into the Armed Forces now provided by that act will be extended until July 1, 1963; and be it further Resolved, That we use every effort that this be made known to the Members of the Congress and to the President. AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, January 26, 1959. Re Extension of Setective Service authorization. Hon. CARL VINSON, Chairman, House Armed Service Committee, DEAR CONGRESSMAN VINSON: At the last annual meeting of the American Farm Bureau Federation the voting delegates of the member State farm bureaus unanimously approved the following statement of policy relative to military training and Selective Service: "Under present conditions an effective Military Establishment must be composed primarily of skilled and highly trained technical personnel who remain in the armed services for extended periods. "This necessitates a vigorous voluntary recruitment program and the maintenance of adequate incentives to encourage skilled and trained personnel to remain in the services. "It is imperative that the use of manpower by the military forces be subject to continuous scrutiny to avoid waste and inefficiency. "Such additional manpower as is recruited by selective service should be obtained primarily from the younger age group, preferably from those under 23 years who have not acquired family or business responsibilities." We continue to be very much concerned with respect to the number of young men, 23 years of age and older, who are inducted-even though this may be a smaller problem numerically than was the case a few years ago. We do not believe it is in the national interest to countenance the wastes involved in disruption of the careers of young men of this age-but rather that it would be in the national interest if practically all inductees were in the age brackets of 19-22 years. We do not necessarily propose any amendment of the law in this respect. Presumably much the same purpose could be accomplished by the inclusion of a recommendation to such effect in the report of the Armed Services Committee. It will be appreciated if you will incorporate this letter in the record of the hearings. Very sincerely, MATT TRIGGS, Assistant Legislative Director. STATEMENT OF NATIONAL WOMAN'S CHRISTIAN TEMPERANCE UNION I am Miss Elizabeth A. Smart. My address is 144 Constitution Avenue NE., and I am representing the National Woman's Christian Temperance Union. The National Woman's Christian Temperance Union opposes this bill. The practices of the armed services in making alcoholic beverages freely available on Government premises and thereby putting the Government's stamp of approval on the use of them is not, in our judgment, conducive to the announced objective of having fighting forces capable of defending our country, and the free world, against aggression. Particularly is this so as our weapons of defense become more and more complicated and require greater skill and greater physical and mental ability to adjust to their requirements. The use of alcoholic beverages is directly opposed to acquiring these skills and this endurance. What we have said with regard to the Armed Forces generally, applies with still greater force to the teenagers in the services who are acquiring wrong ideas at an age when they are ill equipped to defend themselves against such pressures. We deplore the drafting of anyone under 21 and particularly of those from 181⁄2 up, or the pressuring of them to come into the services where such unfortunate conditions obtain. We note that our present defense policies are based on the use of fewer and fewer men and more and more reliance on extremely expensive weapons. We submit that this is an excellent time for Congress to revise its policies in respect to the drafting of our citizens, especially of our future citizens under the age of 21. STATEMENT BY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES TO THE HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE ON H.R. 2260, JANUARY 26, 1959 The Chamber of Commerce of the United States recommends the enactment of legislation to continue for not more than 2 years the authority to induct, for 2 years of active military service, men not previously deferred. Before this is done, however, Congress should explore the alternative methods of reducing the excessively high age of the average inductee and then should(a) Amend the law to make young men liable for induction for only 2 or 3 years after attainment of age 181⁄2, instead of remaining eligible until age 26, or until 35 if deferred for any reason; or (b) Instruct those responsible for administration of the Universal Military Training and Service Act to modify the order in which qualified young men are called into service. Congress also should review the entire draft law to amend its obsolete provisions and permit the expiration of those provisions that no longer are necessary or which Congress has no intention of implementing. The chamber's position on this important issue is based upon policy declarations unanimously approved by its members and upon a comprehensive study of the draft law by a joint subcommittee on manpower drawn from the membership of the chamber's national defense and education committees. This study was completed last week following a series of conferences with manpower officials of the Department of Defense and the Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization, and with the assistance of statistical studies recently completed by Selective Service and Bureau of Labor Statistics officials. THE DRAFT IS STILL NECESSARY In spite of (1) sharply reduced military manpower requirements; (2) an abundance of draft age, physically fit nonfathers; and (3) enactment of nearly a dozen major laws that have substantially increased the attractiveness of military service as a career, there is no conclusive evidence that currently projected military manpower goals for the Active and Reserve Forces can be achieved and maintained without the draft. The input requirement from civilian life to maintain an active force of approximately 2.5 million is 525,000 for the current fiscal year. About 20 percent (115,000) of this number will be inductees and there is considerable evidence that a large percentage of the long-term voluntary enlistees are draft inspired or stimulated. If the Active Forces remain at or about the June 30, 1959, target strength of 2,520,000, defense officials conservatively estimate they will need an average of 90,000 inductees annually through fiscal 1963. The draft is also vital in connection with active duty requirements for junior officers, doctors, and dentists, and in supplying the necessary flow of young manpower into the various civilian components. The principal