"He noted that no survey of the various categories of available federal lands has ever been made, because nobody has yet decided what kind of a system it should be.' "If authority insists that new cemeteries be located near the heart of urban areas that do not now have them, he points out, the cost will naturally be astronomical. But these locations may not be strictly necessary to solve the geographical problem. "While I have no personal impression,' he said, 'we have so much federal land of our own, that I can imagine a figure in the several billions. "It's pretty hard to believe that you couldn't find a corner of a vast post like Fort Belvoir (Va.) where you could set up a cemetery without bothering anybody. "And there are still plenty of places around the country where you can buy a couple-hundred-acre farm without going bankrupt.' 66 6 "Any survey, he added, should begin with land around those cemeteries, which are closed or closing,' and then proceed to a catalog of military posts, national forests, federal grazing lands, and the like." Mr. Chairman, I believe Mr. Meadows' suggestion for a survey of available federal land is an excellent one and I would hope that the members of this Committee strongly consider it. There are, indeed, plenty of places around the country where such land is available. In my own district, the Department of Defense has declared as excess to its needs a portion of land within the present boundaries of the Fort Custer Military Reservation. This tract is approximately 700 acres and contains an existing military cemetery of 4,438 grave sites. Presently, only 130 persons are buried there. Development of a national cemetery there would not affect planning for further federal, state, or private use of other portions of the military reservation. Although no buildings are located in this area, a Post Chapel and certain administrative buildings would be available for temporary use. The area is ideally situated midway between Detroit and Chicago and is serviced by two four-lane approaches, as well as numerous smaller roads connecting it with Interstate Highway I-94. There are many thousands of eligible veterans living in the upper Midwest. Michigan, alone, currently has a veterans population of one million. Mr. Chairman, I am sure many such sites exist across our nation which can remain or serve as hallowed ground and the final resting place of those who gave so much. In considering what type of national cemetery system we need. it seems logical and appropriate that this Committee explore these possibilities and I strongly urge its distinguished members to do so. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., March 18, 1968. Hon. OLIN E. TEAGUE, Chairman, and Members, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE: I appreciate having this opportunity to address you on behalf of H.R. 10898 which I introduced for the purpose of designating permanently the Veterans' Administration Cemetery at Houston, Texas, the "Albert Thomas Veterans Memorial Cemetery." Many of you here served with the distinguished Chairman and know of his outstanding record of achievements. He loved his people and served them unselfishly for nearly thirty years in the House. At the time of his death he was Chairman of the Independent Offices and second-ranking member on the Appropriations Committee. As Chairman of Independent Offices, Albert Thomas worked closely with the Veterans Administration and was a true champion of veterans' causes. He believed our veterans were entitled to the best possible medical attention and benefits. I know of no finer tribute that could be accorded the distinguished Chairman than to have the Veterans Cemetery in his beloved City of Houston bear his name. I am hopeful that your Committee will favorably report, and our great Body approve, this legislation. Thank you again for allowing me the privilege of making these few remarks in support of H.R. 10898. Very truly yours, GEORGE BUSH, Member of Congress. STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM T. CAHILL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY Mr. Chairman, let me commend you and the members of your committee for holding hearings on this most important subject matter. With a war waging in Viet Nam and more American boys dying every day, it appears absolutely essential that we re-evaluate our national policy concerning veterans cemeteries. Ever since I have been in the House of Representatives I have been introducing legislation seeking to expand our national cemetery system with particular emphasis on the expansion of the National Cemetery in Beverly, New Jersey. I believe that every veterans organization in the United States is in agreement as to the need for additional burial space. I am certain your committee agrees that improvement is essential. The problem, of course, is the best way to accomplish the desired goal. All of us realize that we cannot have veterans cemeteries in every city, hamlet, or village in the United States and in all probability we will be unable to have them in each State. However, I am convinced that under proper direction the entire national cemetery