S. 3656, the present maximum rate of 8-1/2 percent

applicable to all guaranteed loans would apply.

type program must attract the participation of the private

sector in order to provide the intended benefit to veterans.

At this point we do not know what rate it wili take to induce

Because of the uncertainties in this

area and the need for flexibility, we believe the better course

is, as the Administration has proposed, to confer on VA authority

to set the maximum by regulation.

. keep the maximum as low as possible and still secure lender

Restoration of Used Entitlement

s. 3683 would permit restoration of entitlement to

mobile home loan benefits upon repayment in full of any previous

mobile home guaranteed loan to the veteran.

that the mobile home securing such loan be disposed of or that

it be disposed of for a compelling reason.

the mobile home may be a temporary or interim housing arrange

ment for the young veteran who may later wish to use his entitle

ment to acquire a conventional home, the purpose of this pro

vision is to facilitate his doing so.

There is no corresponding

As a consequence a veteran who had

previously obtained such guaranteed loan would have to establish

not only payment in full but also disposition of the previous

mobile home for a compelling reason, or establish one of the

other conditions specified in the existing law.

S. 3683 grants the VA broad authority to determine

the provisions of chapter 37 that should be applicable to the

We consider this authority necessary

to a sound administration of the program since some portions

of chapter 37 are obviously applicable while others are not.

Pending the accumulation of adequate experience with

the guaranty of mobile home loans, we believe it desirable and recommend a terminal date for the program, as provided in

We consider a 3 year period will

provide adequate basis upon which to determine the need for

changes in the program or for its continuance.

We believe that there should be included a provision

for a future effective date, as appears in S. 3683.

mend approximately 90 days.

In view of the novelty of the

program, the need for extensive regulatory changes and

indoctrination of field personnel, such lead time is required

program are made acceptable to lenders, there should be no

need for a direct loan program.

The direct home loan program

is predicated on the fact that, following inauguration of the

loan guaranty program in 1944 and 1945, experience revealed

that in certain geographical areas GI home loan money was not

The direct home loan program was devised to fill

Page 10

such geographical gaps in the present availability of con

ventional mobile home financing.

Retail dealers customarily

have a line of retail financing available to their buyers.

Hence, if there is a dealer, there is financing.

recommend that a direct loan program not be authorized until

a need for it be demonstrated.

Mr. Chairman, our detailed comparison of these two

bills leads me to believe that the Mobile Home program could

best be accomplished through enactment of S. 3683 modified as

suggested rather than s. 3656.

REMOVAL OF DELIMITING DATES

Mr. Chairman, I would now like to discuss the

proposals to remove the delimiting dates and discontinue the

phasing-out of veteran's eligibility for loan guaranty

On April 16, 1970, I submitted to the President of

the Senate a draft of a proposal to remove the time limitation

on the duration of eligibility of veterans for guaranteed and

direct loans, with a request that it be considered for enact

On June 2, 1970, it was introduced as Amendment No. 672 to

the Administration bill, S. 3683, which I have just been

The provisions of s. 3656 and this amendment

Both include removal of the present

program terminal dates and the phasing-out of the veteran's

In addition both would revive eligibility

which previously expired under the phase-out provisions and

There are, however, some differences worthy

would substitute in section 1811 a new subsection (n) to

incorpora te the present terminal date for the direct loan

that January 31, 1975 shall be the terminal date of the entire direct loan program, regardless of which service period is

the source of the veteran's entitlement, we believe the pro

the eligibility of only one class of veterans, namely those

qualifying by reason of service after January 31,

Accordingly, placement of the direct loan terminal da te

provision in that section, coincident with removal of the

termination provisions in respect to basic eligibility,

seemingly would make direct loans available indefinitely

for World War II and Korean conflict veterans, but would end

them for post-Korean conflict veterans on January 31, 1975.

In short, transfer of the direct loan termination date to

section 1811 is made necessary by removal of the program

terminal dates for World War II and Korean conflict veterans.

Because it proposes to eliminate the funding fee

requirement for post-Korean conflict veterans, s. 3656 also

proposes to eliminate the saving provision which exempts

certain post-Korean conflict veterans, who are also world

War II or Korean conflict veterans, from paying such fee.

However, the subsection to be eliminated also saves for

World War II and Korean conflict veterans the privilege of

obtaining business loans and insured loans which they would

that this result is not intended, the amendment retains

in a new subsection (d) so much of this saving clause as

is necessary to protect this eligibility of World War II

and Korean conflict veterans.

We do not favor the elimina

tion of the funding fee provision.

S. 3656 proposes a new subsection (d) in section

1818, the apparent purpose of which is to preserve post

Korean conflict entitlement which would be existing on the

We believe this to be unnecessary, since

no such entitlement will expire in any event until March 3,

Reviving Expired Entitlement

s. 3656 proposes a new paragraph to revive the

entitlement of World War II and Korean conflict veterans

which was not used and which has expired (or would expire

We believe that the amendment removing

the phasing-out and program termination provisions will

have this result without such a provision.

would, however, make this clear and is acceptable.

Mr. Chairman, I shall now comment on those provi

sions of s. 3656 which are not encompassed in the Adminis

Section 4 of s. 3656 would amend Chapter 37 of

title 38 by adding a new section 1819 entitled "Special

Closing costs and Interest Payments by the Administrator."

Subsection (a) of the proposed section 1819 would require

of the Commission on Mortgage Interest Rates of August 1969

recommends, among other things, that the VA and the FHA

undertake a joint study of closing costs for submission to the

Congress together with recommendations for reducing and

standardizing such costs, and that such a study is provided

for in the Senate passed Emergency Home Finance Act of 1970

Increases in closing costs during recent years clearly

have added substantially to the cost of acquiring a home.

The Commission recognized, however, that institutional practices

in different states and localities are the primary determinant

of many of the charges made at a mortgage closing.

charges for such things as title insurance, attorney fees,

property surveys and the like vary considerably across the

In addition, they also vary with the amount of the

loan or purchase price involved.

I believe that consideration

of a closing cost subsidy payment is premature at this time

and that the preferable course is to defer consideration of

such proposal until the joint HUD-VA closing cost study

provided for in S. 3685 is completed and submitted to the

Subsection (b) of the proposed section 1819 of

s. 3656 would require the Administrator to pay to the lender

for 60 months an interest subsidy of one percent on behalf of

In the case of direct loans there would be a

reduction in the payment of interest by the veteran for the

Enactment of the interest subsidy pro

visions would result in payment of larger sums to those who

For example, currently we are guaran

teeing loans for the purchase of homes as high as $50,000.

We believe that any interest subsidy should be related to

the income of the family and restricted to assisting only

those acquiring a modest type dwelling.

In cospect to the interest subsidy proposal in

s. 3650 attention is invited to the provisions of Title V

of s. 3685 passed by the Senate recently, which provides

home mortgage assistance for middle-income families.

of Housing and Urban Develo

pay to the Federal National Mortgage Association or to a new

Agency, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, a mortgage

assistance subsidy payment and thereby reduce the effective

interest rate cost to eligible borrowers to 7 percent.

In lieu of enacting a special subsidy program

applicable only to the VA, as proposed in s. 3656, we recommend

that the provisions of Title V of s. 3685 be extended to provide

the same assistance to veterans obtaining financial loan

assistance under chapter 37, title 38, as would be obtained

by individuals purchasing homes with FHA insured financing.