source of junior officers is ROTC graduates, most of whom enter the ROTC program in preference to being inducted as enlisted men. For the past several years, draft-inspired volunteers also have been the principal source of doctors and dentists. By June 30, 1959, defense officials predict that 50 percent of all military doctors and 60 percent of all dentists will be noncareer officers who accepted Reserve commissions-plus a 2-year active duty obligation-in lieu of being inducted. The value of the draft as a source of manpower for the Reserve Forces stems from the fact that most inductees, upon completion of their 2 years of active duty, are required to spend 3 years in the Ready Reserve and 1 year in the Standby Reserve. In addition, many young men enter directly into one of the many Reserve programs in lieu of being inducted for 2 years. TWO-YEAR OR FOUR-YEAR EXTENSION? In response to direct inquiries regarding the reasons for requesting a 4-year extension of the draft law, defense officials have offered only three arguments: 1. Convenience. 2. That's the way it was done the last two times. 3. We think we'll need it that long. The chamber recommends that any extension of the draft law be limited to not more than 2 years for the following reasons: 1. In an era of rapid technological advancement and rapidly changing military manpower requirements, Congress should reexamine our basic military manpower statute at least every 2 years. 2. A 2-year extension would be just as satisfactory as a 4-year extension in showing our allies that the United States regards its military commitments seriously and fully intends to live up to them. 3. Real progress is being made toward the development of a quality active force of men with at least 4 years of service. The Army's percentage of such persons jumped from 34 percent in 1956 to 41 percent in 1958. The comparable Air Force percentages are 40 and 49. If this rate of improvement continues, the draft may not be needed for more than 2 years. 4. While 12 of the 16 Cordiner Committee recommendations affecting military personnel have been fully implemented, defense officials concede it is too early to measure the impact of these proposals-particularly the $576 million pay raise upon new enlistment and reenlistment rates. Even before the pay raise was approved, the reenlistment rate for first-term regulars (the most critical retention group) rose from 15.7 percent in 1955 to 27 percent in 1958. 5. The Defense Department estimate of draft needs assumes no further reductions in the size of the active forces, but Defense Secretary McElroy has made it clear that further reductions are likely. INDUCTEES ARE TOO OLD The major problem in connection with the draft law is the average age of inductees. Those who enlist voluntarily average 18% years of age-just about what the services prefer. But inductees average nearly 23 years of age, the average is still rising, and there is no expectation that it will decline, under existing laws and regulations. With all due respect to the young men who are being inducted, the fact remains that they are merely helping meet strength goals; they are contributing little, if anything, to the development of a quality career force or to our overall defense posture. Most inductees enter the Armed Forces reluctantly, for very understandable reasons. Most of them have either entered the business world or married or both. Many have purchased homes. For these and other reasons, less than 5 percent of all inductees reenlist. Career incentive legislation would influence few of them. This perpetuates the turnover problem which is costly in terms of both dollars and efficiency. Furthermore, most inductees cannot be utilized effectively in the jobs where men are in short supply because they are ready for discharge by the time they receive the necessary in-service training. In summary, the Defense Department, while working hard on the one hand to improve the attractiveness of military service, is reconciling itself to accepting 100,000 men a year that it knows it cannot utilize effectively or retain on a career basis. The Army-the only service now using the draft-is living with this problem, and the situation has improved slightly since mental standards were raised several months ago, in accordance with a draft-law amendment approved during the 85th Congress. But the problem is an unnecessary one that must not be allowed to continue. It is in both the national interest and the public interest that inductees be younger. Younger men make more efficient and more enthusiastic soldiers and are much more likely to remain in the service on a career basis. And taking young men into the service at an earlier age would make it easier for them to decide between a military or civilian career. No matter which they choose, their comparative youth will be in their favor. As previously indicated, there are two ways to deal with the problem. Perhaps the simplest method is to amend the draft law to make young men liable for induction for only 2 or 3 years after attainment of age 18. This, of course, could necessitate wiping out some of the special Selective Service deferment categories. But the continuing need for certain types of student, technical, and professional deferments should be recognized. The potential impact of any such amendment on draft-inspired long-term enlistments also would have to be considered carefully. On the other hand, if your committee decides to extend the law without change, the problem could be dealt with administratively. With only two exceptions, the order in which young men are called into service is left to administrative determination. Under the circumstances, there appears to be no reason why, for example, 19-year-old nonfathers and nonstudents could not be taken first if the proper executive officials determined that it would be in the national interest to do so. For example, the impact of any such change upon our scientific and technical education programs, as well as on long-term enlistments, should be considered carefully. The chamber strongly recommends that your committee give prompt attention to this problem and resist the temptation to rush through a simple extension of the law without resolving it by amendment or appropriate instructions to Defense and Selective Service officials. COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF ACT Our study of the draft law brought to light a number of references to such nonexistent bodies as the National Security Resources Board and the National Security Training Commission. The law also provides the basic authority for a vast universal military training program that was put into effect on an experimental basis but wisely