[House Hearing, 111 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON
H.R. 1522, H.R. 1982, AND H.R. 2270
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISABILITY ASSISTANCE
AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS
of the
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 21, 2009
__________
Serial No. 111-23
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs
----------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
49-921 PDF WASHINGTON : 2009
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
BOB FILNER, California, Chairman
CORRINE BROWN, Florida STEVE BUYER, Indiana, Ranking
VIC SNYDER, Arkansas CLIFF STEARNS, Florida
MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine JERRY MORAN, Kansas
STEPHANIE HERSETH SANDLIN, South HENRY E. BROWN, Jr., South
Dakota Carolina
HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona JEFF MILLER, Florida
JOHN J. HALL, New York JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
DEBORAH L. HALVORSON, Illinois BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
THOMAS S.P. PERRIELLO, Virginia DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado
HARRY TEAGUE, New Mexico GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas VERN BUCHANAN, Florida
JOE DONNELLY, Indiana DAVID P. ROE, Tennessee
JERRY McNERNEY, California
ZACHARY T. SPACE, Ohio
TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
JOHN H. ADLER, New Jersey
ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
GLENN C. NYE, Virginia
Malcom A. Shorter, Staff Director
______
Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs
JOHN J. HALL, New York, Chairman
DEBORAH L. HALVORSON, Illinois DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado, Ranking
JOE DONNELLY, Indiana JEFF MILLER, Florida
CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House, public
hearing records of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs are also
published in electronic form. The printed hearing record remains the
official version. Because electronic submissions are used to prepare
both printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process
of converting between various electronic formats may introduce
unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the
current publication process and should diminish as the process is
further refined.
C O N T E N T S
__________
May 21, 2009
Page
Legislative Hearing on H.R. 1522, H.R. 1982, and H.R. 2270....... 1
OPENING STATEMENTS
Chairman John J. Hall............................................ 1
Prepared statement of Chairman Hall.......................... 20
Hon. Doug Lamborn, Ranking Republican Member, prepared statement
of............................................................. 20
Hon. Ann Kirkpatrick............................................. 7
WITNESSES
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Bradley G. Mayes, Director,
Compensation and Pension Service, Veterans Benefits
Administration................................................. 13
Prepared statement of Mr. Mayes.............................. 27
______
American Volunteer Group (Flying Tigers), Major Ed Stiles, Sr.,
USAFR (Ret.), Poland, OH....................................... 9
Prepared statement of Major Stiles........................... 27
Kakos, Anne R. (Mandzak), Yonkers, NY, presenting statement of
Elizabeth Yeznach, Galesferry, CT.............................. 4
Prepared statement of Ms. Yeznach............................ 22
Kilpatrick, Hon. Carolyn C., a Representative in Congress from
the State of Michigan.......................................... 6
Prepared statement of Congresswoman Kilpatrick............... 25
Lowey, Hon. Nita M., a Representative in Congress from the State
of New York.................................................... 2
Prepared statement of Congresswoman Lowey.................... 21
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, statement.. 29
Buyer, Hon. Steve, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Indiana, statement............................................. 29
Disabled American Veterans, John L. Wilson, Associate National
Legislative Director........................................... 30
MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
Hon. Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs, to Hon. Bob Filner, Chairman, Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, letter dated August 5, 2009, transmitting
Administration Views for H.R. 2270 and Cost Estimate for H.R.
1522........................................................... 32
LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON
H.R. 1522, H.R. 1982, AND H.R. 2270
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 21, 2009
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
Subcommittee on Disability Assistance
and Memorial Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:10 a.m., in
Room 334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. John J. Hall
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Hall, Donnelly, Kirkpatrick, and
Lamborn.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN HALL
Mr. Hall. The Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs
Subcommittee's legislative hearing on H.R. 1522, H.R. 1982, and
H.R. 2270 will now come to order.
Would you please join me in rising for the Pledge of
Allegiance. There are flags at both ends of the room.
[Pledge of Allegiance.]
Mr. Hall. I apologize for being late. As Congresswoman
Lowey knows, we had a bit of news in our districts. This is
news to all of us, but it affects our districts, mine in
particular, regarding Stewart Airport security issues.
Mr. Lamborn, I am sorry. I will recognize you for a minute.
Mr. Lamborn. Yeah. Thank you.
I will be back as quickly as I can. An unavoidable thing
has come up with me, but I do want to hear as much of the
testimony from the two Members and the other distinguished
witnesses, so I will be back as quickly as possible. Thank you.
Mr. Hall. Okay. Thank you, Ranking Member Lamborn.