system can be re-evaluated and appropriate legislation enacted so as to insure all veterans a burial space in a national cemetery. This can be done by development of national cemeteries in those areas where the veteran population is the greatest and by accommodating all veterans through the establishment of regional or sectional national cemeteries in all areas of the country. I think that the first step of vesting jurisdiction in the committee on Veterans Affairs is one of the most important steps that could be taken. So long as the responsibility for the veterans of our nation, the possibility of true accommodation of the veterans was in doubt. I am convinced, knowing as I do, the dedication of all the Members of the Committee, that some appropriate plan will be designed to solve the problem that must be solved. The entire national cemetery of the country needs re-evaluation and hopefully veterans organizations will appear and testify so that the committee in making its final recommendation, will have the unanimous support of all of these organizations. I commend you, Mr. Chairman, and your committee for your interest in this important legislation. STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES C. CLEVELAND, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, ON H.R. 3744 Mr. Chairman, in behalf of myself and my colleague from New Hampshire, Mr. Wyman, I sincerely appreciate this opportunity to testify before your distinguished committee on the need to establish a national cemetery somewhere in New England. As I am sure you are already aware, there is not at present any national cemetery anywhere in the six New England States. The closest such place where there is still any space available is in Arlington, Virginia. But even here, space is severely limited, and those grave sites which are not yet occupied are generally reserved for long-service veterans and for those who have died in the Vietnam War. As a result, it is really impossible for most New England veterans to be interred here in Arlington. But even if there was more space available, the great distance of Arlington and other national cemeteries would make it inhibitive for most veterans to come here. Arlington is almost 500 miles from my home in New London, New Hampshire, and I could hazard a guess that it is well over 1000 miles from those living in Northern Maine. Clearly, this is too far to bring New England's old soldiers, and too far for their loved ones to travel in order that they might pay their proper respects. So the need for a national cemetery somewhere in New England is definitely there. In years past, any proposal to establish such a cemetery in New England has generally gotten little hearing. The Federal Government figured that if it would cost less simply to pay an allowance for the burial of each veteran unwilling to come to Arlington in private or public graveyards, rather than build a new national cemetery in New England. But now it appears that the National Cemetery system will have to be expanded anyway. Of the ninety-eight national cemeteries in America, almost one third are completely filled, and many others expect to reach the saturation point within a decade. We must therefore begin to lay plans for an orderly and logical expansion of the system. So for this reason, I heartily urge this committee to consider the needs of our veterans in New England. The exact location of the cemetery is less important than the fact that we have one. The right to be buried in a national place of honor is a right which we grant to all veterans, and yet in the case of New England veterans, this right is being denied because of a lack of conveniently located facilities. We owe it to our veterans and their families to establish a new cemetery, appropriately located in our region so that their loved ones will be able to pay proper tribute to their memories. Mr. Chairman, I wish to thank you again for this opportunity to offer testimony on this legislation which we all consider to be so very important. STATEMENT OF HON. SILVIO O. CONTE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS Mr. Chairman, ever since the Defense Department altered its policy with respect to burials at Arlington National Cemetery, many voices have been raised throughout the country in behalf of an expansion of our national cemetery program elsewhere. Various bills have been introduced in this body either to expand certain existing national cemeteries or to establish new ones in areas where there is no convenient facility at the present time. In spite of our apparent awareness, little has been done to devise a national program for providing a consecrated resting place for all of those who rightfully deserve a place of honor alongside former comrades. The standard response of Administration officials has been that government participation in the burial of veterans through the payment of cash burial allowances is fair and reasonably effective. I do not feel this is sufficient. Money allowances can never be a substitute for the honored privilege of burial in a national cemetery. Even in looking at costs however we find that under the present