There is a tremendous need for counseling of young veterans with severe disabilities in order that they learn their potential and are motivated toward achieving that level. Jobs must be made available. This is not to say jobs should be created for the disabled veteran, only that they should be available for qualified individuals without prejudice to their disability. The Government itself is the most qualified and has the most to gain from employing disabled veterans. Yet the sad truth is that the Government seems to have lost interest in the creative capabilities of its veterans, once they have served their purpose as soldiers. This is intolerable, both from the standpoint of the indignation suffered by the veteran and the valuable waste of human resource. We must instigate a program of career opportunities which provides the disabled veteran the chance to retain his personal dignity, satisfy his vocational ambitions, and earn an equitable income. The restoration of a human being back into society after the ravages of war must be of an equal priority as national defense. For what is there to defend if those who must suffer the brunt of battle are discarded afterwards or receive only minimal survival care?

It is all very simple and as plain as the noses on our faces; it is time to do something for the veteran besides talk. I repeat; let us do something for the veteran and not to him. The Vietnam war has cost this Nation $130 billion, nearly 50,000 dead, 300,000 wounded, and at least 2,500 of these are suffering from some type of spinal injury.

With the proposal of $10 billion more to reconstruct Vietnam, whatever possesses those who make these proposals that veterans should suffer even further-that VA hospital bed space should be cut to 80,000 for fiscal year 1974 and that nonservice-connected pensions should be reduced because of social security increases and other pension plans. It has been further proposed to include wives' income in the computation of veterans' income for veterans' pension, sinking him to a lower poverty level of living.

It appears that there is an insidious move to place the nonserviceconnected veteran on welfare. If and when he is relegated to that level, the veteran will have lost any remaining self-respect.

Even though the President has rescinded the recomputation of the disability rating scale, there exists the real possibility that entitled benefits and programs are in jeopardy. How can this be tolerated?

With all due respect, I just wonder what would happen if a POW was discharged or was retired tomorrow and in 6 months he had the misfortune of becoming catastrophically disabled. What benefits would he and/or his dependents be entitled to as a nonservice-connected veteran?

You should know that the service-connected paraplegic veteran is concerned for the nonservice-connected paraplegic veteran, indicative of our testimony here today. Yes, the paralyzed veterans of America is highly concerned.

Gentlemen, I leave you with the definition of a paraplegic and the purpose of our organization: A paraplegic is an individual. The Paralyzed Veterans of America is an organization formed by and for the most seriously disabled in the world. It is devoting its life and effort to every problem of each paraplegic regardless of race, creed or color.

Mr. Chairman, honored members of the committee; we wish to thank you, as we are appreciative of your time, your patient concern, and the privilege to appear before you. It is our belief that this auspicious body will act upon the matter presented today and bring about corrective measures for fair and equitable legislation. Once again, thank you.

Chairman DORN. Thank you, Mr. DeGeorge, for your very fine statement. I think it is excellent, too.

Mrs. Grasso?

Mrs. GRASSO. Thank you very much for your statement and for the information you have given to us. One of the matters that has been of very great concern to me is information that I heard last year that it appears a number of our veterans who are paralyzed find that they cannot live in the United States, the country which they served so honorably and for which they have such great admiration and respect. They must go abroad, some of them to Mexico, in order to find the kind of housing and care that they need within the limits of their

resources.

I wonder if you could give us some information as to how many such veterans we do have and what the problems are, if possible?

Mr. DEGEORGE. Thank you, Mrs. Grasso, for that question. Yes, I think I can give you some information. I believe, if I am correct, I think there are approximately 300 spinal cord injured veterans living in Mexico alone. I am certain, as I speak for our organization, we, too, are concerned over this matter, and we would point directly to the cost of living and the type of income that these veterans have who are residing outside the continental United States and what they have received has caused them to live outside of this country.

Mrs. GRASSO. There is one more thing I would like to say. I join with you in saying that each of these persons is an individual. I think that in our society when we start thinking more of people as individuals and less as members of groups, we will be making greater contributions to their real sense of self-dignity and self-respect.

The question of training and job opportunities, therefore, comes to the foreground and I was wondering if you could make some other recommendations as to how we could be of greater assistance in improving the opportunities in this area.

