The first purpose of our defense planning remains the maintenance of a just, secure peace. If, however, unwanted war should come, it should find us ready with every resource at our command to repel and defeat the enemy. And, at home, we must have forces trained for every emergency should an aggressor be so criminally unwise as to attempt an atomic attack.

In seeking to attain these goals, we must remember that the active military forces are only the cutting edge of our Nation's full strength. A vigorous economy, a strong mobilization base and trained citizens are the invincible elements in our military striking power.

But we cannot possibly keep armed and in uniform the total forces that might ultimately be required in all-out war. The inescapable burdens would endanger the liberties and the economic system we are determined to defend.

On the other hand, in case of a global war, the Nation could not count on having time to marshal its strength while the enemy was engaged elsewhere. Unquestionably, the United States would be involved from the outset of such a conflict. We must be prepared.

The

The Defense Establishment, through the past 2 years, has concentrated_on effectiveness, economy, and efficiency within the active military forces. result is a formidable assurance to any aggressor that we would react to attack, instantly and powerfully.

In the same period, exhaustive studies have been made on manpower-the key to a proper military posture. The recommendations herewith submitted, dealing with both the active and the reserve forces. are based on them.

In summary, I recommend (1) that the present statutory provisions authorizing the induction of young men by the Selective Service System for 24 months of training and service, scheduled to expire July 1, 1955, be extended until July 1, 1959; (2) that the existing special statutory provisions authorizing the registration and induction of doctors and dentists, also scheduled to expire on July 1, 1955, be extended until July 1, 1957; and (3) that legislation be enacted by the Congress to permit the strengthening of the reserve forces to meet essential mobilization requirements.

The extension of selective service is necessary because experience demonstrates that active armed forces of the size we must maintain cannot be raised by voluntary enlistments alone. The maximum number of volunteers will continue to be the recruiting goal of the services. But realistic estimates set the probable ceiling on voluntary forces, in the present economic situation, at a million and a half-more than 1,300,000 men short of the planned strength goal for the end of the fiscal year 1956.

Active-force strengths are continually under review in the light of changing missions and technological improvement of weapons. A major purpose is economy in the use of men. But I see no reasonable prospect that the world situation or technological advances, in the next 4 years, will render the draft unnecessary. I earnestly recommend, consequently, that the extension be for 4 years. In the case of doctors and dentists I recommend that the extension be for another period of 2 years only. By that time it is expected that the medical personnel requirements of the Armed Forces can be met adequately by other means.

The term of service should be retained at the 24-month level established by the 82d Congress after weighing the military efficiency and dollar-cost arguments involved. Those arguments, whose soundness was proved in the experience of the 3 past years, are now compellingly persuasive that shortening the term of service would seriously damage the combat readiness of our active forces.

The present operation of selective service is recognized by the American people as an equitable and necessary solution to a national problem. The calm planning for a call, the unquestioning acceptance of it, the smooth adjustment to a new way of life, manifested by millions of our young men and their families, evidences the maturity of their attitude toward the problem of national security.

Under the new national Reserve plan, selective service and the Reserve forces, in conjunction with our Regular establishment, will fulfill our security needs with the least possible disruptive impact on the life of the individual citizen and the civilian economy. Flexibility is a primary characteristic of the plan. Constant scrutiny and review of its operation by the services will assure its increasing efficiency.

The Reserve program has been the subject of extensive study in the Congress, in various Government agencies, and in the military services themselves over long periods of time. As in our active forces, we will rely as heavily as possible on voluntary service. To further this purpose, recent surveys indicate that certain improvements can be accomplished within the services, without legisla

tion, and steps have been taken to remedy existing deficiencies. I shall follow this action personally with particular attention to training for combat missions.

In addition, however, there is need for certain changes in present laws relating to the Reserves. There are five principal areas where affirmative legislation is needed to provide the basis for a strengthened Reserve plan.

First, present law divides Reserve personnel into categories that do not lend themselves fully to strategic requirements. I recommend that this be altered so as to provide one group of reservists who can be organized into a force maintained in a high degree of readiness to meet immediate mobilization requirements, and a second nonorganized group with prior service who would be called into military service by a selective process, if the need for their services should develop in a general mobilization.

The first group should be kept ready through training, through the constant flow of new men into the group, and through the screening from the group of combat veterans and persons of essential civilian skills in excess of military requirements whenever possible. This makes provision for meeting the essential manpower needs of defense supporting activities as well as those of the Armed Forces. Both these needs must be met if we are to realize our maximum national strength in time of emergency.

Second, present legislation does not make adequate provision for bringing young men directly into the reserve forces without either adversely affecting the readiness of the active forces or reducing the capability of the active forces to recruit long-term volunteers.

At present, the Reserves are composed of older men who have completed their terms of active service. For example, less than 17 percent of the men now in the Army Reserves are under 24 years of age. I recommend that legislation be adopted by which physically fit young men between the ages of 17 and 19 may volunteer for 6-months' basic training, to be followed by Active Reserve participation for a period of 91⁄2 years.