system, many veterans are eligible for a $250 burial allowance, plus an additional $255 allowance under Social Security. So the burial costs could be $505. On the other hand, the cost to the government of a burial in a national cemetery, exclusive of the cost of the land involved, has been given as $56.46, plus $4.93 a year for perpetual care. The government also provides a headstone on request, whether in public or private cemeteries, costing from $22 to $34. My own record in this area is a long and perhaps familiar one, dating back well before the change in policy at Arlington over a year ago. I have introduced legislation in previous sessions of the Congress calling for the establishment of a national cemetery at Westfield, Massachusetts. I have re-introduced this same legislation during the present session, my bill being H. R. 403. The bill authorizes the Secretary of the Army to acquire, either by donation or purchase, sufficient land to establish a national cemetery in Westfield and the appropriation of sufficient funds to clear the land and make it suitable for such purpose. The proposed national cemetery would become the nation's 86th cemetery, but would be the first national cemetery in New England. The closest for many years have been at Elmira, New York, and Farmingdale, Long Island. I have pointed out repeatedly that the travel distance and expense thus imposed on the veterans of New England is not only unreasonable in terms of funeral arrangements for the deceased and their dependents, but is a total and, in a sense, heartless inconvenience for surviving families who naturally wish to visit and honor the gravesites of their loved ones from time to time. The situation has been a frustrating and needless one for many years, long before the changes took place at Arlington. The situation has grown ever more urgent since a year ago February. I respectfully submit that establishment of a national cemetery at Westfield, Massachusetts, on a site presently available should receive the immediate and favorable consideration of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES C. CORMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA I appreciate this opportunity to appear before the Committee on Veterans' Affairs in support of my bills, H.R. 6009 and H.R. 12352, the former to provide for the establishment of a National Veterans' Cemetery System, and the latter to provide that one of these cemeteries be located in Los Angeles County, California. I was pleased last October when the rules of the House were amended to transfer jurisdiction over military and national cemeteries from the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. It seems to me that the Veterans' Affairs Committee is the proper place for this legislation, and I am certain that since the changeover has been effected, the great need for the establishment of a national cemetery system will be given early attention. I believe that all veterans who have served this great country of ours are entitled to the secure knowledge that their government has made careful plans governing cemeteries. Every veteran who wants it, whether he risked his life in France in World War I, in Iwo Jima in World War II, in the Korean mountains, or below the DMZ in Vietnam, should have the right to burial in a national cemetery situated close to his home. We have been grossly negligent of our war dead, and we have been negligent in providing our veterans with the security that a national cemetery close to home would give them. We need now to compensate for this neglect as soon as possible. My bill, to establish a National Veterans' Cemetery System, places new emphasis on the Nation's obligation to provide and maintain burial grounds for servicemen killed in action, and other deceased veterans. It also provides for appropriate headstones bearing the names of the deceased, as well as setting aside areas with markers designating members of the armed forces missing in action or known to be lost at sea. Last year, President Johnson asked the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs to form an Advisory Commission to evaluate veterans' programs and to see if the government is fully meeting its responsibilities to veterans. The Commission, composed of eleven distinguished Americans, held hearings in cities all across the country. Recognizing the very serious laxity in the area of providing every veteran with the right to burial in a national cemetery, the President asked the Commission to include in its recommendations proposals to assure this right. The Commission's report was presented to the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs on March 19. Among other recommendations, the Commission fully endorsed the provisions contained in the proposed legislation to establish a National Veterans' Cemetery System. Anything less than the enactment of this proposal would be a gross injustice to our servicemen... In addition to the need for a national cemetery system is the need that cemeteries, created under the act, be placed at locations of convenience to surviving members and give families of deceased veterans the thoughtful