Mr. DEGEORGE. Mrs. Grasso, it would be my pleasure to have Mr. Maye, our executive director, expound on this matter. He has a vocational rehabilitation background as a counselor and he is very involved with our organization in this area. Mr. Maye?

Mr. MAYE. Yes, m'am. The rehabilitation of a veteran, as far as the Veterans' Administration is concerned, is primarily that of a medical aspect. He is brought into the hospital. He is treated for his disability to the point he is able to leave the hospital or in some instances he cannot leave. They alleviate his medical problems as much as possible, but the sociopsychological aspect of his rehabilitation is left pretty much to himself.

He is left to his own devices, any means he can utilize. The provisions of education are those that he asks for really. There is no provision for counseling to any great degree applied to the veteran today

in the hospital. Once he is stabilized and leaves the hospital, then he goes his own way.

He needs to be in a situation of professional counselors, rehabilitation counselors, people who are knowledgeable in the field of vocation, people who can help this individual reach his full potential in work or an avocation if he cannot follow a vocation. It isn't being done.

The reason for it, I am not really sure. There doesn't seem to be any logical explanation for why not. These people are individuals who can be employed. They can go back to work but apparently apathy has set in from the Veterans' Administration in saying, "This man is disabled. He will receive a pension or compensation. So let's let it go at that." As far as any specific questions you might ask, I will try and answer them.

Mrs. GRASSO. I thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It has been a privilege to listen to you today, Mr. DeGeorge. Mr. DEGEORGE. Thank you, Mrs. Grasso.

Chairman DORN. Thank you, Mrs. Grasso.
Mr. Wylie?

Mr. WYLIE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. DeGeorge, for taking of your time and appearing before this committee, and for your very meaningful presentation and contribution. I know you have spent considerable time getting it together because it is thoughtful. I am one of those who feels that the paraplegic has given far beyond what anyone would ask and I for one feel that we should do as much as we can to support your activities and to have active participatory help coming your way. We want to do whatever is necessary. I feel that very strongly. I would like to refer, if I may, to your statement on page 5.

You suggest that veterans who have nonservice-connected paralyzing disabilities should be admitted to veterans hospitals. I think there is a statement that expands it even more to say that if they are once veterans who become discharged and become disabled, they should have the benefits of the veterans program. Did I read vou correctly? Mr. DEGEORGE. If I understand your question correctly, Mr. Wylie, I think the answer is "Yes."

We are not suggesting that it be on the same terms as the serviceconnected veteran.

Mr. WYLIE. I think we might have to establish some guidelines. I am not certain the Veterans' Administration is presently equipped to handle all of the spinal cord injuries which occur every day to persons other than veterans and this is the thrust of my question I see in the report from the Veterans' Administration that they say the rate of admission of patients with spinal cord injuries to centers increased to a marked degree, to wit, 11 percent during fiscal year 1972. This trend is expected to continue due mainly to the admission of patients with nonmilitary accidents. So evidently, the Veterans' Administration is admitting some persons at the present time to these centers. who do not have service-connected disabilities.

Mr. DEGEORGE. Yes, sir, they are.

I would hope that our organization would not leave the impression that we feel they are not admitting nonservice-connected veterans when they are in fact.

Mr. WYLIE. All right. I was a little bit confused there. What is the relationship and I have asked this of several people and I don't know why I can't get the answer-but what is the relationship between the Veterans' Administration to administer vocational rehabilitation programs and the vocational rehabilitation program as administered by Health, Education, and Welfare?

Mr. DEGEORGE. Once again, I think I would like to turn that over to Mr. Maye, if you would permit me but before I do, could I back up just a minute to your last question?

Mr. WYLIE. Yes, sir.

Mr. DEGEORGE. Peacetime nonservice-connected veterans are also entitled to come into the VA system and I would just like to make that point explicit that we also realize that.

Mr. MAYE. The rehabilitation system varies between the VA and the State. Vocational rehabilitation under HEW, HEW and the States work on a combined system, matching funds. Presently I think it is 80-20 matching funds, 80 percent from the Federal Government, 20 percent from the States.

The eligibility for vocational rehabilitation with the State is any individual 15 years of age or older with three criteria. First of all, that he has a disability and that disability constitutes a handicap and that he has some reasonable expectation for success and that he will be employable after the completion of the rehabilitation process. The individual undergoes State rehabilitation which is a comprehensive program. They have individuals trained as vocational counselors and I would say a vocational counselor differs from that of the personnel employed by the VA.

The VA employs psychologists. They also employ vocational training officers and their function really is completely different. A vocational training officer will help an individual with a specific area of training and psychologists can sit down and test that individual and say, "All right, your potential lies here according to paper tests, according to your interest, and so forth."

But a vocational counselor is an individual who takes the disabled person through this process from the time he enters the hospital. His disability is diagnosed. He will carry this individual, work along with the physicians and then he works with those involved in specific training education, whether it be formal or technical training. Then he goes into the employment situation with the individual helping him to solve his problems of employment, the everyday routine, the adjustment to his disability, the financial aspects, in other words, seeing that it is gainful employment.

Mr. WYLIE. Does the vocational rehabilitation division of HEW provide moneys to veterans hospitals? Is that what you are saying? Mr. MAYE. No, sir; they do not.

Mr. WYLIE. I didn't think so. Do they provide personnel for veterans hospitals?

Mr. MAYE. No, sir; not as such. They may have an individual working in a veterans hospital who functions to pick up referrals, in other words, nonservice-connected veterans who are not eligible for rehabilitation services through the VA. I refer to DVR.

Mr. WYLIE. Do you think we ought to have-and I am asking this without any implication intended-do you think we ought to have

better coordination between these two facilities? Apparently, this is one of those situations that I found where the left hand doesn't really know what the right hand is doing. Is that a fair statement or not?

Mr. MAYE. Yes, sir; I think it is a very fair statement and I think in the case of the nonservice-connected; yes, it would be advantageous for the veteran himself to have a coordinated program between the two and I feel that the nonservice-connected veteran is being left out. He is eligible for DVR but generally he is not being referred to the State department of vocational rehabilitation and is not eligible for veterans' vocational rehabilitation.

Mr. WYLIE. Last year we appropriated about $2 million for the vocational rehabilitation program in HEW and I see that in those terms, the program for the veterans is very modest and though the appropriation for this year is increased considerably, $543,000, in terms of the overall budget it is a very small percentage. Would you like to comment on that?

Mr. MAYE. Yes, sir, I would like to. You have got a lot of young men who are going to school, receiving educational benefits or taking correspondence courses, receiving educational benefits and they are doing this without any guidance at all. They may be taking courses or be involved in educational programs that will not benefit them at all when they finish that. In other words, the only gain that they make is the financial gain they may get for going to school. That is really a very poor motivating factor to go to school, for a person to seek any type of training.

Mr. WYLIE. I agree with you.

Mr. MAYE. I think it is money wasted. I mean that. Don't get me wrong. Don't cut the moneys off.

Mr. WYLIE. What you are saying is it could be utilized better.
Mr. MAYE. Far more; yes, sir.

Mr. WYLIE. That is the place where I am coming out too, I think. I don't think it should be reduced but I think we can be using it more efficiently.

Mr. MAYE. Yes, sir.

Mr. WYLIE. President DeGeorge, just one more question and I will turn you back to the chairman. You have suggested that the paraplegic veteran or the veteran with a spinal cord injury be allowed to make more outside income before his benefits are reduced. I can't find it in your statement but I think I remember your saying that. Did you?

Mr. DEGEORCE. Yes, sir; I did. Our organization recommends that; yes, sir.

Mr. WYLIE. How much more in outside income should you be able to earn?

Again, I would like to know the answer. There is no implication intended except to find out what your recommendation might be.

Mr. DEGEORGE. I have many things to say and I am going to call on our service director, Mr. Alan Langer, to let him answer, if you permit me, sir.

Mr. LANGER. Mr. Wylie, we feel a non-service-connected veteran with a spinal cord injury would need somewhere in the area of $9,000 a year to live at an equitable level as a member of the community. What we have proposed is a program that would allow him to earn