Congresswoman Lowey, I understand you also have to leave
soon. Today, we are considering and hearing testimony on three
bills, H.R. 1522, H.R. 1982, and H.R. 2270, that were recently
referred to this Committee.
The first bill we will discuss is ``The United States Cadet
Nurse Corps Equity Act'' or H.R. 1522 introduced by
Representative Nita Lowey. If enacted, it would grant veteran
status to the members of the United States Nurse Cadet Corps of
World War II, thereby making them eligible for benefits and
services administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
I commend Congresswoman Lowey for her 13-year commitment to
these nurses and I welcome her and Cadet Nurse Elizabeth
Yeznach. Is that correct?
Mrs. Lowey. Elizabeth Yeznach took a slip on the wax floor
outside, so we will submit her statement for the record. Anne
Kakos from Yonkers, another constituent, will speak in her
place.
Mr. Hall. Ann, welcome. I trust that Elizabeth is receiving
prompt----
Mrs. Lowey. Immediately.
Mr. Hall [continuing]. Capable care and I hope that she
recovers from her fall. In order to move along, I will save the
rest of my statement on the other two bills. Okay. Since
Representative Carolyn Kilpatrick also has to leave, we will
talk just briefly about that second bill on the agenda.
Let me just elucidate that this bill, H.R. 1982, the
``Veterans Entitlement to Service (VETS) Act of 2009,''
sponsored by Representative Carolyn Kilpatrick directs VA to
acknowledge receipt of medical disability and pension claims
and other communications submitted by veterans within 60 days.
As many of you recall, this Subcommittee, jointly with the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, conducted an
investigatory hearing on thousands of pieces of mail which were
found unprocessed at Regional Offices (ROs) during mail amnesty
periods in 2007.
We continue to keep an eye on this serious problem and
other claims processing irregularities that have plagued the VA
over the last 2 years. I am looking forward to hearing how this
bill will improve upon the Veterans Claims Assistance Act or
VCAA requirements that are already codified in statute and in
the procedural instructions outlined in VA's regulations.
I thank Congresswoman Kilpatrick for her activism in this
area and look forward to her testimony.
I will save my comments on H.R. 2270 until after this panel
has spoken in the interest of time.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Hall appears on p. 20.]
Mr. Hall. Your full statement is entered in the record. Our
colleague and friend, Congresswoman Nita Lowey, you are now
recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENTS OF HON. NITA M. LOWEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK; ACCOMPANIED BY ANNE R. (MANDZAK)
KAKOS, YONKERS, NY, PRESENTING STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH YEZNACH,
GALESFERRY, CT (WORLD WAR II CADET NURSE); AND HON. CAROLYN C.
KILPATRICK, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF
MICHIGAN
STATEMENT OF HON. NITA M. LOWEY
Mrs. Lowey. Well, I thank the Chairman. And I am truly
honored to be before your Subcommittee.
You have been an extraordinary Chairman. And in the short
time that you have taken leadership, you have done so much to
improve life for our veterans. And I want you to know that all
of us are aware of your incredible accomplishments and I am
very, very appreciative.
And I thank the Committee for holding the first hearing on
the ``United States Cadet Nurse Corps Equity Act'' today. I
offered this legislation in 1996 to recognize and honor the
service of women who served with distinction in the Cadet Nurse
Corps.
Sixty-six years after the end of World War II, recognition
parallel to their great sacrifice and commitment has not been
given to the cadet nurses. At a time when our country has been
called to serve by our new Administration, it is fitting to
adequately express our gratitude to those who have served our
country during one of the most challenging eras.
With few opportunities to serve in the military, many young
women joined the U.S. Cadet Nurse Corps during World War II to
fill the domestic nursing shortage in our country. H.R. 1522
will ensure that the many women who served our country the best
way they could receive the acknowledgment of veteran status
that they deserve.
Other women's groups who served in World War II have
rightfully been granted veteran status and benefits. Despite
the historic and patriotic contributions, the women of the U.S.
Cadet Nurse Corps have been forgotten.
The legacy of the Cadet Nurse Corps is manifold, felt by
all Americans, but understood by few. Many cadet nurses were
deployed to Army, Navy, public health facilities, and Indian
Health Agencies during their senior cadet services.
As a result, World War II military veterans came home to a
strong health care system and were provided critical care by
cadet nurses. In order to properly recognize their patriotism,
the cadets should be designated as veterans.
Three dedicated patriots who served in the Cadet Nurse
Corps are here today. My constituent, Anne Kakos, from Yonkers,
New York, served as a cadet nurse from 1943 to 1946. Caroline
Bradford of Mechanicsville, Maryland, served as a cadet nurse
from 1943 to 1946. And both their stories in addition to others
have been submitted for the record. And certainly we have Anne
Kakos here who is going to say a few words.