During the 6-month period of training, these young men would receive pay at the reduced rate of $30 a month. The total numbers accepted in the basic-type training should be subject to quotas, fixed by the President, to avoid bringing the manpower pool down to an undesirably low level; on the other hand, if an adequate number do not volunteer for this program, authority should be given to induct the needed young men through the Selective Service System. Men so selected would be between the ages 182 and 19.

The 6-month-training program should be authorized for a term of 4 years, covering the same period as the requested extension of the draft. In connection with this program, the National Security Training Commission should serve in an advisory capacity to the Secretary of Defense and to the President as Commander in Chief.

Third, under present legislation, there is no assurance that the National Guard which by law is in the first line of defense and dependent on voluntary enlistments, receives an adequate supply of young men with appropriate basic training. Young men who enlist in the National Guard receive no concentrated initial training of the type provided by the active services. I recommend that legislation be enacted by which the men enlisting in tne National Guard receive basic training in the active services. There must be further assurance that the National Guard contain a hard core of men who have been schooled in leadership and technical military skills through longer periods of active training and service.

Primary emphasis on voluntary recruitment of personnel for the National Guard should continue. However, subject to constitutional limitations, the legislation should provide that in the event of failure to recruit the necessary numbers and quality of volunteer personnel, and at the request or approval of the governor of a State, personnel completing training or service in the active forces may be assigned to the National Guard for their obligated period of reserve participation. Fourth, I recommend that legislation be adopted to induce participation in reserve training by providing that men who have served less than 2 years may be recalled to active duty in order to maintain or restore proficiencies.

It is also contemplated that reservists who fail or refuse to participate in the Reserve training that may be required of them and choose not to restore lost proficiencies, will be given other than an honorable discharge at the end of their period of military obligation. Such action, which will be taken in accordance with existing statutory authority and procedures, is based upon the concept that honorable military service includes complete fulfillment of all service obligations, Reserve as well as active. I ask that the Congress reaffirm this concept which is already contained in the law.

Fifth, existing law does not permit States to maintain troops in addition to the National Guard. In view of the fact that the potential enemy possesses weapons of mass destruction and means for their delivery, it is a matter of urgent importance that there be no break between the time that National Guard units might be called into Federal service and the time that the States could raise additional forces to replace them. I therefore recommend that the Congress enact legislation which would permit the States to raise and maintain in time of peace organized militia forces which would take over the National Guard's domestic missions and support civil defense activities upon its withdrawal.

These five remedies are suggested as amendments to our existing legislative pattern, which is an essentially sound one. Through these amendments, certain broad objectives can be attained. To begin with, we will give each young man the maximum possible right of self-determination by offering him a choice of methods of meeting his military obligation. At the threshhold of his career he will understand his obligations, so that he can make definite plans for his future. In addition, a more equitable sharing of the military obligations will be accomplished. The program will go far toward assuring combat veterans that they will not be called in an emergency until younger men who have not had combat duty are called, thus alleviating an inequity made apparent during the Korean conflict. In sum, the program will constitute a substantial improvement in our present defense arrangements. It will make our determination evident to every would-be aggressor.

I believe that, under today's conditions, steps generally as outlined above represent the best available approach to the problem of military security. I earnestly urge that Congress promptly initiate its studies of the detailed measures necessary and that legislation incorporating the principles of the program be enacted.

THE WHITE HOUSE, January 13, 1955.

DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER.

The President's recommendations were embodied in three bills which were introduced at the beginning of the 84th Congress: H. R. 3005 to extend the induction authority of Selective Service for 4 years; H. R. 6057 to extend the draft of doctors and dentists for 2 years; and H. R. 2967 to provide for the National Reserve Plan. These measures, together with the Military Career Incentive Act of 1955, were considered to be interrelated parts of a military manpower policy that would promote the national defense. H. R. 2967, the administration bill, was changed by the House Armed Services Committee so that the Reserve Forces legislation first came before the House as H. R. 5297. Another version, H. R. 6900, was later introduced but after further committee consideration, a new bill was written, H. R. 7000. After amendment both by the House and Senate, this bill was destined to become the Reserve Forces Act of 1955, enacted on August 9, 1955 (Public Law 305, 84th Cong.)

III. BASIC LAWS AS OF JANUARY 1955

One characteristic the Reserve bills had in common was that they were in the form of amendments to basic laws rather than completely new legislative proposals. Before describing the history of the legislative process that resulted in new amendments, it is necessary, therefore, to give the main provisions of the two major laws on military manpower that were passed by the 82d Congress: (A) the Universal Military Training and Service Act (65 Stat. 75); and (B) the Armed Forces Reserve Act of 1952 (66 Stat. 481). In addition, it is necessary to mention (C) the National Defense Act of 1916, as amended (39 Stat. 166), because the original bill which proposed the national Reserve plan, H. R. 2967, called for the amendment of certain provisions of that act.

