In a case of that character, the qualifying veteran, who is able to live outside of a hospital, would be assisted in acquiring a home in this manner: The Administrator of Veterans' Affairs would be authorized to pay 50 percent of the cost of a specially arranged, specially adapted housing unit for such a veteran, with a limit on the Government's contribution of $10,000 in any one case. A veteran would not be entitled to assistance more than once and in connection with that one housing unit. Various plans are set up in the bill to adapt it to special situations with respect to the character of housing unit to be acquired. In the typical case, that is, where the veteran has no housing unit or land, he would apply for the benefit and upon being adjudicated eligible by reason of the nature of his disability, having no house or no land, he would acquire the land, submit his plans and specifications, and if they were approved, he would arrange, himself, for the building of the house and the Administrator would pay one-half of the cost of that house and land-such one-half payment not to exceed, however, -10,000.

In a case where the veteran had the necessary land but not the house, the Administrator would pay one-half of the cost of the suitably equipped dwelling, and he would pay the unpaid balance, if any, on the cost of the land, but not to exceed 50 percent of its cost to the

veteran.

The Administrator would have no responsibility for actually constructing the housing unit. That would be the problem of the veteran. However, the bill would authorize the Administrator to furnish to eligible veterans, without cost to them, model plans and specifications. The veteran would also be protected in his rights under title III of the Servicemen's Readjustment Act. In other words, on his half of the cost, he would be able, if otherwise eligible, to obtain a guaranty of loan under title III of the Servicemen's Readjustment Act. The Government would have no liability in connection with the housing unit.

There are special provisions in the bill giving the Administrator broad regulatory authority, but specifically requiring regulations for certain definite findings in each case before the veteran would be qualified to receive this benefit: Those findings would consist of the following:

(a) That it is medically feasible for such veteran to reside in the proposed housing unit and in the proposed locality;

(b) The proposed housing unit bears a proper relation to the veteran's present and anticipated income and expenses; and

(c) That the nature and condition of the proposed housing unit are such as to be suitable to the veteran's needs for dwelling purposes.

I think that substantially indicates the nature and purpose of the bill. I might state this at the outset: This is not a bill which is being sponsored by the Veterans' Administration. It is the policy of the present Administrator not to recommend for or against general legislation conferring benefits on veterans and he is following that policy in connection with this bill. He considers it to be the province of the Congress to pass upon the merits of a measure, and he desires only to submit information and anything dealing with the administration or the general effects of a measure of this kind.

An identical measure has already been passed by the House of Representatives as an independent bill, which covers nothing but housing for disabled veterans, in the form of H. R. 4244. That was passed by the House on April 6, 1948, and is now pending before the Senate Committee on Banking and Currency.

As I said, that bill incorporates provisions which are identical with title VIII of this bill.

Going further into the background of this measure

The CHAIRMAN. The two bills, the one which we passed and this title, are identical, are they not?

Mr. BLAND. Exactly the same, except for the title. This title is somewhat briefer. But the text of the two bills are identical.

Going further back into the legislative development or evolution of this proposal, it began with bills introduced in the House and the Senate in the first session of the Eightieth Congress, which would have granted outright gifts of special housing units to disabled veterans of the class described in this bill.

Mr. BROWN. I am very much interested in the secondary market for GI loans. I would like to hear your comments on that feaure of it. I had that placed in the Reconstruction Finance Corporation bill and it was taken out last year. I was wondering if it would not be desirable to have something in this bill along that line. I would like to hear your comments on that.

Mr. BLAND. I would be glad to comment on that if I were prepared to. We were called up on title VIII, Mr. Brown. Mr. Kelsey, who is Assistant Administrator for Finance, is here this morning, and after we finish with this, we would be glad to answer any questions on that

matter.

As I said, the original bills on this subject provided for an outright gift of housing. They would have required the Administrator to construct the house and quitclaim it to the veterans of World War I or II with this disability-what we normally refer to as the paraplegic

veterans.

Mr. BUCHANAN. How many veterans would be eligible under this program?