And would Caroline Bradford please stand up. Thank you for
joining us today.
Let me say this. I am very disappointed that Elizabeth
Yeznach, whose statement will be entered in the record, had a
fall, as I mentioned, as she walked down the hall right
outside. After looking forward to this day, unfortunately the
doctors prevailed and she could not testify.
But Anne Kakos, as I mentioned, from Yonkers, New York,
will say a few words. And we appreciate your coming here today.
Anne Kakos.
[The prepared statement of Congresswoman Lowey appears on
p. 21.]
Ms. Kakos. Thank you.
Mr. Hall. Please push the button on your microphone. There
you go. Welcome, Ms. Kakos.
STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH YEZNACH, GALESFERRY, CT, AS PRESENTED BY
ANNE R. (MANDZAK) KAKOS
Ms. Kakos. Good morning. I am reading this statement. And I
am privileged to talk on behalf of us and I appreciate that we
are here and we are being heard. And as Congresswoman Lowey
says, this is the first time we have been heard and it is a
wonderful feeling.
I am going to read it, but I am going to insert my name. My
name is Elizabeth Yeznach, but Anne Kakos is speaking for her
in this hearing.
I am here on behalf of the 180,000 women of all races and
ethnicities who served our country during World War II as
members of the United States Cadet Nurse Corps. I myself served
as a cadet nurse from 1943 to 1946 at St. Francis Hospital in
Hartford, Connecticut.
First, I would like to extend a heartfelt thank you to
Congresswoman Nita Lowey for consistently introducing the
``United States Cadet Nurse Equity Act'' through the years. You
kept our hopes alive that some day the Cadet Nurse Corps would
be recognized as veterans.
This hearing brings us one step closer and I am grateful to
the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs
for holding this hearing.
I would also like to thank all of the other Congresspersons
who cosponsored this legislation year after year, including the
Chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Bob Filner.
During World War II, our Nation faced a desperate shortage
of nurses on the home front and a decline in nursing school
enrollment ensued during that time.
Nurses who enrolled in the military left a dearth of nurses
in civilian facilities and as the war continued, the shortage
of nurses became acute both at home and overseas.
The Federal Government established the United States Cadet
Nurse Corps in 1943 to recruit young women, teenagers mostly,
to become nurses, 180,000 of whom provided 80 percent of the
nursing care in our country during this war.
The United States Cadet Nurse Corps offered an innovative
solution to the pressing shortage of nurses during World War
II. Without us, our domestic health care system could have
collapsed and resulted in a sick and demoralized Nation.
We were deployed to the Army, the Navy, the public health
facilities, the Indian Health Agency, the veterans hospitals.
We abided by all the rules that were applicable to the
military, such as wearing uniforms, and we were required to
pledge 36 months of service and until the end of hostilities.
Yet, our contributions and commitments during a tense time in
our country's history remains virtually unknown.
We, the cadet nurses, worked tirelessly to care for sick
civilians and injured troops. We were exposed to infectious
diseases and deaths, worked 12-hour shifts 6\1/2\ days a week,
and cared for as many as 50 patients simultaneously.
During this time, we had a very bad situation, which we
call the polio era and very deadly situations and paralysis
ensued.
As a cadet nurse and student at that time, I remember the
stress of providing--I am speaking for Elizabeth--providing
emotional and physical support to multiple patients and other
families who faced major trauma and tragic events.
For example, the Hartford Barnum and Bailey Circus fire of
1944. Cadet nurses were charged with providing complex care and
attention to the many injured while they endured painful and
prolonged treatments.
During my time as a cadet nurse, I gained strong clinical
experiences and skills in providing complete care both
physically and emotionally in challenging settings. That goes
for all of us because we had many challenging situations.
And in my case as Anne Kakos, we had troops coming through
our area in trains and many times, they were taken off the
trains and brought to our hospitals.
Other women in World War II military services, the Women's
Army Corps, the Women Accepted for Voluntary Emergency
Services, and the Women Air Force Service Pilots have
rightfully been granted veteran status and benefits.
Despite our historical and patriotic contributions, we, the
women of the United States Cadet Nurse Corps, are consistently
dismissed and forgotten. We are not seeking special
recognition, just equal recognition.
Many former cadet nurses have already passed away and,
unfortunately, I do not know how many remain. What I do know is
that we are passing on at the same rate as those of that
generation with all former cadet nurses now in their 80s,
octogenarians.
Passing the legislation is more important now than ever
before as 66 years have passed since the inception of the
United States Cadet Nurse Corps, introduced as Public Law 74 by
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, was founded and our
service remains unrecognized.
We came forward to help our country through a difficult
time and we are proud and patriotic to know that as a part of
our uniformed service, we contributed to America's victory in
World War II. We believe that. Therefore, after all the
commitments and contributions, if we are not veterans, can you
tell us what are we?
Thank you. And, again, I appreciate you hearing us for the
first time. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Yeznach appears on p. 22.]
Mr. Hall. Thank you, Ms. Kakos and Congresswoman Lowey.
Mr. Donnelly, I believe, would like to make a brief
statement.
Mr. Donnelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I heard your comment to ``tell us what we are.'' You
are not only veterans, you are heroes. And our Nation is
grateful to you for your service.
My mother-in-law, Virginia Truitt, served in the WAVES and
it was one of the things that she was proudest of in her life.
And so the contributions you made and your fellow members
are what helped us to win this war and this war that saved our
country and the world. So we are in your debt. We are in your
gratitude and thank you very much for your service.
Mrs. Lowey. Thank you again.
Mr. Hall. Thank you, Mr. Donnelly.
I would echo that sentiment and say, first of all, thank
you and all of your colleagues. Our prayers are with Elizabeth
Yeznach and a speedy recovery from her injury to her wrist.
I think you told me that you have a time problem also so we
will send questions, if we have questions about the legislation
in writing to you, if that is acceptable.
Mrs. Lowey. Thank you very much, Chairman Hall, and thank
you to the Members of the Committee. We look forward to the
bill's passage and we appreciate your comments and your
thoughts.
We thank you, Anne Kakos, for coming here today. Thank you.
Ms. Kakos. You are welcome.
[Applause.]
Mrs. Lowey. And thank you for doing our job.
Mr. Hall. Congresswoman Kilpatrick, your statement is
entered in the record. We now recognize you for 5 minutes on
H.R. 1982.
STATEMENT OF HON. CAROLYN C. KILPATRICK
Ms. Kilpatrick. Thank you, Chairman Hall. And to Minority
Ranking Member Lamborn, who is absent, to the full
Subcommittee, thank you for holding the hearing.
My father is a Navy World War II veteran, so I stand here
in support of the nurses who served during that war and that
they might become full veterans and receive all the benefits
that veterans receive.
I come to you this morning introducing H.R. 1982, the
``Veterans Entitlement to Service Act.'' We call it ``The VETS
Act of 2009.'' And what it simply does is says that every
veteran that files a complaint, that the Veterans
Administration must within 90 days, excuse me, 60 days--90 days
was the bill I am going to talk about, your bill that you
passed, the ``Veterans Benefit Improvement Act of 2008,'' which
is an outstanding bill.
I applaud this Committee, as well as the full Chairman,
Chairman Filner, and all the work of the Veterans' Affairs
Committee. You are by far one of the most important Committees
in this Congress and I appreciate all of you.
This bill says that the Veterans Administration must,
within 60 days, acknowledge in writing to the veteran that they
have received their claim.
I have been getting a lot of letters from my veterans'
community that they sometimes never hear and these are people
who come back with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and
other ailments not so severe on claims.
You all in your report, and I am glad you are having this
study, that you are having now that ``The Veterans Benefit
Improvement Act'' requires.
In my own city of Detroit, I am told that there were 16,000
claims that you all found in the study that you did and in
other places around this country that were shredded, thrown
out. So those 16,000 vets will never be notified, number one,
and never be--have to reinvent their claims in the first place.
So what H.R. 1982 does is says that the Veterans
Administration must, in writing, notify the veteran that they
have received their claim. Your bill, the ``Veterans Benefit
Improvement Act,'' says 90 days they must make a determination.
And I think that is absolutely paramount. We are fighting two
wars, not to mention World War I, II, Vietnam, Korea, and all
the others.
The claims must be received. You can just imagine the
stress that the families--and I want to again thank the
Veterans Affairs Committee for also including families in
services. I am right now, as we speak, in a Department of
Defense (DoD) appropriations hearing on health care for the
active and the Reserves, as well as some of the veterans. And
though we do spend money, we are not yet sure how much we will
be spending when we finish, God help us finish, Iraq and
Afghanistan conflicts.
So I am here today asking if this Subcommittee, Chairman
Hall, and your Members would take this bill to full Committee,
report it out. Make sure that our veterans are taken care of.
They commit their lives to our country.
I recently returned from Washington State with Chairman
Norm Dicks and saw the young sailors, saw the Marines, the
young Army vets who give their lives to us, the active and the
Reserves.