A. The Universal Military Training and Service Act (65 Stat. 75), which amended the Selective Service Act of 1948, was enacted on June 19, 1951. Passed during the Korean war, the purpose of this act was

first to raise immediately the manpower necessary to build and maintain an armed force of the size determined by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to be our minimum security requirement, and, secondly, to provide for the maintenance of an adequate force of trained Reserves for the future security of the United States.2

In brief, the act provides that every man between 18 and 26 years of age shall register for military service; that those between 181⁄2 and 26 years shall be liable for training and service in the Armed Forces; that they must meet minimum standards of physical and mental fitness; that each man shall be given full and adequate military training for no less than 4 months; and that no man shall be assigned to duty outside the United States, its Territories, and possessions, until he has had the equivalent of at least 4 months of basic training.

Furthermore, the law provides with regard to periods of service that everyone inducted, enlisted, or appointed in the Armed Forces (or the proposed National Security Training Corps), prior to his becoming 26 years of age, shall be required to serve on active training and service and in a Reserve component for a total period of 8 yearsunless sooner discharged because of personal hardship. Each man inducted since June 19, 1951, is required to serve for 24 months in the Armed Forces, and upon his discharge, for 6 years in a Reserve component.

No person is to be inducted for training and service in the Armed Forces after July 1, 1955, except certain deferred persons whose liability continues after this date.

All men who are physically and mentally qualified are, upon their release from active training and service in the Armed Forces, transferred to one of the Reserve components of the Armed Forces. Unless there is personal hardship, it is the duty of the person, "to enlist, enroll, or accept appointment in, or accept assignment to [an] organized unit or officers' training program and to serve satisfactorily therein."

The Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force (and the Secretary of the Treasury with respect to the Coast Guard) may provide that persons who volunteer for and are accepted into organized units of the National Guard and the Air National Guard and other Reserve components may be released from training and service in the Armed Forces before they have served 24 months. Any such reservist, however, may be called to active duty.

The law provides that if the National Security Training Corps program is started, the trainees who serve for 6 months shall be obligated thereafter to serve in a Reserve component for 7 years. The proposal for a National Security Training Corps, designed to insure the flow of trainees instead of prior servicemen into the Reserve Forces, failed of passage when it was considered by the Eighty-second Congress, second session (H. R. 5904 and S. 2441).

Under the present statute, deferments may be authorized by the President for persons in any category of industry, agriculture, or other occupation or employment, or whose continued service in an office

U. S. Senate Armed Services Committee. S. Rept. No. 117, 82d Cong., 1st sess., p. 1.

under the United States or any State, Territory, or possession or the District of Columbia, or whose activity in study, research, medical, dental, scientific, and some additional endeavors is found to be "necessary to the maintenance of the national health, safety, or interest ***" The President cannot, however, defer all persons in any particular category; deferments must be made on the basis of individual status. Even so, a person who has been deferred for any reason remains liable for induction until he is 35 years old.

Deferments are also made for other persons, such as those with dependents, those who are deficient or defective, high-school students until the time of their graduation, and college students who may be deferred until the end of an academic year or until they cease to pursue their studies in a satisfactory manner. Young men who join National Guard units before they are 18 years old may also be deferred as long as they participate in training. Deferment is also extended to those in officer-training programs such as the senior division of the Reserve Officers Training Corps.

Exemptions from induction apply to members of certain specialized groups, among which are members of the Armed Forces who are on active duty, cadets and midshipmen of the various service academies, students enrolled in officer procurement programs at military colleges, reservists while on active duty, foreign diplomatic representatives, ministers and students of the ministry, and sole surviving sons. Certain members of organized National Guard units are also exempt from induction.

In summary, our Active Forces are built up by volunteers and by men who are inducted through the Selective Service System. Whether inducted, enlisted, or appointed in the Armed Forces, however, each man has a total military obligation of 8 years, including active duty and service in a Reserve component. Upon completion of active duty, servicemen are automatically transferred to one of the Armed Forces Reserve components if they are physically and mentally qualified. Failure to implement the Universal Military Training and Service Act by establishing some type of National Security Training Corps resulted in the Reserve components being automatically built up by men who had already seen active service. Many of these prior servicemen had been in combat in Korea. Meanwhile, those who were not inducted for active service, or did not enlist, had no Reserve obligation.

The legal provisions governing service in Reserve components are largely to be found in the Armed Forces Reserve Act of 1952.

B. Armed Forces Reserve Act (66 Stat. 481).-The purpose of Public Law 476 (82d Cong.), approved on July 9, 1952, is to provide trained units and qualified individuals who can be called to active duty in time of war or during a national emergency declared by the Congress or proclaimed by the President, or when otherwise authorized by law. The Reserve Forces are to augment the Regular Forces when additional trained men are required for the defense of the Nation. The act codifies many existing statutes which relate to Reserves, and provides various benefits and equalization measures for reservists.

Each of the Armed Forces is to maintain a Ready Reserve, a Standby Reserve, and a Retired Reserve. The aggregate personnel strength of the Ready Reserve is limited to 1,500,000 persons. Individuals may serve in 1 of 7 components: