entitled to burial in such cemetery. Eligibility would also accrue to Reserve or National Guard members, and ROTC members who incur death during training exercises. Spouses and minor children would receive the same entitlement. The Administrator would also provide plots for servicemen missing in action. Entitlement would not devolve on veterans guilty of subversive activities. The rules set forth governing the furnishing of head stones are generally the same. The rest of the subchapter relates to such specific matters as: selection of cemetery superintendents from among disabled veterans; entombment in the Arlington Memorial Amphitheater; acquisition of land, provision of approach roads and prohibition of right-of-ways, and the Veterans' Administration's control of cemeteries outside the United States. The next subchapter provides that the Administrator of Veterans Affairs shall undertake a study for acquisition of new land for cemetery space, especially as regards the needs of metropolitan areas, and that the study shall be submitted to the House Veterans Affairs Committee. Also, the sections of this subchapter increase the $250 maximum burial allowance which surely we would all agree is unrealistic-to $400. If the deceased veteran is not buried in a National Cemetery, the Administrator would reserve one-fourth of that sum to cover expense of purchase of the burial site. The amount of the veteran's estate, or other means for defraying burial expense will not affect entitlement to the allowance and would not reduce it. As I explained upon introduction of this legislation, four agencies presently control the cemeteries in which veterans may be interred as a matter of right. I believe that a unified control under only one agency would be most efficient. Logic would require, I submit, that this agency be the one created to administer veterans benefits. Acting upon the proposal of my colleagues and my own, recently we placed the legislative jurisdiction of veterans cemeteries all within the House Veterans Affairs Committee. We should act upon the wisdom of our own example and do the same for actual administration and management of the cemeteries which we have done as regards legislation. The shortage of space in veterans cemeteries is becoming acute. I do not believe that mere acquisition of new land will solve the problem. Land must be acquired which is convenient to communities in which veterans live. In creating new cemeteries we must certainly take into consideration which localities have the largest veteran population of the entire Nation. In the same manner, we should not acquiesce to the restriction of burial in Arlington Cemetery. Everyone who has ever borne arms for defense of America has had until now the right to burial there. Let us restore and preserve that right by acquisition of more land adjacent to Arlington. Also, I propose by this measure not only to increase the burial allowance, but to extend it for the first time to servicemen who fell in battle. The preamble to the U.S. Veterans Advisory Commission's Report, which as I've said, endorses these proposals, states, in the words of President Johnson: "Our government and our people have no greater obligation than to assure that those who have servd their country and the cause of freedom will never be forgotten or neglected." By consideration of the problems here addressed, we would act in accordance with that noble sentiment. STATEMENT OF HON. JERRY L. PETTIS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Mr. Chairman: Thank you for giving me this opportunity to express my support of legislation for the establishment of a national veterans' cemetery system within the Veterans' Administration. I feel that the present system badly needs to be examined, especially since we do not, at this time, have a definite or uniform policy in providing additional cemeteries. Since the responsibility for managing the cemeteries is now administered by four Federal agencies, I feel that one agency, the Veterans Administration, would be the most logical choice to manage the cemeteries. The Administrator of Veterans' Affairs should have the right to operate, care for, and maintain all national cemeteries under his jurisdiction, and the Congress should have the right, through the Veterans' Affairs Committee to consider policies relating to our national cemeteries. I am certainly aware of the inequities within the present National Cemetery System. There are only one million burial sites remaining in our 98 national cemeteries and there are currently 40 million veterans eligible for National Cemetery burial. More, of course, are becoming eligible every day because of the high casualties we are currently suffering due to the Vietnam conflict. Within the next three or four years, when the cemetery in Denver is out of space, there will be no National Cemetery west of the Rocky Mountains with space available. Study has revealed that the privilege of burial in a national cemetery is effectively available to only a small part of those who are legally entitled to interment. Surely, when we ask a man to lay down his life for his Country, the least we can do is set aside a plot of hallowed ground for his burial. The men of our armed services who have given their lives in their Country's service deserve a burial with dignity, respect and honor in a national cemetery set aside for our Nation's heroes. The time has come for us to take such steps as may be necessary to insure the continued availability of the burial privilege in a national cemetery for all eligible service members, both active and retired, and their dependents and survivors in appropriately located cemeteries so that their loved ones will be able to pay proper tribute to their memories. If the system must be revamped, and I believe it surely must, we should first place the administration of the national cemeteries under the jurisdiction of the Veterans Administration and then lay plans for an orderly and logical expansion of the system. Every effort should be made to provide cemeteries to match the growth of the veteran population in the West. I have introduced a bill which would provide the establishment of a national cemetery in San Bernardino County and hope to have an opportunity to testify on my bill at the appropriate time. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, Hon. OLIN E. TEAGUE, Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Washington, D.C. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., March 13, 1968. Dear "TIGER": It was thoughtful of you to remind me of the meeting of your committee to to discuss the question of National Cemeteries. Frankly, you are far more familiar with this than I am. You know the needs and I recognize that you are going to try to adopt some kind of general policy which I realize is essential, but whatever the policy adopted, I think you know of the very natural interest of the people of Killeen in a National Cemetery. There will be a continual growing demand for the burial of veterans at Fort Hood. In addition, the Veterans Hospital at Temple, Marlin, and especially at Waco, will undoubtedly continue to create a special need for a National Cemetery in this section. I don't understand that you are trying to determine sites at this time and therefore I don't think that it will be necessary for me to take the time of your commitee. I would not attempt to suggest the basic policy that you should pursue or just who should handle these cemeteries. I would, however, want to be on record as being deeply interested in the establishment of some kind of facility in Central Texas. With all good wishes, I am, W. R. POAGE, CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Hon. OLIN E. TEAGUE Chairman, Veterans' Affairs Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. Dear MR. TEAGUE: Enclosed is my statement for the record of the Special Subcomitee on Cemeteries and Burial Benefits hearings on cemetery administration. I am deeply grateful for this opportunity to express my views in support of the three bills I have pending before your committee. Again, thank you for your kind cooperation. Sincerely, ED REINECKE, Member of Congress. STATEMENT BY HON. ED REINECKE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Mr. Chairman, I am deeply grateful for this opportunity to present my views before your Subcommittee in support of three bills I have introduced during the present Congress-H.R. 3159, H.R. 5891, and H.R. 11229. The first two bills, introduced over a year ago embody proposals set forth in the Report of the U.S. Veterans Advisory Commission on Veterans Benefits of March of this year. Those proposals are: That the Administrator establish uniform criteria for elibigility for burial in the Federal cemetery system; That Arlington National Cemetery be opened to all veterans as it has been until only recently; That the Veterans Administration have control and administration of the entire Federal Cemetery function; and That the veterans burial allowance be increased. H.R. 5891, which I introduced on February 21, 1967, first revises Chapter 23, Title 38 of the U.S. Code of transferring to the Veterans Administration national cemeteries presently controlled by other agencies. Most of the cemeteries affected are those administered by the Secretary of Interior and the Secretary of the Army. The bill specifies the names and location of the cemeteries. It proceeds to repeal all sections inconsistent with the Veterans Administration's complete control. The second subchapter sets forth particular standards for the care and operation of the cemetery. For instance, it specifies that every veterans cemetery will be enclosed with a substantial stone or iron fence and that there will be only one approach road to a cemetery. It also governs the procedure for acquisition of new land. This part provides that every grave will be marked with a headstone. Such markers will be furnished upon request by the Veterans Administration for any grave in a national cemetery. The Administrator will also furnish headstones for graves of members of the armed forces who died in service even if they are buried in a private cemetery. Very importantly, this subchapter unifies the rules of eligibility for burial in veterans cemeteries. Consistent with the previous provision for transfer of all jurisdiction to the Veterans Administration, Section 952 grants right of burial in national cemeteries to all veterans. Here included is Arlington National Cemetery. The various rules of eligibility of other agencies will no longer have effect, of course, after the control is unified under the Administrator. Also, National Guard and Reserve members who are killed in service are entitled to burial. I should add too, that the Administrator is to set aside plots for servicemen whose remains are not recovered. My bill, H.R. 11229, increases the burial allowance from $250 to $300. If the remains are not buried in a veterans cemetery, the Administrator could increase the amount by $100. H.R. 3159, which I introduced on January 19, 1967, would authorize establishment of a national cemetery on Federal land, now under control of the Secretary of Agriculture, in Los Angeles County, California, near Oak Spring Canyon. This land is secluded and unused, but near a metropolitan area. It is accessible to thousands of veterans families. With the tremendous increase in real estate costs, I believe that use of land already owned by the Federal Government is a logical and exemplary method for confronting the problem. According to the Veterans Administrations latest report, 2,749,000 veterans are living in California, for more than in any other state. This fact alone, I submit, indicates need for more cemetery space near the most concentrated metropolitan area of the State. Mr. Chairman, I have recently received over 600 petitions from my constituents urging the establishment of a national cemetery on Federally-owned or privately donated land in the area of Eastern Kern County which is central of the State of California. In this regard, I submit that we explore more methods for funding national cemeteries in all states. Besides utilization of unused Government land, we might develop systems of long-term leasing. Another method of funding might be for each veteran to pay $1.00 yearly dues to help cover cemetery expense. Such collection would be patterned after veterans insurance. Veterans benefits could be put in a state fund for covering cemetery costs in that state. In conclusion Mr. Chairman, I ask why should America be less grateful for the sacrificies of her fighting men than in the past. America has provided facility for burial of her veterans from the earliest times. Yet now we see that system falling into disarray. I believe that now is the time to meet the problem, because with over twenty thousand deaths already in Vietnam, with those deaths steadily increasing, with the continuous expansion of our veterans population, the shortage of burial facilities steadily grows more acute. The basic training cost of an infantryman exceeds $12,000. This figure is only the beginning and does not include his equipment. Surely a grateful Nation therefore can afford the comparatively smaller exepnse of rendering more adequate facilities for his burial. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., March 29, 1968. The Hon. OLIN E. TEAGUE, Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Enclosed herewith is a statement on my bills, H.R. 1168 and H.R. 1171, which I will appreciate your having included in the record of hearings of the Special Subcommittee on Cemeteries and Burial Benefits. With best regards, Yours sincerely, JOHN J. RHODES. STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN J. RHODES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA Mr. Chairman, beginning with the 84th Congress I have introduced in each Congress a bill to provide for national cemeteries in the State of Arizona. As you may know, Arizona has a large veterans population resulting from the number of military installations within the State, and the healthful climate which brings many veterans to Arizona. I believe that my bill, H.R. 1168, is important to Arizona veterans, and this belief is shared by our veterans' organizations which have supported my efforts over the years. Although to date, due to the policy of both Democratic and Republican administrations, my efforts have not been successful, I intend to continue to introduce my bill and to work for the establishment of the national cemeteries needed in Arizona. Also, Mr. Chairman, I have introduced in the last two Congresses a bill to amend Title 38 of the United States Code to increase the amount which may be paid on account of the funeral expenses of certain veterans from $250 to $300. It is my belief that families of deceased veterans should not be asked to bear alone the increased funeral expenses, and I hope that my bill, H.R. 1171, will help them to obtain sufficient funds for a proper and decent burial. I am pleased that the Veterans' Affairs Committee is planning to report out much needed legislation in the field of cemetery and burial benefits. I urge serious consideration and prompt action on these matters so vital to our veterans and their families. STATEMENT OF THE HON. HENRY C. SCHADEBERG, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN Mr. Chairman, thank you for giving me the opportunity to present testimony to you and to this fine Committee on which I formerly served with great pride. I would like to bring to your attention during these hearings the bill which I introduced last year, H.R.-6065, to void the Defense Department's restrictions on burial in Arlington Cemetery. Let me review for you briefly the developments leading up to this legislation. On February 10, 1967, the Department of Defense officially set forth new criteria for burial in Arlington Cemetery. Until that date, Arlington Cemetery was open to any member or former member of the Armed Forces of the United States or any citizen of the United States who served in the Armed Forces of any government allied with the U.S. during a war, whose last active duty terminated honorably. Also eligible were the wives, husbands and minor children of these veterans. As of February 17, 1967, Arlington Cemetery was limited to Medal of Honor winners, active duty and retired members of the Armed Forces and honorably discharged veterans who have also served in high positions in the Federal Government, along with their wives and children. No one will take issue with the availability of Arlington to Medal of Honor winners or to active duty and retired servicemen. I do not believe, however, that there is any justification for including high Government officials to the exclusion of American men and women who have also served their country and served it with honor. Rank should have no privileges in Arlington. This cemetery was opened some hundred years ago as the last resting place of a group of battle casualties who died during the Civil War. Throughout the years it has taken its rightful place as a shrine to the millions of men and women who have served the flag of this great nation and, until the recent action by the Defense Department, has been available to these valiant Americans for burial if they so chose. I believe that burial in Arlington should continue to be the right of all veterans so long as grave sites are available on a first-come, first served basis. On February 23, 1967, I sponsored HR-6065, which will reopen Arlington National Cemetery to all veterans. I urge this Committee's early action on it in behalf of every American who has served his country's flag. STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD S. SCHWEIKER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am indeed honored to testify as a sponsor of the much needed legislation designed to expand our national cemetery system. An injustice is being committed against the veterans of our armed services. These men fought valiantly, and many were wounded, in the service of our country. For this service they have asked and received little except the satisfaction of knowing that they defended their country in time of trouble. One small thing that many do ask, however, is the privilege of being buried in the company of others who have served, as they have, fighting for America. This is a simple request and it has been granted for over 90 years. When the national cemetery system was set up in Civil War times it was a quick patchwork job. An order for national cemeteries was issued to provide burial grounds for battlefield victims. Our cemetery system has remained basically unchanged since Civil War days. It is in this same chaotic state as when it was initiated. Some people have used this as a reason for disbanding it. I think it is reason for reorganization and expansion. We have had two world wars, the Korean conflict, and now Vietnam. The last national cemetery opening was in 1950. It is disgraceful that there is no longer sufficient burial space for our veterans in our national cemeteries. There is a strong possibility that in the near future a veteran's request for burial with his fellows in arms will have to be denied. Thirty-six of the 98 national cemeteries are already closed. Two-thirds of the remaining 62 cover an area smaller than 50 acres. In 1966 six of the eleven busiest national cemeteries (handling 83% of the interments) were expected to be filled within the next ten years. One of these six, the Beverly National Cemetery in my neighboring state of New Jersey (the only one in the Philadelphia area), is now accepting only Vietnam veterans. The situation is becoming critical. It is becoming difficult for the parents of servicemen killed in Vietnam to have their sons buried in a national cemetery. Our nation has an obligation to provide room for these veterans. The Administration has argued that our only obligation is a monetary one. The Administration argues that our obligation is met by supplying money to a veteran's family to pay his burial expenses. This is absurd. We have a moral obligation to honor |