We believe this would provide a more uniform and equitable

method of assisting all of our citizens in acquiring homes who

desire to do so regardless of the type of Federally-assisted

An amendment to accomplish this result

has been submitted to the House Banking and Currency Committee.

Should the House pass the bill with such change, we would

earnestly hope that the Senate will concur in the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, to sum up our position on the

provisions pertaining to the Loan Guaranty program, we

favor legislation regarding mobile homes and removal of

the delimiting dates, but we do not favor providing

closing cost subsidy at this time.

viding loan interest subsidy, but urge that this be

accomplished through the suggested amendment to Title V

in S. 3685, rather than the approach proposed in s. 3656.

It is our feeling that the provisions in the Administration

bill S. 3683, as amended to remove the delimiting dates,

Page 11

together with the proposed amendment to Title V of S. 3685,

views on the several important and meritorious legislative proposals under consideration today.

I, and members of the VA staff who accompany me, will endeavor to answer any questions with respect

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman, as you and the other members of the subcommittee know on June 5, 1969, President Nixon created a Cabinetlevel Committee on the Vietnam Veteran to evaluate how well the Nation is meeting its debt to today's veterans.

The report of the Committee was presented to the President and was approved by him on March 26, 1970 at the time he signed into law the Veterans' Education and Training Amendments Act of 1970 (H.R. 11959, now Public Law 91-219). A

copy of this report has previously been furnished to each member of this subcommittee and with your permission I would like to file a copy at this time for inclusion in the record as part of my remarks.

Senator CRANSTON. It is so ordered. (The information referred to follows:)

Recommendation A-2 - In-service Eligibility

- for GI Bill Benefits--

Recommendations to Improve the Veteran's

Access to Jobs and Job Training

Recommendation B-1 - Readjustment Appoint

ments in Federal Service--

Recommendation B-5 - Removing Roadblocks to

Military Skill Transfers--

Recommendation B-6

Counselling--

Recommendation B-7 - Expanding On-the-Job

Training Opportunities--

Recommendation B-8 Availability of con

current Training Benefits--

Recommendations in Related Readjustment Areas

Recommendation C-1 - Minority Business

, Ownership Through SBA Loans-Coopera- tive Training---

Recommendation C-2 Loan Guaranty Under

writing Mobile Home Financing----

Page 12

REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT'S COMMITTEE

ON THE VIETNAM VETERAN

Throughout our history the American people have

recognized a special obligation to those who have served

President Nixon, on June 5, 1969, created a committee

on the Vietnam Veteran to evaluate how well the Nation is

meeting its debt to today's veterans.

Committee members include the Administrator of

Veterans Affairs (Chairman), the Secretary of Defense, the

Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, the Secretary

of Labor, the Postmaster General, the Director of the Office

of Economic Opportunity and the Chairman of the Civil Service

The President has now signed H. R. 11959. This legis

lation provides increased educational benefits for disabled

veterans, war orphans, and war widows, and additional

assistance to those who need special help to prepare for

yond increasing GI bill benefits on an across-the-board

U. S. Conference of Mayors, labor unions, associations of

in calendar 1965 to 958 thousand in 1969.

1971, the annual rate will climb to an estimated one

This report refers to this group of veterans

as "Vietnam-era veterans".

These men and women show great potential.

generally young with more than half falling in the age

They are better educated than veterans

About 78% have completed high school at

separation, compared with 63% of veterans of the Korean

Conflict and 45% of veterans of World War II.

than those of non-veterans in the same age groups.

are satisfied that the same general "economic advantage"

will pertain to the Vietnam-era veteran.

provides for full cost of tuition, books, supplies, a

an estimated 64 thousand Vietnam-era veterans will receive

Page 13

Veterans with educational and skill deficiencies

Seven times more veterans than those who are disabled

and entitled to compensation carry the invisible handicaps

of inadequate or defective education and training.

Measured by lack of a high school education, 16% of

Vietnam-era veterans now being released from service are

educationally disadvantaged.

full measure of those who educational deficiencies.

results show that 30 percent of high school graduates in

the Armed Forces scored as poorly or worse than the average

score of those who had not completed high school.

Ironically, these factors are an important determinant

in placing men in military occupations.

completed their high school education and those who per

form poorly on the qualifications tests have less opportu

nity while in the service to acquire skills applicable to

ly handicapped veterans bears out their need for concern.

A recent survey reported unemployment rates of 5.8% for

white veterans who had completed high school and 8.8% for

those white veterans with less than a high school education.

These rates compare with a 4.6% unemployment rate for all

non-veterans in the comparable age range.

reported unemployment rates of 9% for Negro veterans who

had completed high school and 18.5% for Negro veterans with

less than a high school education.

in the same age group, the unemployment rate was 5.9%.

civilian life very much the same as they entered active

service, except that they are a bit older, jobless, and

For many of them job prospects are worse than

for non-veterans in the same age brackets.

Having assessed the problems of disabled veterans and

veterans with educational and skill deficiencies, the

Committee has determined that this report should concen

trate on ways in which veterans readjustment benefits for

education and training can be made available to all veterans

on a basis of equal access.

As of February 1970, 1.06 million, or 27.8% of the 3.8

million eligible Vietnam-era veterans had used GI Bill edu

cation or training benefits.

An additional 3.1 million

veterans were eligible who had served in the period January

of these veterans, 1.7 million, or

24.6% have participated in GI Bill training.

approximately 70% of veterans in training are Vietnam-era

Available survey data show that participation in GI Bill

training is inverse to need.

Nearly 50% of the veterans who

already have college training at the time of discharge and

therefore have the best prospects for immediate employ

ment seek to upgrade their education under the GI Bill.

On the other hand, those who have serious education

deficiencies show participation rates as low as 10%.

The Committee has developed three types of recommenda

(A) recommendations to improve the veteran's access

to education; (B) recommendations to improve the veteran's

access to jobs and job training; and (c) recommendations in

Page 14

can be gradually recouped over the whole period of enroll

Establish an in-service program to assist servicemen to prepare for post-secondary training while on active duty. Eligibility criteria should be revised to permit participation following completion of six months active duty.

The U. S. Armed Forces Institute (USAFI) of the

Department of Defense currently sponsors educational pro

grams offering elementary, secondary, and college-level

In 1969, 90,000 servicemen who

had .dropped out of high school took courses on an off-hours

limitations regarding veterans with educational defi

Lack of tuition support for non-careerists.

Lack of flexibility to get courses and remedial

instruction in schools near the man's military

Under existing provisions of the GI Bill (38 USC 1652)

men in the active military service can qualify for GI Bill

payment of tuition and fees, provided they already have

served at least two years.

The proposal would bestow these

benefits upon short-term draftees, provided they had served

schools of his home community or those near his military

This would increase the possibility of local classroom instruction (where he now is limited to correspondence

courses of college-run studies or to group study sponsored

In concert with recommendations

A-4 and A-5, this proposal would provide a financial basis

for enrolling educationally handicapped veterans in colleges

which develop special remedial courses and offer full-time

enrollment after discharge.

The Office of Education and the Veterans Administration jointly work with the major organizations of universities, colleges and community colleges to develop the following types of assistance to educationally deficient servicemen and veterans desiring college enrollment:

Prior to discharge, provide clearing house services giving information on college programs for disadvantaged students and put men in con- tact with colleges of their choice;

After discharge, facilitate contact with VA- certified colleges by providing referrals of veterans with their consent;

Facilitate, in behalf of servicemen making com-
mitments to particular colleges in advance of discharge, the packaging of scholarship-loan- GI Bill arrangements;

Arrangements for entry into college soon after discharge, avoiding lengthy waits for application processing and beginning of the next school term.

In 1970, as a part of the Hope for Education project,

Michigan State University is operating a national clearing

house between colleges and servicemen, financed by a

Talent Search grant of the Department of Health, Education

Participation in this type of program by

men in Vietnam can meet a genuine need.

The Office of Education and the Veterans Administration jointly assist the educational community in developing special programs for educationally handicapped veterans. In approving grants under the Special Services to Disadvantaged Persons program, the Commissioner of Education should give priority to institutions which indicate that their programs will include significant numbers of student veterans with educational handicaps.

Veterans with educational deficiencies need special

help in making up the courses which are prerequisites to

college and other training.

The ability of the academic

community to modify its curriculum and service is criti

cally important to effective use of GI Bill benefits for

A recent survey by the Twentieth Century Fund

has shown that 59% of some 400 colleges and universities

surveyed had already established or were planning special

education programs for "high risk" students,

included such elements as special recruiting, extra finan

cial aid, and special courses, special counseling, and

Page 15

reduced course load in the first year.

this base, the Office of Education in HEW and the VA

should develop a program of technical assistance to en

courage schools to set up remedial, restorative and related

programs to serve veterans with educational deficiencies.

The President has included in his 1971 budget $10

million in 1970 and $15 million in 1971 to finance a new

program of Special Services for Disadvantaged students,

authorized by the Higher Education Amendments of 1968.

Under this program, students of deprived educational,

cultural, or economic background or physically handicapped,

can be given special services to initiate, continue, or

resume their post-secondary education.

receiving a grant from the Office of Education under the

program provides counselling, tutoring, summer programs,

career guidance and placement, and other specialized services.

In approving grants, the Commissioner of Education should

give priority to institutions which indicate that their

programs will include significant numbers of student

veterans with educational handicaps.

Authorize GI Bill payment for individual tutorial assistance when the school certifies this is necessary to overcome educational deficiencies.

The first year in post-secondary schooling is the

most critical for the disadvantaged veteran.

experience in programs for disadvantaged students report

attrition rates of 50% in the freshman year.

with educational deficiencies must adjust his way of life

to a competitive surrounding where other students have had

a continuity as well as familiarity with the course material.

Situations will arise where the veteran will need some

personal, specialized tutoring to comprehend and master the

material and to progress at the same rate as the average

By providing this support, the veteran can be

helped to achieve his goal and be prevented from dropping

This proposal supplements any tutorial assistance pro

vided under recommendation A-4 which is limited to grantee

institutions under the Special Services to Disadvantaged

Recommendations to Improve the Veteran's Access to

Jobs and Job Training.

The President issue an executive order authorizing a program of veterans readjustment appointments to positions in the Federal Civil Service.

The Federal Government as an employer must lead the

way in meeting the nation's obligations to returning

Federal agencies must do more to facilitate

employment and concurrently provide developmental opportu

nities appropriate to veterans' needs, potential, and

Employment under a veterans readjustment appointment

should be coupled with developmental activities tailored

to the needs of the veteran and the agency in which he works.

A new system is needed which permits Federal agencies

to appoint Vietnam era veterans to entry level positions up

to GS-5 without: regard to Civil Service lists, provided the

veteran completes a program of education or training.

The Civil Service Commission should be authorized by

executive order to prescribe regulations providing for the

readjustment appointment system.

Intensify recruiting activities at Military Separation Centers, Veterans Assistance Centers, and through community action agency programs.

The Secretaries of Labor and Health, Education, and Welfare, in cooperation with the Department of Defense, should use MDTA Skill Centers near major Defense_separation bases to furnish educational or vocational training to servicemen prior to release from active duty.

At present, the Manpower Development and Training

Act (MDTA), administered by the Departments of Labor and

HEW, finances some sixty Skill Centers offering a wide

Transition, there has never been a concerted DOD/Labor/HEW

effort to bring to educationally handicapped servicemen the

diversity and specialized training resources of MDTA Skill

Growing out of the need for skill training centers

for servicemen discussed in this Committee's interim report,

the President already has included funds in the 1971 budget

for expanding MDTA training of returning veterans.

the following additional actions should be initiated.

MDTA contracting institutions should be encouraged

to expand and diversify course offerings;

Page 16

At least 10,000 additional training slots for

veterans with educational deficiencies should

Defense should identify and where feasible

route servicemen to the separation center

nearest a Skill Center offering the voca

tional courses they desire. The system

should attempt to assign servicemen to

bases near their home to facilitate job

placement. Where this is not possible, job

placement will be accomplished by special

arrangements among Skill Centers and offices

of the U. S. Employment Service, using techni

ques found successful in other Federal manpower

The Department of Labor, in cooperation with the Department of Defense and other affected agencies, provide linkage of key facilities for veterans job assistance with the Labor Department's system of computerized job banks and thereby improve the matching of manpower needs with the skills of individual veterans who are seeking employment. Servicemen now returning to civilian life have

skills and abilities that may be in demand by both govern

ment and private industry.

A critical problem is the time

required to match the trade or skills of the returning

servicemen with the jobs available from private and

To the extent that this process

of job placement can be accelerated, the veteran avoids a

non-productive, frustrating period of job search and need

less draw-down of unemployment compensation.

with educational deficiencies is most likely to need

assistance for job placement and to become discouraged by

At present, the typical returning veteran in need of

job-finding assistance returns to his place of residence

Each of the 2,100 local offices of the

Federal-State Employment Service receives notice of his

discharge and each includes staff ready to accord him the

veterans preference for employment assistance and other

services authorized by law.

Each veteran's options, how

ever, are limited by the amount and quality of job infor

mation available at the separation center and in his home

The Employment Service is establishing a network of

computerized Job Banks to upgrade information on job avail

ability by disseminating job information throughout each

metropolitan area on a daily basis.

will be activated in 56 cities, expanding to 81 cities by

The interim report of this committee contained several

recommendations for computerized job bank and job matching

services for servicemen and veterans.

recommendations and on a $20 million increase in the 1971

budget for Job Bank and job matching activities, the

Departments of Labor and Defense, with any necessary assis

tance from the Veterans Administration, should take steps

to include the larger military separation centers, Skill

Centers, USVAC's, and other key veterans contact points

into the Job Bank system, to the extent permitted by

system capacity, locations, and other feability factors.

In 1971, it is estimated that local Job Bank services

could be extended to veterans contact points near almost

all 81 metropolitan areas.

In addition, selected larger

military separation centers could be used as focal points

The Departments of Defense and Labor and the Veterans Administration should:

Conduct a survey to identify the major roadblocks to transferability of military skills to civilian jobs;

Develop a program for more fully utilizing service acquired skills in related civilian occupations; including work with private groups to adopt new certification procedures which will take military training into consideration.

the military and the civilian economy as to the training

these men receive, its pertinence to non-military employ

ment, and its general acceptability. Military experience

is often not recognized for credit towards obtaining a

license or degree and therefore the veteran pursues

employment in other fields.

In areas where military ex

perience is not fully accepted, refresher courses, credit

for service experience, or revised standards could accom

modate the entrance of the skilled veteran into the

We must tap this source of training to meet critical

manpower shortages in the civilian economy.

servicemen who served as "medics" in active service have

a valuable knowledge and skill that should be tapped to

meet the great need for medical technicians, aides, and

related medical assistance jobs in civilian life.

At present, the Departments of Defense and Labor and

VA have initiated a joint survey of the job experience of

Page 17

The Departments of Defense and Labor and the Veterans Administration develop a cooperative program of civilian career counseling for servicemen with educational deficiencies, supported by DOD test data and other current relevant data on the client and job and training opportunities. This program should assure adequate coverage of overseas commands.

Within the Department of Defense, Project Transition

provides civilian job counseling and training to servicemen

in 290 bases of the Army. Navy, and Air Force in the con

In the 18 months between program

inception and June 30, 1969, 72,000 servicemen (about 5

percent of all separatees) were given training and 445,000

The program's strong points in

clude the concept of enlisting private industry and govern

ment agencies to conduct on-the-job training and providing

an opportunity for men in the last six months of service

to prepare for civilian employment.

The Transition program needs to identify men with edu

cational deficiencies earlier in their military careers, to

give them special priority for selection, to sponsor counsel

ling opportunities for those who spend their last months of

service in overseas areas, and to improve the quality of

counselling, including provision of current job data (see

VA regularly contacts over 310 military installations

and 184 military hospitals, including seven locations in

The VA representative primarily aims to acquaint

servicemen with their VA benefits, largely through mass

briefings. In the third quarter of 1969, VA briefings

were reaching servicemen at an annualized rate of 600,000.

VA also conducts personal interviews, running at an

annualized rate of 85,000 in military hospitals and 96,000

The Department of Labor outstations or makes avail

able a representative of the Veterans Employment Service

to each large military separation center for briefing

and counseling on veteran employment rights and job

At present, there is no system assuring VA and Labor

will successfully reach men with educational

deficiencies, will be based upon current data on the client

and job openings and available education and training pro

grams, and will supplement military counseling efforts with

a minimum of gaps and duplication.

with quick deployment of trained counsellors to Vietnam

indicates the feasibility and desirability of devising a

plan whereby trained counselor teams can be readied on a

standby basis for dispatch to any overseas area needing

The Veterans Administration utilize existing GI Bill authority to develop additional on-the-job training and cooperative education programs in areas which would serve a public need and/or provide vocational outlets for veterans for whom institutional training is not suitable. This effort should be conducted in such a manner as to take maximum advantage of other related Government programs.

The Department of Labor include returning disadvantaged veterans in the new Public Service Careers program.

VA assistance for on-the-job training is directed pri

marily at helping to train veterans for occupations requiring

Traditionally, such training has served to

train veterans for jobs as bricklayers, carpenters, electri

cians, plumbers, machinists, mechanics, and repairmen.

job training is a method that lends itself to preparing trainees

for work in the "new technology" industries, such as automation

and data processing, jet-age transportation, and the repair

and servicing of household appliances and business machines

VA should take steps to expand OJT opportunities in these

In addition, VA should develop with the assistance

of the Civil Service Commission, HEW, and Labor, some

public service intern programs involving use of GI Bill

authority for cooperative education payments.

areas, e.g., social work training under the Social Security

Act, there is authority to pay training stipends which can

for this program in each of the years 1970 and 1971, in which 40% is targeted to accommodate 8,000 veteran trainees.

The program aims to attract new talent into careers in

education, with added opportunities for on-the-job train

The veterans component of this program is based upon

favorable experience with a 1969 pilot program in which

200 Vietnam veteran trainees participated, most of them

recruited from inner-city, low-income areas.

it is important that VA work with the Department of Health,

Education, and Welfare and State and local agencies in

developing the new programs.

The Department of Labor's Public Service career program,

launched in 1970, is another Federal initiative which should

be utilized for expanding opportunity for disadvantaged

The 1971 budget contains $51 million for hiring

and training 32,000 disadvantaged persons for regular posi

tions in Federal, State, and local governments.

in this program should be given to veterans.

The bar against the duplication of educational and training benefits be repealed.

Section 1781 of Title 38, U. S. Code, bars the payment

of Federal educational assistance when it would constitute

Page 18

cally exempted certain awards, loans and grants made to

students from the non-duplication prohibition. Equivalent

types of programs offered through some agencies continue

The most significant area affected by the existing

bar is Manpower and Training Assistance (MDTA) programs.

The lifting of the bar would entitle veteran trainees to

an MDTA stipend averaging $200 per month (varies by State)

in addition to the ĜI Bill allowance, bringing his total

Support minority entrepreneurship through a combination of Small Business Administration loans and cooperative GI Bill education.

Most Vietnam veterans do not have the financial capa

city for starting or expanding a business of their own.

The veteran requires knowledge, experience, money and

business guidance to successfully operate a business.

There is need for small business, locally owned and

operated in areas where a concentration of disadvantaged or

minority group veterans may be found.

attempt such enterprises, many fail because of lack of

Financial institutions require some training and exper

tise on the part of the borrower before lending money for

business purposes, and consider this in determining the

Cooperative training programs can provide the veteran

with the necessary experience to carry on the business

functions, the managerial, bookkeeping and other needs.

Under the Small Business Administration program the veteran

who agrees to take GI Bill training in a related field would

be qualified for a loan up to $25,000 for the purpose of

initiating or expanding a business venture.

the SBA can provide business counseling and technical advice

in operating the business, and give priority to those

VA loan guaranty underwriting of mobile home financing in order to promote an adequate supply of low cost housing for low and moderate income veterans.

Cost of single family home and mortage financing have

increased in recent years to the point that low and moddate

income veterans are priced out of the housing market for all

Some way must be found to enable these

veterans to purchase suitable housing on terms that are

within their payment ability.

The mobile home represents an enormous potential in

meeting the housing needs of many veterans with low to

The increasingly higher construction

cost of convential homes is a principal factor in the sudden

popularity of mobile homes.

Manufacturers are able to pro

duce these homes at relatively low price.

Existing provisions of the VA home loan guaranty law

were designed to promote real estate mortgage loans to

purchase conventional type housing and do not contemplate

the purchase of mobile home structures on a chattel mortgage

loan basis which is the customary type of loan made to

individuals purchasing mobile homes.

real estate first mortgage GI loan vehicle is not a suitable

mobile home financing vehicle.

To induce lenders to make loans available to veterans

on liberal terms for the purchase of mobile homes, a special

type of loan guaranty or insurance underwriting vehicle

should be designed which will be attractive to lenders in

terms of investment return and loss exposure.

time, it is essential that the Government's exposure be

limited to the minimum required in order to insure an

adequate supply of mobile home financing for veterans in

the low and moderate income brackets.

Page 19

FHA undertake a joint study of closing costs for submission to the Congress together with recommendations for reducing and standardizing such costs.