Mr. BLAND. We do not have any precise figures on it, Mr. Congressman. It has been estimated that there were approximately 2.400 spinal-cord cases coming out of World War II. There are very few which have survived from World War I, because the development of method of treatment and medical science has taken place long after the end of World War I, and most of those veterans, unfortunately, died off. There was very little that could be done for them. Most of the group which would be affected by this legislation would be World War II veterans.

There are about 2,400 spinal-cord cases. Now, how many of those spinal-cord cases would be of the complete degree described by this bill, I do not know. I would hazard a guess that there are perhaps around 2,000 which would be presently eligible under this bill. However, that needs further explantion. At the present time there are about 1,500 paraplegic veterans in Veterans' Administration hospitals. About 1,100 of those are service-connected cases. Several hundred— perhaps three to five hundred-of those veterans, the doctors say, will never be able to leave the hospital. So that they would not be able

to take advantage of these benefits. They are limited to those veterans who can live outside of a hospital.

You can see from that, that the entire potential group would probably not be able to take advantage of this feature because many of them would be kept in the hospitals. We do not know exactly how many could qualify.

Mr. MONRONEY. This is not open to amputees, is it?

Mr. BLAND. No, Mr. Congressman, this is not open to amputees. This covers only the so-called spinal paraplegia group-the paralyzed veterans who are paralyzed as a result of spinal injury or disease. In that connection, I might point out that the bill, H. R. 4244, which is identical with title VIII of this bill, and which has been passed by the House, as it was reported by the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, was of somewhat broader scope. It was similar except for describing the class of disabilities. That bill would have covered veterans entitled to compensation for permanent and total service-connected disability, which requires the regular or the frequent and periodical use of a wheelchair. In other words, that would have covered other wheelchair veterans than the paraplegia group. It would not have been limited to the paraplegia veterans. However, that bill was amended on the floor of the House to restrict its effect to the paraplegia group as described in title VIII of this bill, and was passed in that form.

Mr. MONRONEY. Why would you exclude the man who has lost both legs or both arms from having specialized housing under this bill? What is the reason for it?

Mr. BLAND. Well, as I say, Mr. Congressman, the Veterans' Administration is not proposing this matter and is making no recommendation on it. There are arguments on that point, to the effect that there may be other wheelchair conditions deserving similar assistance. This proposal is based on the wheelchair condition. This is based on the philosophy that the veteran who is required to make regular use of a wheelchair encounters certain practical difficulties in using a conventional dwelling. He needs wider doorways, larger rooms, ramps for approaching entrances and leaving exits, he needs perhaps an exercising room, he needs special bathroom facilities. It has been argued that there are other veterans who are wheelchair cases who might have substantially similar needs. As I said, the original bills provided for an outright gift to this group. The Administrator of Veterans' Affairs reported on those bills and then he was asked to suggest another plan. He came in and said, "Now, if the Congress wishes to enter this field, I suggest that it consider legislation which would cover the entire wheelchair group, and instead of giving a house to the veteran, give him simply one-half of the cost of the house." The theory was that this would equalize the opportunity of veterans in this group with that of the disabled veterans in obtaining houses to suit their needs. The ordinary house might cost $10,000. Some other disabled veteran could get that for $10,000. But this man could not feasibly use that house, and he might have to pay $20,000 for equally comfortable facilities. That seemed to have been the philosophy of the original proposal. But, as I say, that broad wheelchair coverage was modified by the bill as it passed the House, and the Veterans' Administration has no recommendations to make with respect to that matter.

Mr. MONRONEY. If it were broadened to include all wheel-chair cases, how many would it add to these 2,400 cases that you mentioned?

Mr. BLAND. We have been unable to make any estimate on that for the reason that we do not keep our assembled statistics on that basis. We do have assembled statistics on our special rate cases. In other words, special rates are provided for the loss of the use of a leg, for the loss of the use of two feet, for blindness, and so on. We have information on that, but not definite information on the wheel-chair group as such or the paraplegia group.

Mr. MONRONEY. It is possible under modern techniques of training sometimes for double amputees to be able to live outside of a wheel chair, by the use of artificial limbs?

Mr. BLAND. I understand that is correct, depending upon the location of the amputation, and whether he can be fitted with the necessary appliances.

Mr. NICHOLSON. Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Nicholson.

Mr. NICHOLSON. We do not need to have this title VIII in this bill at all, do we? It is already taken care of, is is not?

Mr. BLAND. Well, it has not been finally enacted, sir.

Mr. NICHOLSON. If it were taken care of, we would not need it in this bill at all, would we?

Mr. BLAND. If it were enacted in the other form, no, because that is identical with title VIII of S. 866. That bill has been passed by one House only.

Mr. NICHOLSON. You do not know how this got into this bill, do you? Mr. BLAND. I do not, except from hearsay, sir. I think that it was one of Senator McCarthy's amendments to the bill. Senator McCarthy, I know, was an active sponsor of the original bills providing this type of benefit.

Mr. NICHOLSON. That is all, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there further questions of Mr. Bland?

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Spence.

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Bland, I understand that there are about a million veterans who have received loans at 4 percent. What do you think would be the effect of increasing that rate to 412 percent?

Mr. BLAND. Mr. Congressman, again, I am here only on the housing for disabled veterans aspect of this bill, and Mr. Kelsey, the Assistant Administrator for Finance is here, and when the committee is ready to get to other phases of the bill, he will be glad to give you any information that he has.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the interest on these loans, Mr. Bland? Mr. BLAND. There would be no special loan in this case. The contribution of the Government here would be a contribution and not a loan. On the veteran's one-half, the cost that he would have to defray, he would be eligible for a Servicemen's Readjustment Act loan up to $4,000 guaranteed by the Government, and, of course, that is a 4-percent loan, as I understand it.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. BUCHANAN. The technical assistance would also be granted without cost, would it not, in the planning of these homes?

Mr. BLAND. There is a provision which would authorize the Government to furnish model plans and specifications. That would not be individual, for each housing unit. The Veterans' Administration would probably develop certain model plans and have them for the use and convenience of the veterans. That would be without cost to the veteran. I understand, Mr. Congressman, that the New York chapter of the American Institute of Architects has taken a very active interest in this matter and has developed, from time to time, certain model plans and specifications for what they consider to be the typical, suitable home for this type of case.

Mr. COLE. Have you given an estimate of the cost of this, including the administrative cost?

Mr. BLAND. No, Mr. Congressman. As I said a moment ago, we have been unable to give a precise estimate because we do not know exactly how many would qualify under the bill. I indicated a moment ago that it has been estimated that there were approximately 2.400 spinal cord cases growing out of World War II. How many of those would fit the disability described in this bill, we do not know precisely. There are very few which survived from World War I, and, of course, very few from the peacetime service.

Mr. COLE. Would this be applicable to World War I veterans? Mr. BLAND. It would be applicable, sir, to all veterans having the disability described, whether of the peacetime service or of the wartime service.

Mr. COLE. Even peacetime service?

Mr. BLAND. Yes. It is estimated that the cost of hospitalization of a paraplegia veteran is around $20 a day-substantially more than the cost of an ordinary patient.

Mr. COLE. You do not believe that this would eliminate the hospital patient, however?

Mr. BLAND. I was about to say, Mr. Congressman, that it would not entirely eliminate it. There would be some offsetting saving in cost, but that would not be complete, because our doctors tell us that all of these veterans who might be able to reside in special housing would have to have periodic hospital checkups, so that you would not have an entire offsetting of the hospital cost.

Mr. COLE. Do you know of any study which has been made by anyone which would indicate to us factually that this is feasible? That it would work? That veterans actually need it? That it would be something that they could use, practically? Or is it merely an idea tending towards giving them additional housing?

Mr. BLAND. The answer to that is speculative, because it has not been done on any extensive scale. There have been a few experimental projects. I think the doctors, both in and out of the Veterans' Administration, agree that this would certainly facilitate the use of a house by the wheelchair veterans.

Mr. COLE. Wider doors and ramps?

Mr. BLAND. Yes, bathroom facilities, and so on. It would certainly be a convenience to him.

Mr. COLE. It would be of some help, in other words?

Mr. BLAND. Yes, sir.

Mr. MONRONEY. It would have definite therapeutic value also, would it not? I know that in the hospitals they feel the more activity these veterans take part in, the better chances of recovery there are.