privilege of being near enough to their dead to visit cemeteries. With this in mind, I wish to speak to my bill, H.R. 12352, to provide that a national cemetery be located in Los Angeles County, California. I first directed my attention to a much-needed cemetery in Los Angeles County in 1964 when I introduced a measure to establish such a cemetery. As we examine the history of the national cemetery system, we find that most of them are located in Civil War battleground areas. There are more national cemeteries in the State of Virginia than there are west of the Mississippi River; there are only two in California and both are almost filled; there are none in the Los Angeles area. There are about 1.5 million veterans in Los Angeles County who are without a national cemetery, and about 55,000 of them reside in my Congressional District. I am deeply disturbed at the extent to which the situation has been allowed to deteriorate. The number of veterans is swelling as draft callups continue. We have run out of time in Los Angeles. Our California veterans have contributed greatly to our country, and it is disgraceful that there is no longer a proper burial facility for them in their native state. If there is to be a national policy that veterans in all sections of the Nation are to have reasonable access to a national cemetery, it seems inescapable to me that one must be located in Los Angeles County. Mr. Chairman, I urge the Committee's consideration of both my bills. The need for them is urgent. Thank you. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Re H.R. 12801. Hon. OLIN E. TEAGUE, Chairman, Veterans' Affairs Committee, DEAR "TIGER": I am enclosing a copy of a letter which I received today from my constituent, Mrs. Stan Pawl of Brookfield, Wisconsin, expressing support for the aforementioned bill, which is pending before the Special Subcommittee on Cemeteries. If you could make this letter part of the records on the hearings, it would be appreciated. Thanking you in advance for your cooperation, I am, GLENN R. DAVIS, BROOKFIELD, WIS., March 31, 1968. DEAR REPRESENTATIVE GLENN DAVIS: As a member of the Elm Grove Legion Aux. Post 449, I wish to express my desire for a National Cemetery in Wisconsin. I believe this is Bill H.R. 12801. I also was a SPAR during World War II and do realize many of our National Cemeteries are already full. Also, Bill H.R. 10480 surely has my support to provide penalties to those persons who desecrate our flag of the United States. There are fewer things in our lives each year that demand the respect of years ago. Sincerely, (Mrs. Stan) MILLICENT PAWL. STATEMENT OF HON. JOSHUA EILBERG, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 7226 AND H.R. 12822 Mr. Chairman, I speak in support of H.R. 7226 and H.R. 12822, which I introduced during the last session. H.R. 7226 would grant authority to the Secretary of the Army for acquiring land for establishment of National Cemeteries in Pennsylvania. One of the most historic of all veterans benefits is that our grateful nation provides the final resting place for those citizens who have given or risked their lives for her defense. Yet many national cemeteries have reached or are about to reach their capacity. If we are to continue this time-honored benefit, then we must provide more ground. But not only acquisition of space, but also its location is crucial to whether the benefit continues. If the land is not convenient to the veteran's community, then of course, the burial benefit no longer retains its value or significance to the veteran's family. I see no reason why the benefit should count for less to the families of our soldiers fallen in Vietnam or of other veterans, than it has to families of veterans interred before them. H.R. 7226 provides, therefore, that the Secretary of the Army shall give special consideration to cemetery sites in the vicinity of Valley Forge Park and Brandywine Battlefield Park in eastern Pennsylvania; Indiantown Gap Military Reservation and Boalsburg Memorial Park in central Pennsylvania; and Bushy Run Battlefield Park located in southwestern Pennsylvania. These areas, I submit, would be adequately accessible to metropolitan areas. Also the bill would provide that the Administrator of General Services is authorized and directed to transfer to the Secretary of the Army any surplus Federal land in Pennsylvania which the Secretary determines to be suitable for National Cemeteries. We would then be utilizing land which already belongs to the Government but which we use for no other purpose. Such utilization of course would not involve transfer of funds. H.R. 7226 also authorizes the Secretary to establish National Cemeteries on land already under his jurisdiction but which he no longer needs for military purposes. Whereas H.R. 7226 confronts the serious problem of physical facilities, H.R. 12822 confronts an emotional problem which likewise cannot be ignored. In the same way that we must provide adequate and suitable space, we must protect the hallowed nature of that ground. I submit that it is our duty to safe-guard the burial right also by disallowing that right to those persons who have |