We note that such a study is provided for in the Senate-passed Emergency Home Finance Act of 1970 (S. 3685) now actively being considered by the House.

Increases in closing costs during recent years clearly have added substantially to the cost of acquiring a home. I believe, however, that a closing cost subsidy payment is premature at this time and that the preferable course is to defer consideration of such a proposal until a joint HUD-VA closing cost study is made.

The proposed section 1819 would also require the Administrator to pay to the lender for 10 months an interest subsidy at 1 percent of the loan on behalf of the veteran purchaser.

In the case of direct loans there would be a similar reduction in the interest payment. Enactment of these provisions would result in payment of larger interest subsidies for those who have the least need.

I would invite your attention to the provisions of title V of S. 3685 which provides home mortgage assistance for middle-income families.

In lieu of enacting a special subsidy program applicable only to the VA, as proposed in S. 3656 we would prefer that the provisions of title V of S. 3685 be extended to provide the same assistance to veterans obtaining home loan financial assistance under chapter 37, title 38.

This would provide a more uniform and equitable method of assisting both our veteran and nonveteran citizens in acquiring homes who desire to do so regardless of the type of federally assisted loans they

We understand that an amendment to accomplish this result has been submitted to the House Banking and Currency Committee.

Should the House pass the bill with such changes, we would earnestly hope that the Senate would concur in the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I would now like to sum up our position. We favor the enactment of S. 3683 as amended to remove the loan guarantee delimiting dates. We would prefer that loan interest subsidy for veterans be provided through an amendment to title V of S. 3685.

We do not favor providing closing cost subsidy at this time. As indicated earlier, we favor a work-study program employing veteran students under a general statutory authority at the going rate for the job classification.

We would also favor S. 3907, if amended to apply to all title 38 benefit awards as we have suggested.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. Thank you again for the opportunity to express my views on the several important and meritorious legislative proposals under consideration.

I, and members of the Ñ A staff who accompany me, will endeavor to answer any questions with respect to these proposals.

Senator CRANSTON. Thank you very much.

I appreciate your testimony greatly. I do have quite a few questions for both you and your staff to clarify various points.

Page 20

Senator CRANSTON. Second, in carrying out such a Federal hiring program, you would be totally dependent on your general operating expenses appropration item which, as you know, I do not believe is adequate to enable you to staff DVB operations in regional offices at present.

By contrast, appropriations for my proposed work-study program would come through the readjustment benefits account which is relatively automatically appropriated as an entitlement.

What are your views on this?

Mr. OWEN. Mr. Chairman, under the proposal that we support we feel that we would be able to provide employment on the basis, if we chose to call it intermittent employees, of 4,000 to 5,000 in this coming year with the funds that would be appropriated in the 1971 appropriations.

Senator CRANSTON. What would the funds be used for if they are not going to be used for that purpose ?

Mr. Owen. We would use them in our general operating plans for other intermittent employees in the VA offices. In effect, we would, instead of employing the 300 to 400, or 500, we would employ more veterans because they would be working less hours per week than the normal intermittent employee.

Mr. Johnson. In our general operating expense fund, we do have moneys in there for overtime and for extra help during those peak periods, like the income questionnaire period.

Also, it should be pointed out, I believe, that your bill called for $2 an hour, and we preferred to go to the more regular rates which 2 would be probably a minimum of $2.51.

Some of these students could qualify for even higher rates, depending upon their level of education.

Senator CRANSTON. Do you feel you have adequate authority, or that new authority would be helpful ?

Mr. Johnson. We feel new authority would be helpful to us.

Senator CRANSTON. We will get together with your staff and see what we can work out to suit your needs best in that regard.

Third, under the system you support, would not the number of student trainees hired be determined by overall allocations of personnel ceilings by the Bureau of the Budget ? Whereas my intention was to avoid such constraints through the system in S. 3657, since the student-veteran workers would be serving without compensation and in that sense would be akin to volunteers, considered Federal employees only for certain very limited purposes such as tort and workmen's compensation liability.

What are your views on that?

Mr. OWEN. Mr. Chairman, we don't anticipate a problem in this area. Of course, the number of employees used on either approach would be determined by the work needed, the work available, and we feel it would be successful.

Mr. JOHNSON. The personnel ceiling that is set by the executive branch would not affect us in this case, because they are part time.

We talk about full-time permanent, so that there would not be any major effect. Actually, what we would do in either instance would be to give some preference I am not sure that is quite the right word to be used in this—but some preference to the recipients of benefits under the education bill.

Page 21

Would you have any objection to specifying this scenic factor in the bill itself?

Mr. DERVAN. If my recollection is correct, Mr. Chairman, I think in S. 3656 and in the administration bill, we refer to the necessity of placing the mobile home on a site acceptable to the Administrator.

We contemplated, for example, that an acceptable site could be defined as one which meets the mobile home park criteria promulgated by the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

With respect to those which do not meet that criteria we contemplate that we would have an inspection either by staff or by a fee inspector to determine whether the particular circumstances at that park are such as to warrant its being considered acceptable.

I think the authority in S. 3683 clearly is adequate to prescribe requirements which would ensure against a repetition of the old trailer park image.

Senator CRANSTON. The word "scenic” does not presently appear. Would there be any objection to the inclusion of that as far as you are concerned to make certain that we would have high standards?

Because standards are not set forth in any way.

Mr. Owen. Mr. Chairman, the word "scenic" itself would not pose a problem in my opinion, but we do not want to limit by legislation the placement of a mobile home to a mobile home park.

In this way, we would be defeating again the availability of the mobile homes to the rural areas, where the person would perhaps locate them on a farm plot. We would want it to be located with the proper sanitation and scenically correct, but we would not want to have it so restricted.

Senator CRANSTON. That would not be our intent, either. That would simply be one of the criteria.

Mr. Johnson. I am wondering if it might not be best to include this in the report also. It would seem to me this is one of the things that should be done by regulation rather than by legislation.

We would like to have as much flexibility as possible so that we could assist the greatest number of veterans.

Senator CRANSTON. I can understand that, and if the report can be given such great weight that will be fine.

On the loan interest subsidy, regarding your recommendations to carry over the same method of mortgage assistance subsidy as is contained in S. 3685 for FHA insured housing, we will get together with the Banking and Currency Committee on which I also serve.

I would appreciate your clarifying one point for me, please. In your statement you note that the subsidy proposed in S. 3656 would provide more assistance to the purchaser with the most expensive home and you say now in your longer statement that any interest subsidy should even be related to the income of the family and restricted to assisting only those acquiring a modest-type dwelling.

Are both of these principles carried over in title V of S. 3685, the Emergency Home Finance Act of 1970, now under active consideration in the House, which you recommend be extended to VA-assisted home loans?

Mr. DERVAN. I think you will recall, Senator, that the Senate specifically confined the mortgage assistance under title V of S. 3685 to those in the middle-income bracket and the assistance to these

Page 22

individuals would be futher limited to those obtaining FHA insured loans, or loans which are bought by the proposed Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation. Under the amendment which has been suggested to extend the title V assistance to those obtaining VA guaranteed loans the assistance would be limited to veterans in the middle- or low-income bracket.

The answer to your question as I see it is that these principles are incorporated in title V. Senator CRANSTON. How do you define middle-income!

? Mr. DERVAN. Well, there is no specific definition of middle income in dollar terms in title V of the Senate bill as I remember it. It permits the middle-income category to be determined on an area basis by the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Senator CRANSTON. Of course, a middle-income person might be able to acquire a really expensive home. Shouldn't there be some limit on the cost of the home?

Mr. DERVAN. Yes. There is considerable difference as to what constitutes a middle-income group, but I would think by and large that incomes up to $12,000 are generally considered in the middle-income bracket.

Senator CRANSTON. That does not relate to the value of the home though. Somebody with an income of $12,000 might be in a position to acquire a quite expensive home.

Mr. DERVAN. Well, he would probably be in a position under the traditional rule of thumb to acquire a home which costs about 21/2 times his income, which would be about $30,000. Actually, title V says that the Secretary of HUD may require that a homebuyer's income may not be more than the median income for the area in which the property is located, with appropriate adjustments for smaller and larger families. Of additional significance, I think, is the fact that title V further provides that in order for a mortgage to be insured by FHA when made to a borrower eligible for mortgage interest assistance, the value of the property purchased cannot exceed $20,000 except that an increase of not more than 50 percent may be allowed by the Secretary where required by the cost level of houses in the area. Under this rule, the appraised value of an eligible property may not exceed $30,000 in any area. These limitations would also be considered applicable to veterans obtaining VA guaranteed home loans under the proposed amendment extending title V assistance to VA financing:

Senator CRANSTON. Does your approach allow for any variation of subsidy at various levels of income?

Mr. DERVAN. No, sir.

Senator CRANSTON. In regard to the restoration of lost home loan entitlement, I am surprised by your statement that your amendment to S. 3683 restores all lost entitlement. I was not aware of that when I introduced the amendment because nothing in your April 16 letter of transmittal to the Vice President made reference to restoration of eligibility, and I find somewhat questionable your theory that the removal of delimiting dates would have the effect of restoring entitlements that had expired under those delimiting provisions prior to their repeal.

Could your General Counsel expand on this for us, please?

Mr. DERVAN. Our position, Mr. Chairman, is that when the phaseout formula is deleted from the existing law and there is continued in the existing law the statement that service of such and such duration shall create or establish entitlement to the loan benefit, the conjunction of these two items in effect brings into being that entitlement which has not been used, and it continues there on in the future.

Senator CRANSTON. Don't you think that it would be far preferable to have an explicit restoration provision as in S. 3656 ?

Mr. DERVAN. Well, we certainly would have no objection to such a provision.

Senator CRANSTON. Fine.

One final area I want to explore briefly is regarding the new regulations implementing title II of Public Law 91-219.

I welcome the issuance on June 2 of your new regulations implementing title II of Public Law 91-219. However, I wish to bring to your immediate attention two specific points: First, the regulations seem to have disregarded the plain meaning of the amendment, in section 206 of the act, to sections 1684(a) and 1733(a) (3) of title 38 with regard to liberalized criteria for measuring full time college study.

Your regulation section 14270 footnote 3, implementing the above statutory amendments, states that the minimum number of hours which can be approved for full time study is 12 now under any circumstances.

Whereas, I believe that the Public Law states clearly that if the educational institution charges full time tuition for any given number of hours less than 14, then that lesser number, regardless of whether it is less than 12, will be the full time minimum at that particular institution.

Second, the same footnote also states that the new provisions for reducing college semester hour minimum requirements are for full time only and do not affect the measurement of less than full time under VA regulations.

Insofar as the face of Public Law 91-219 is concerned, this is technically correct. However it has always been fully and clearly understood in the subcommittee, the full Labor and Public Welfare Committee and the Senate that the alteration of the full-time study requirements would be carried out administratively with respect to parttime study.

This expectation was clearly stated in the committee report on H.R. 11959 which contained the amendment in question. Page 53, the committee stated :

With respect to part time study at institutions where full time minimum requirements would be lowered under the new exception in clause (4), the committee would expect the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs to exercise his authority under 38 USC 1684 (b) to redefine part time minimum semester hour requirements so as to make them proportionate to the full time minimum at a particular institution. For example, if the full time minimum had been reduced to 12 hours, the three quarter time minimum would be reduced to 9 hours and the half time to six hours.

Also, after conference action adopting this provision without any alteration, in describing the provision on the Senate floor I again made clear the expectation that part time requirements at such colleges would be adjusted administratively in general accordance with the college's definition of full-time study.

Since the Senate is the originating body on this provision, and since there is no contrary legislative history in the House conference report- which is totally silent on this provision—I feel strongly that you should reconsider the decision not to provide for such part-time hour requirements at institutions where full-time minimums have been lowered for GI bill purposes.

Mr. Johnson. Mr. Chairman, it has been my understanding that your counsel has informally spoken with my staff on this matter, and that there has been considerable discussion.

It is further my understanding that a letter was to be submitted to us at the VA, and because this is a highly complex matter affecting perhaps thousands of veterans, I feel that any extemporaneous remarks that I might make today could be misleading and I would invite, sir, that letter from you so that we can answer in writing and be very explicit in our position.

Senator CRANSTON. Fine. I understand fully your position. That letter will be sent today. I just wanted to express my deep interest in this at this point.

I deeply appreciate your helping us this morning. I am always amazed at your great ability to answer questions in diverse fields.

Thank you very much, Mr. Johnson and Gentlemen. Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Senator Cranston.

Senator CRANSTON. Our next witness is Dr. Luis M. Morton, president, Central Texas College, representing the American Association of Junior Colleges, the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, the National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges, the Association of American Colleges, the Association of American Universities and the American Vocational Association.

Dr. Morton, thank you very much for being with us this morning. (The prepared statement of Dr. Morton follows:)

STATEMENT OF DR. LUIS M. MORTON, PRESIDENT, CENTRAL TEXAS

COLLEGE, ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF JUNIOR COLLEGES, THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF STATE COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE UNIVERSITIES AND LAND GRANT COLLEGES, THE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN COLLEGES, THE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN UNIVERSITIES, AND THE AMERICAN VOCATIONAL ASSOCIATION

Dr. Morton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to testify this morning. The National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges should be added to those who are unanimously endorsing S. 3657, and it is included in testimony submitted to you, and I would like to request that the testimony submitted to you,

, as well as the appendix A and appendix B, be attached for the record.

(The prepared statement of Dr. Morton follows:)

Statement on S. 3657 by President Luis M. Morton, Central Texas College, Killeen, Texas, on behalf of the American Association of Junior Colleges, the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, the Association of American Colleges, the Association of American Universi- ties, and the American Vocational Association. Present- ed to the Senate Subcommittee on Veterans' Affairs,

United States Senate, June 9, 1970.

MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS :

I am Dr. Luis M. Morton, Jr., President of Central Texas College,

I am here today on behalf of several educational organizations,

in addition to the American Association of Junior Colleges :

Association of State Colleges and Universities, the Association of American

Colleges, the Association of American Universities, and the American Voca

tional Association. Together, these organizations represent institutions

which enroll well over half of all students in American colleges and post

secondary institutions, and probably well over half of all veterans now attend

ing college under the G.I. Bill.

The American Vocational Association also re

presents schools which educate millions of young men and women, including many

veter ans, at the secondary and adult levels.

Brief descriptions of several of these organizations will be found

I am submitting as an Appendix B a description of some of the

programs for servicemen and veterans which are offered at Central Texas College.

We believe that our experience in providing educational and counseling programs

to a great many men has helped these men and bettered our nation in the process.

I should add that I serve as a member of the National Commission on

Legislation of the American Association of Junior Colleges.

member of the National Advisory Council on Vocational Education, appointed

under the Vocational Education Act of 1968.

Before I speak about the legislation which is before us today, I

would like to take a moment to express my own appreciation, and that of the

associations which I represent, that Congress has passed and the President

has signed Public Law 91-219, the G.I. Bill amendments of 1970.

We all owe a vote of thanks to the Congress and especially to the

Senate Subcommittee on Veterans' Affairs and the House Committee on Veterans'

Affairs for this outstanding new legislation.

The higher rates of financial

support for all veterans will make it possible for many more men to continue

their education and training after they leave the services.

II" programs, including the supplementary assistance program for the educa

tionally disadvantaged, the "PREP" program for men still in service, and the

Veterans Outreach program, will help our educational institutions to do a

still better job in helping servicemen and veterans.

We are especially aware of our debt to Senator Alan Cranston of

California, Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee, Senator Ralph Y arborough

of Texas, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, and

Senator Richard Schweiker, the senior minority member of the subcommittee, as

well as to other member of the Senate.

We are keenly aware of the outstanding leadership in veterans! legis

lation provided over many years by Representative Olin Teague of Texas, Chair

man of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

We in Texas are especially

aware of Mr. Teague's contribution in providing adequate assistance to the

nation's veterans, in education, health, hospital care, and other areas.

know that thanks are also due other members of the House Committee, including

Representative Charles Teague of California and Representative Ray Roberts of

Page 23

The Junior colleges, like the other institutions I have the honor

to represent today, are especially interested in the man who might not be able

to continue his education without the G.I. Bill. Historically, most of our

colleges have charged relatively low tuition and have tried to provide educa

tional and training opportunities to everyone who is interested and qualified.

The American Association of Junior Colleges reports that as of last

fall, 1969, there were 1,038 junior colleges in the nation, located in all 50

states, and with a total enrollment of 2,186,000 students. Enrollments have

been rising at the rate of over 250,000 students a year and about 40 to 50

new junior colleges have opened each year.

My own state of Texas last fall had 52 colleges with an enrollment

of about 105,000 students. California, the state represented by the Chair

man of this Subcommittee, had 96 junior colleges with a total enrollment of

The Veterans Administration reports that about 30 per cent of all

veterans now in college attend junior colleges. We expect that with the new

G.I. Bill programs enrollments will increase at all educational institutions.

Our colleges are also most interested in working with men still in service,

through Project Transition and other programs.

We hope to do a great deal

more through the new "PREP" program authorized by the new G.I. Bill of

1970, for men still in the services.

The educational organizations for which I speak today are unanimous

ly and enthusiastically in favor of s, 3657,. the "Veterans' Educational

Assistance Allowance Advance and Work-Study Program Act of 1970." This bill,

by providing up to $250 advance payment to a veteran enrolled in college,

by permitting him to "work off" the advance if he wishes to do so, will be a

great help to veterans, to colleges, and to the Veterans Administration.

As Senator Cranston pointed out in his statement in the Congressional

Record on March 31, there have been a great many complaints from every part of

the country from veterans who have not received their G.I. benefits for up to

several months after they enroll in college.

This works a great deal of hard

Many of them have little money, and may be working to support

their wives and children. Going to college is difficult for them in any case,

A procedure to speed up their payments such as that envisioned in S. 3657 is

Similarly, the work-study provisions of 5.3657 make a great deal of sense.

Giving veterans an opportunity to work off these small advances with the

Veterans Administration by helping to process the applications of other

veterans, or by working in the new Veterans Outreach program, is a way to help

veterans help themselves, to supplement their incomes with useful work, and

at the same time to help the colleges and the Veterans Administration. The

Outreach program in the new legislation has a good deal of merit, and it is

probable that recently discharged veterans can help a good deal in encouraging

and recruiting other veterans for college.

As Senator Cranston said in his statement on March 31, we believe that

the processing of advance payments to the veteran can be expedited by having

the veteran alone certify that his papers are in order.

has proposed an alternative bill, s. 3683, which would require that the

school certify that the veteran is entitled to advance payment.

that this would tend to delay payment, and that there are sufficient adminis

trative safeguards in s. 3657 to take care of any problems which may arise.

We believe that s. 3657 will serve many useful purposes.

another way to expand educational opportunity in America, to encourage men of

the Vietnam war period to continue their education as men did after World War

We hope that Congress will pass this legislation.

Further Statements on s. 3657.

Statement by the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, One Dupont Circle, Washington, D.C.

The American Association of State Colleges and Universities takes this opportunity to express its support of the testimony submitted by the American Association of Junior Colleges on S. 3657.

A brief description of the membership of the AASCU will be useful in identifying the reason for the Association's support of s. 3657 which proposes to provide advance payments to veterans attending colleges and enable them, through a work-study program, to earn the advance received.

AASCU is composed of 274. state colleges and universities. Together the membership enrolls almost one-fourth of all students enrolled in institutions of higher education in the U.S. and approximately one-third of all students in four-year institutions. The membership awards 25% of all bachelor's degrees in the country and 20% of all master's degrees. Although in recent years the majority of AASCU institutions have developed into comprehensive institutions offering training in all academic disciplines, teacher training remains one of the principal responsibilities of these institutions: in recent years 47% of all elementary and secondary school teachers have received their training at AASCU institutions.

Though they are four-year institutions, a large percentage of AASCU members offer two-year career or vocational education covering hundreds of courses including training law enforcement officers, electronic technicians and health professions specialists.

Traditionally, the state colleges and universities have been the education medium turned to by first generation college students in the U.S. As the number of veterans who take advantage of Veterans Administration education grants increases, a very substantial percentage of these veterans will look to their state colleges and universities for their next step in education. While the $250 advance payment and the opportunity to "work it off" may seem trifling in the light of the cost of education today, it is precisely that small sum that may enable thousands of young men from disadvantaged backgrounds to take advantaged of educational opportunities. Many of these young men waver before committing themselves to a new goal in life; a small assist indicating the society's genuine desire to help can have an immeasurable impact. Noteworthy, too, is the Outreach facet of the program that would reward young veterans for encouraging their peers, to whom they bear highest credibility, to pursue higher education.

We commend Senator Cranston and all others who have designed this legislation.

Statement by the Association of American Colleges, 1818 "R" St., N.W., Washington, D.C.

"The Association of American Colleges in the national organization of undergraduate colleges of liberal arts and sciences. Its 900 members, both public and private, range from small, four-year colleges to multi-campus, Ph.D. granting universities. The quality of liberal education in both four-year colleges and undergraduate components of universities has been and continues to be the central focus of the Association's concern. The Association's membership constitutes the widest cross section of any higher education association composed exclusively of institutions. Members are represented in the Association by the chief executive officer."

We are pleased to join with the American Association of Junior Colleges in support of s. 3657.

Statement by the Association of American Universities, One Dupont Circle

Washington, D.C.

"The Association of American Universities is composed of

46 public and private universities (list attached) with pre

eminence in graduate education and research. They grant about

three quarters of all Ph.D. degrees awarded in the United

The AAU supports s. 3657.

Page 24

Mr. MORTON. These associations for whom I am speaking this morning, Mr. Chairman, represent approximately 75 percent of the students attending colleges and postsecondary institutions in the United States, and over half of the veterans attending under the GI bill.

The bill that they are supporting, and particularly the provisions involving the $250 advance payment to veterans enrolled in college permitting them to work off this small advancement, is endorsed strongly.

There are many reasons why this is a necessary request and many of these veterans, of course, are not able to make ends meet for the first month or two. l'here may be many promises that these things will provide for, but this would assure, until such time as there is no question but that they will be provided expeditiously that this would be taken care of.

We are particularly endorsing concepts involving veterans outreach and the college that I represent is a unique institution which is com

Í pletely surrounded by a vast military reservation, Fort Hood, Tex., and we have considerable experience in dealing with the military, with the military dependents, and with some veterans, since we have a discharge capability there at Fort Hood.

Some 20,000 to 24,000 a year are discharged, some 2,000 a month, are coming out. We are completely dedicated to the concept of servicing educationally, and particularly in the technical vocational area, these military personnel who are highly dedicated to the concept of Project Transition, on which some of you have worked to increase the funding

These men sleep in their bunks and eat in the mess 'halls. They are not looking for checks at the end of the month. All they want is an opportunity that when they get home they will have 360 contract hours, or whatever, so that they can weld or operate a machine to earn a living

This is extremely inexpensive when you really relate it to the costs of other education programs.

I mentioned Project Transition only because of the concept of the free college that relates to prior legislation that you have been involved with—this is extremely important. The question is, how are we going to make it work, and that means basically that you have three areas that need to be motivated.

The military themselves, to pass this word down from the Veterans' Administration to act in an expeditious manner, and the colleges themselves to want to do these things.

So, as a last recommendation in this very brief presentation, Mr. Chairman, for those colleges that are located close to military installations and who want to do these things, there should be some thought within the bill to give them every opportunity to service these men before they get out, because many of these men have a very small picture of life, and they need help.

You need to find the colleges who want to help them, and there are many that are located close to these military installations. Those men are there with little to do, possibly, in the last 2 or 3 months.

It will not interfere with their military mission. Basically that is what I wanted to say, Mr. Chairman. If you have any questions, I will be glad to answer them.

Senator CRANSTON. Thank you very much.

Page 25

INTRODUCTION OF THE VETERANS EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE ALLOWANCE

ADVANCE AND WORK STUDY PROGRAM ACT OF 1970

It is at the outset of a veteran's college career that he needs the most assistance-financial, personal counseling, academic guidance, support services in various fields. It is at the outset of the veteran's career that he often gets the least assistance and faces the most problems.

Your question, Mr. Senator, to President Morton a few minutes ago, I asked my own veterans. About how many would they judge would need this assistance. They estimate 3 out of 4 new veterans might benefit from this advance allowance, and that figure, you see, is not too far off what President Morton said in his testimony a few minutes ago.

Senator CRANSTON. Did you get an estimate, also, of those that would take advantage usefully of working it off?

Dr. COOKE. Yes; I asked Veterans Saxon and Smothers that also, and they believe a substantial number would immediately take advantage of working it off, maybe in the same number, 3 out of 4, or somewhat less who would work in the program and thus would not be obligated to pay the $250 back in dollars as such, because they would have contributed the work at $2 an hour.

They believe that a substantial number would take advantage of that. I think one of the reasons they would, from my own experience, is that the $250 allowance is available as early as 30 days prior to the time of registration, which gives a month for the veteran to contribute his time to work off that allowance.

Senator CRANSTON. It can be applied for 30 days before registration.

Dr. COOKE. It would not, sir, be made available to him prior to registration?

Senator CRANSTON. It could be. It can be applied for 30 days before.

Dr. CookE. At that time, would he be able to begin working it off, too? Senator CRANSTON. I guess that is not clear. We will seek to clarify

I that point. Do you think that would be useful?

Dr. COOKE. I think it is useful, because that is the time the veteran might very well do his outreach service, and as President Morton testified—and I would support his comments strongly-help in recruitment.

This is in my testimony later and I may repeat, but during the period of 30 days before the college opens, and this is the 30-day period at the beginning of which he applied, he might also provide his services to explain the allowance and other GI benefit provisions to other veterans, because the problem of getting word to the veteran of what benefits are available to him is still a serious problem.

Senator CRANSTON. That is very helpful, and I gather you would concur with Dr. Morton's response to the final question I asked him regarding whether or not it would be useful or productive for the VÅ to contract with schools where there are no outreach programs available and, through the VA, to set up outreach programs using work-study veterans enrolled in the school to work off their advances.

Dr. COOKE. That would be exceedingly valuable and useful, to permit the veterans to tell other veterans what the programs are and to permit the ones who have the allowances to work it off.

Page 26

Dr. COOKE. I think much of what I have to say after this is simply supporting the general intent of the bill to make the allowance available, showing why it is necessary in this institution, showing what the working off means in value to the veteran.

At a time when the veteran is beginning college work, facing his normal problems of orienting himself to college routine and study, his worries about financial security should be at a minimum.

Thus, provision in S. 3657 for advance allowance for veterans is a very welcome clause to make available to the veteran money he will need and to remove the anxiety of living expenses as he begins his college career or college year.

The advance would not exceed $250 to cover a period of expense and could be available in 30 days prior to his entrance into college. The bill provides for repayment.

The provision for the veteran to cancel some or all of his advance allowance through service under college work study in the VA outreach services is a sound proposal.

To recruit other veterans and to perform other services are vital. Our own experience is that getting the word to the veteran about available benefits and opportunities is a major unsolved problem. Veteran to veteran has real promise. It also serves to cancel the advance allow

I would like to continue with the last paragraph and point out we are bringing to your attention the kind of work study services that some of our veterans at the teachers college, including veterans Saxon and Smothers, are now providing the District elementary schols, specifically Tubman Elementary School and Mills Elementary School at Sherman Avenue.

These kinds of work study services our veterans are already providing, and in our particular situation they are of considerable value, because then it introduces them to the profession for which they are preparing at the outset of their college career.

It permits them to earn money, but at the same time it permits them to get experiences in the preparation for teaching. It also permits the veteran to decide that teaching is not the thing, that he should not go into it, and maybe it is just as well to get people who really do not want to go into teaching, rather than wait until the juniorsenior year for these experiences.

We have here as an exhibit tables on the work experience. There is a kind of hierarchy of gradation from the simplest things to the point where they are almost working in the classroom when teachers are absent.

I mention that not simply to call to your attention that something I presented to you a year ago is now reality—that is, we were just proposing to do this a year ago, and it is now a reality—but to say that maybe it might be considered that the services of the veterans in paying off the $250 allowance might be used in this kind of work, which would be just as valuable to the veteran, especially in the profession into which he is going, and it would be valuable to the public schools because it is rendering a service to the schools, and it might be to assist in GI bill certification or in recruiting of veterans, although I would put recruitment at No. 1 of the problems we seem to face in getting veterans to come to the college.

Hỏi Đáp Là gì