abandoned soon thereafter. These and other similar provisions should be stricken from the law prior to its extension. ELECTRONIC INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION, Hon. CARL VINSON, Chairman, House Armed Services Committee, DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: On behalf of the Electronic Industries Association, the national trade association for the electronics industry, I am enclosing for your information a copy of a resolution on selective service adopted by the association's board of directors on December 4, 1958. The resolution supports the extension of the Universal Military Training and Service Act of 1948, as amended, which will expire on June 30, 1959, unless congressional action is taken. As you will note, the resolution sets forth the conclusion of the electronics industry that the Selective Service System is fair and equitable and necessary for the proper functioning of our industrial system at the present time and in the event of a national emergency. If appropriate, we will appreciate your inserting this letter and the supporting resolution in the record of the hearings on the extension of the Universal Military Training and Service Act. If you have any questions concerning our position, we will be pleased to meet with you and discuss them. Very truly yours, JAMES D. SECREST. RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE ELECTRONIC INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION, DECEMBER 4, IN NEW YORK CITY Whereas the Selective Service System has fulfilled the Nation's need for a fair and equitable method of recruiting members of our Armed Forces while recognizing the need for deferment of those persons whose talents could best be used in industry, and Whereas the deferment of 1,100,000 students during the Korean war has made possible the training of 40,000 to 50,000 engineers and scientists whose services are essential to industrial support of the national defense program, and Whereas the critical skills program has also aided defense industries by minimizing the time required by men of exceptional qualifications to fulfill their military obligations, and Whereas the Selective Service System, under the able direction of Gen. Lewis B. Hershey, is the only Government agency equipped by experience and trained personnel to prevent industrial collapse, in the event of a national emergency, through the orderly retention of key personnel: Therefore be it Resolved, That the board of directors of the Electronic Industries Association on this day of Thursday, December 4, 1958, respectfully urge the President to recommend and Congress to approve continuation of the Universal Military Training and Service Act of 1948, as amended, before its expiration on June 30, 1959. STATEMENT BY FRED J. HOLLENBECK, VETERANS OF WORLD WAR I OF THE U.S.A., INC. Before the Armed Service Committee on extension of selective service Mr. Chairman and members of the committee: The Veterans of World War I of the U.S.A., Inc., believe that in the interest of the welfare of the United States of America the induction provisions of the Universal Military Training and Service Act should be extended by Congress to July 1, 1963. This recommendation is based upon the following resolution adopted by the 1958 National Convention of the Veterans of World War I of the U.S.A., Inc. Resolution for Extension of Induction Authority Under Universal Military Training and Service Act to July 1, 1963 Whereas section 17 (c) of the Universal Military Training and Service Act (62 Stat. 625), as amended, provides that no person shall be inducted into the Armed Forces under that act after July 1, 1959, with the exception of persons whose deferments under section 6 of such act have ceased to exist; and Whereas selective service is based on the accepted principle of the universal obligation and privilege of all citizens to defend this Nation; and Whereas the impending termination of induction authority under the aforesaid act will leave our Nation without an effective obligation for every young man to serve his country in a military capacity; and Whereas the continuance of authority to induct all persons liable therefor under the aforesaid act is essential to insure the maintenance of the required strength of the Armed Forces since voluntary enlistments in such forces and their Reserve components are greatly stimulated and influenced by the mere existence of that induction authority; and Whereas the existence of full induction authority enables the Selective Service System (1) to insure that the required strength of the active Armed Forces be maintained both directly by inductions and indirectly by stimulating enlistments, (2) to assist in maintaining the required strength of the Reserve forces by deferring inductions of members who serve satisfactorily, and (3) by classifi cations deferring induction, to channel men possessing critical skills or the requisite ablity to acquire them into essential activities and occupations including engineering, scientific and technical pursuits and teaching, and the study and preparation for such fields; and Whereas the Selective Service System maintains through registration an inventory of all men of military age including the only inventory of veterans no longer in the Armed Forces who in an emergency might be needed quickly for augmentation of those forces, and keeps current the availability for order to active duty in time of emergency of over a million members of the Standby Reserve; and Whereas selective service has become an integral part of the Nation's defense and the Selective Service System, by its decentralized system of operation through over 4,000 local and appeal boards in every community made up of local citizens, has earned and enjoys the confidence of the overwhelming majority of the American people; and Whereas the local boards of the Selective Service System in every community of this Nation would render invaluable service in the event of an all-out emergency because of their ability to furnish manpower at local levels to any agency authorized to requisition men for specific duties, and Whereas some 40,000 of the 46,000 full and part-time officers and employees of the Selective Service System have volunteered their services to the Government and received no compensation; and Whereas the annual cost of operating the Selective Service System is only about 16 cents for every man, woman, and child in this Nation: Therefore be it Resolved by Veterans of World War I of the U.S.A., Inc., National Convention assembled in Springfield, Ill., September 14 through September 19, 1958, That section 17 (c) of the Universal Military Training and Service Act (62 Stat. 625), |