So today please pass H.R. 1982. Please send it to full
Committee. Please report it out. Our veterans deserve no less.
They give for our country. They sacrifice their lives. The very
least we can do is provide them an answer in a timely manner,
not shredded material or never to hear from again. They serve
us. They represent us in some of the most difficult theaters in
this world.
And I ask you pass the ``Veterans Entitlements to Service
Act'' notification. Some say it does not go far enough and it
does not. We wish we could in 60 days get back to them. Some
say the staffing in the Veterans Administration is low. Let us
staff it up. A claim, the very least we can provide our vets is
an answer that we received it and in 90 days, act upon it to
keep the families whole after all the stress they have been
under.
Thank you, Chairman Hall. Thank you, Members of the
Committee. I look forward to working with you.
[The prepared statement of Congresswoman Kilpatrick appears
on p. 25.]
Mr. Hall. Thank you, Ms. Kilpatrick. It is a simple and
sensible bill and I applaud you for bringing it forward.
I do not know if there are any questions from my other
Members up here. If we have any, we will send it to you.
Ms. Kilpatrick. We are ready and able to assist you.
Mr. Hall. I am sorry. Excuse me. Mrs. Kirkpatrick has a
statement.
You are recognized now, please.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ANN KIRKPATRICK
Mrs. Kirkpatrick. Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you, Representative Kilpatrick. As a Kirkpatrick, I
appreciate your work.
And I just wanted to tell you I came back from Afghanistan
meeting with our men and women serving there. And they have
earned the right. This is not a handout. This is not a
giveaway. They have earned the right to have health care, to
have their claims received and notification. So I applaud you
for your effort.
I do not think we can do enough for them, but I really, you
know, really want to--and you made your point so well that, you
know, they have earned it. They served their country very
selflessly and their families make such a sacrifice as well.
So we were there on Mother's Day. We wanted to spend
Mother's Day with the men and women in the service who could
not be with their families on that day. And it was so inspiring
to hear from them, their professionalism, their level of
dedication, their commitment. And so they have earned the right
to be treated well when they come back and are out of the
service.
And so thank you again for what you are doing. I appreciate
that.
Thank you, Chairman.
Ms. Kilpatrick. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Mr. Hall. Thank you, Congresswoman.
I would just say once again that, especially after the mail
amnesty, the 16,000 pieces of missing mail, and the incidences
of shredding that we have heard of at various ROs, that the
burden of notification, at this point, is on VA to let veterans
know, yes, we got your communication. It is simple enough.
In the New York RO, we also have heard stories, and seen
evidence of backdating of claims. So, your bill would make that
more difficult to do obviously. It is kind of like return
receipt requested, except we are not making the veteran pay for
it.
Ms. Kilpatrick. I agree. Human bodies, lives, families, you
know, we owe them that.
Mr. Hall. I, too, was in Iraq and Afghanistan over our last
recess and I agree that we should not put these men and women
through more of a battle after they get home from the battle.
So, I thank you. If we have any further questions about the
language, we will communicate with you in writing. Thank you
for your testimony and for your bill. We will excuse you now
from the panel.
Next the Committee will consider the ``Benefits for
Qualified World War II Veterans Act of 2009,'' H.R. 2270, which
would establish a compensation fund for payments to qualified
World War II veterans with ``such sums as may be necessary.''
At a recent May markup, Ranking Member Buyer brought to my
attention and the attention of the Committee, that there are
perhaps other groups of World War II veterans who should be
entitled to the same benefits that H.R. 23 would provide for,
the forgotten service of Merchant Mariners of World War II.
And, he followed up on that hearing by introducing H.R.
2270, which we are going to hear testimony about today.
It is my pleasure to welcome here today Mr. Ed Stiles, one
of the surviving Flying Tigers, who will explain to us how
Ranking Member Buyer's bill will help him and his generation of
veterans. So, I would invite Mr. Stiles to join us at the
witness table.
There is the center microphone there and one name card for
you, Mr. Stiles.
Okay. Yes. Minority Counsel has asked me to submit a
statement into the record from the Ranking Member of the full
Committee, Steve Buyer. Without objection, it will be done.
[The statement of Congressman Buyer appears on p. 29.]
Mr. Hall. So, Mr. Stiles, thank you for your service and
thank you for coming here to testify to us today. Your written
testimony is part of the record, so feel free to deviate or
not, whatever you choose. You are now recognized for 5 minutes,
sir.
STATEMENT OF MAJOR ED STILES, SR., USAFR (RET.), POLAND, OHIO,
ON BEHALF OF AMERICAN VOLUNTEER GROUP (FLYING TIGERS)
Major Stiles. Chairman Hall and Ranking Member Lamborn, the
Members of the Subcommittee, my name is Ed Stiles, Sr., and I
am pleased to have the opportunity to appear before you today
on behalf of my comrades both living and deceased of the
American Volunteer Group known as the AVG, also known as the
Flying Tigers.
I am here today to express the AVG's support for H.R. 2270.
I am here today for the ``Benefits for Qualified World War II
Veterans Act of 2009.''
H.R. 2270 would provide $1,000 a month to qualified Flying
Tigers and members of the other 28 World War II civilian groups
that were given veteran status under the process set up by the
``GI Bill Improvement Act of 1977.''
While I am not eligible for this payment, I am here to
represent the other Flying Tigers who are eligible.
Between June 27, 1941, and June 27, 1942, I had the
distinct pleasure of serving as a Crew Chief for the AVG. We
served the Chinese government in attacks against Japan before
and after Pearl Harbor.
Our pilots eliminated 297 enemy aircraft of which 229 were
done in the air. There were approximately 80 pilots that flew
for us, 19 of which were aces. Twenty-two of these brave pilots
died in service and there was one Crew Chief.
My charge was the maintenance of the P40 airplane, to
service each aircraft so that our pilots had a reliable
aircraft with which to locate and destroy Japanese targets,
which at that time were decimating the Burma Road, the supply
routes, and the Chinese mainland, including all their big
cities.
My first contact with the AVG was while I was in the Army
Air Corps stationed at Mitchell Field in Long Island, New York.
A representative came to our base carrying a signed document
from President Roosevelt granting those interested in going to
China under the command of Superior Air Tactician, Retired
General Claire Chennault, to fight back the aggression of the
Japanese Air Corps, with a $350 monthly salary and an honorable
immediate discharge from my position.
The experience I had during my contracted time with the AVG
Flying Tigers could never be expressed fully today in my
allotted time. The friendships and military bonds that we
created have sustained me for the past 68 years.
Please understand that the mission that the AVG members
undertook ultimately slowed Japanese aggression in the Pacific
theater and also revitalized the morale of the American people.
I felt proud and rewarded, along with my fellow AVG
members, the day we received the Bronze Star Medal on December
8, 1996. And, of course, the pilots received the Distinguished
Flying Cross.
We served our country with honor and gallantry and many of
our members did not receive the World War II GI Bill. However,
I did not come here to seek sympathy, but to seek equity.
It is not my place to say that members of the AVG are more
or less deserving as members of the Merchant Marine, but I
believe that if Congress is going to provide service pensions
for the Merchant Marines that they should provide this pension
to the living members of all 28 groups, including my comrades
in the AVG.
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 2270 provides this equity and has my
full support.
This concludes my statement and I appreciate being given
this opportunity to answer any questions you or others of the
Subcommittee may have.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Major Stiles appears on p. 27.]
Mr. Hall. Thank you very much for your service and your
testimony, Mr. Stiles.
Since you joined the military and were offered the
opportunity to take advantage of the benefits that come with
military service, do you feel that other Flying Tigers who did
not join the United States Armed Forces should have the same
access to benefits?
Major Stiles. I am not sure I understand what your question
is asking, but I believe that all those that served in any
capacity in civilian status and were also--keep in mind the
Flying Tigers were civilians at the time they were fighting in
China, not in the military Air Corps at that time.
Mr. Hall. I understand, sir. You were in the Army Air Corps
yourself before you were given an immediate honorable discharge
in order to go fight in China against the Japanese, is that
correct?
Major Stiles. Yes. I was in the 8th Pursuit Group on the
East Coast at Mitchell Field, Long Island, 36 Pursuit Squadron.
We had P36s with radial engines which was the fighter at that
time. The airplanes that we received were turned down by the
British and did not have the equipment that should have been
installed when they came out of the factory.
And we in Rangoon, Burma, had to--we had the services of a
Curtis Wright employee and we had to put in the armament, the
communication equipment that we had to procure besides the
airplane. This is not well known, but this is what happened.
And this is the way the airplanes, the ``P40,'' was not
equipped when we received them from the boats in Rangoon,
Burma.
Mr. Hall. Thank you, Mr. Stiles.
Do you know how many members of the Flying Tigers served in
our United States Armed Forces before they became part of the
AVG?
Major Stiles. Every one of the persons that I met in the
Flying Tigers were at one time in the military service of our
country. They were not people that were brought in off of the
street or some other place, or country. They were in the U.S.
military at the time. We had been called a bunch of renegades
and maybe a few other names, but we were all personnel of the
military in 1941.
Mr. Hall. And in all seriousness, I am just curious because
I am a fan and a history buff, too. I was wondering did you
paint the jaws and teeth on the nose of the plane yourself or
is that a movie recreation of the P40s you flew?
Major Stiles. If you are referring to the movies, in that
there was a movie that was called the ``Flying Tigers,'' it
came out when the world heard about the Flying Tigers, that was
``strictly Hollywood.'' We had none of that.
Mr. Hall. I know you are good at a lot of things if you can
install armor and electronics. And I am glad you did not have--
--
Major Stiles. John Wayne was quite a fellow, but he was not
with the Flying Tigers.
Mr. Hall. Yeah. Okay. Thank you.
I just actually have a question for Minority Counsel. If
there is a number, officially a population number of Flying
Tigers. Are you or is Mr. Buyer, to your knowledge, aware of
members of the Flying Tigers who were not in the armed forces
first before they became members of the AVG or a cost estimate
for H.R. 2270?
Mr. Lawrence. I am told there is at least one member of the
Flying Tigers that did not have a military affiliation that was
granted veteran status. And as far as the cost estimate, we are
still working on that, sir.
Mr. Hall. Okay. Thank you.
Have you or has Mr. Buyer, to your knowledge, been
contacted by anyone who is eligible for these benefits who is
not also eligible for VA benefits currently?
Mr. Lawrence. No.
Mr. Hall. Okay. Mr. Donnelly?
Mr. Donnelly. Thank you very much.
Mr. Stiles, thank you for your service. And the rumor we
heard was that John Wayne was with the California Division of
the Flying Tigers. Is that true?
Major Stiles. No.
Mr. Donnelly. You were a member of the Army Air Corps----
Major Stiles. Yes.
Mr. Donnelly [continuing]. When you were at----
Major Stiles. Yes, sir.
Mr. Donnelly [continuing]. Mitchell Field, right? And then
the letter came from President Roosevelt stating if you would
like to do this, you are more than welcome to do so?
Major Stiles. Yes. Correct.
Mr. Donnelly. Go ahead. I am sorry.
Major Stiles. And this was handled by a company called
CAMCO, the Central Aircraft Manufacturing Co., that had a place
on the Burma/China border called Lijiang. They had a repair
facility for Chinese aircraft, whatever they had, which was not
much. And it consisted of maybe a Russian bomber here and
there, which did not do any bombing, but that is what they were
working with. China had no Air Force, none at all.
Mr. Donnelly. And, in effect, the letter from the
President, if that was me, I would feel that that was like the
seal of approval to take this action and to head to China when
the President is telling you, hey, if you want to do this, go
right ahead.
Major Stiles. If my understanding is correct, and I believe
it is, China, before Chennault took it over--in fact, he had
tried some kind of this, you know, catch as catch can, you
know, of pilots around the world that wanted to fight and get
into the action in the China theater. And none of them turned
out very well.
Mr. Donnelly. And your presence in China really helped the
American war effort by slowing down the Japanese and by causing
them endless difficulties; did it not?
Major Stiles. From the press report, and, of course, I was
in China at the time, and we were always 1 day later than what
it was over here for the international date line, and we heard
about Pearl Harbor when we were there. And we were mortified.
Here we thought we were going to deal and fight the
Japanese that were bombing the Burma Road and some of their big
cities like Kunming and Chunging or maybe Shanghai. And that
was not so.
[The following was subsequently received from Major
Stiles:]
I lost my train of thought there.
Mr. Donnelly. That is quite all right.
Major Stiles. But we----
Mr. Donnelly. The things you were doing----
Major Stiles. To sum it up, to sum up our service in China,
as far as the American volunteers were concerned, and we were
volunteers, every one of us, and everyone that I know was from
the military except one fellow, who was a German mechanic that
was brought over there, and he was responsible for putting
together a Japanese Zero that was captured until we found out
what kind of a fighter they had. I cannot even remember his
name now.
[The following was subsequently received from Major
Stiles:]
The fellow was a German refugee named Gerhart Neumann.
Mr. Donnelly. Did you----
Major Stiles. Chennault insisted and did get citizenship
for this individual. Now, of course, he was not in the
military. He was one of those dislocated Germans that Hitler
was trying annihilate. And he ended up over there.
Mr. Donnelly. Sir, do you have any family here with you
today or any relatives? I saw the gentleman with the beard in
the back. I did not know if you were with him.
But I would encourage any of your family--I do not know if
you have heard about the Living History Program, but we would
love to have your story tucked away safely in the Library of
Congress for generations to come so they can know what heroes
and wonderful patriots we had serving our country back then.
Major Stiles. Well, thank you very much. I am honored to be
able to talk to you today and tell you my experiences for
whatever they are worth.
We did the best we could with whatever we had at a time
when our military was getting the worst that was happening,
bombing, dying, Chinese. It was inhumane what was going on in
China. And you had to be there to really get the feeling of it,
not the press. Press did the best they could, but they did not
really tell you the story and that is always the case.
Mr. Donnelly. It is my honor to have a chance to be here
with you today, sir. Thank you.
Mr. Hall. Thank you, Mr. Donnelly.
Mr. Stiles, before we let you go on the rest of your day,
I, too, want to thank you and ask, is there an association of
the Flying Tigers at the AVG? You said you had friendships that
have lasted through the years since that time. Is there an
association, a club, a group, organized group of your
colleagues?
Major Stiles. Well, as you may or may not know, talking to
Mr. Clark, we all did the best with what we had and tried to
keep the war effort for what it was worth in China. And in my
own personal opinion, if they would not have dropped the atomic
bomb when
they did, we would have been over there again fighting and winni
ng.
But I could tell you many stories about what really did
happen when it comes to find out that your armament people had
their own type of ammunition for 30 caliber machine guns and 50
caliber machine guns and they were different kinds. And this
stuff was brought up through the Burma Road.
And China came so close, so close to being knocked out of
the war completely. And if it was not for the Flying Tigers, I
do not know what would have happened if China was completely
knocked out of the war.
Mr. Hall. Well, obviously if they had been, then Japan
would have been able to concentrate more of its military power
against us and that was a close enough call anyway as things
turned out.
So obviously your service was critical to the war effort.
And we thank you for your bravery. I understand that you were
not only a Crew Chief but also a pilot, is that----
Major Stiles. If any of the Subcommittee has any questions
that they would like me to answer, I am available. Thank you.
Mr. Hall. Okay. Well, we will submit them in writing to
you, sir, if we do. Thank you again so much for testifying.
[Applause.]
Mr. Hall. Now we would like to call our third panel,
Bradley G. Mayes, the Director of Compensation and Pension
Service, from the Veterans Benefits Administration, U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs; accompanied by Mr. Richard
Hipolit, the Assistant General Counsel for the U.S. Department
of Veterans Affairs.
And, I will just also mention that we also have submissions
for the record from the American Federation of Government
Employees (AFGE) and the Disabled American Veterans (DAV).
[The statements of AFGE, and DAV appear on p. 29 and p.
30.]
Mr. Hall. Mr. Mayes, Mr. Hipolit, it is always good to see
you again. Welcome back. Your full statement is entered in the
record. You are now recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF BRADLEY G. MAYES, DIRECTOR, COMPENSATION AND
PENSION SERVICE, VETERANS BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS; ACCOMPANIED BY RICHARD HIPOLIT,
ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL, OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Mr. Mayes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Donnelly.
First of all, I would like to thank you for inviting me
here today to really be a part of history and to listen to Mr.
Stiles and the cadet nurse that talked about her experience. I
feel privileged to be here.
I am here today to provide the views of the Department of
Veterans Affairs on H.R. 1522, the ``United States Cadet Nurse
Corps Equity Act,'' and H.R. 1982, the ``Veterans Entitlement
to Service (VETS) Act of 2009.''
I will not be able to address H.R. 2270, the ``Benefits for
Qualified World War II Veterans Act of 2009,'' because VA
received it in insufficient time to coordinate the
administration's position and develop cost estimates. But with
your permission, we will provide that information in writing
for the record.
Also, we could not in the time given develop a cost
estimate for H.R. 1522, so we will also provide that in writing
for the record with your permission.
[The Administration Views for H.R. 2270 and cost estimate
for H.R. 1522 were provided in a followup letter from Secretary
Eric K. Shinseki, dated August 5, 2009, which appears on p.
32.]
H.R. 1522, the ``United States Cadet Nurse Corps Equity
Act,'' would deem participation in the United States Cadet
Nurse Corps during World War II to have been active duty in the
Armed Forces for purposes of VA benefits' laws.
Congress, in 1977, set up an administrative mechanism for
the consideration of requests by various civilian groups to
qualify for benefits historically provided to veterans of the
Armed Forces proper. Congress created this process to
discourage the use of the legislative process to make such
determinations. This bill would effectively override that
deliberative process.
Title IV of Public Law 95-202, that authorized the
Secretary of Defense to review applications to confer veteran
status upon groups who rendered assistance to the Armed Forces
in capacities which at the time were considered civilian
employment or contractual service.
In reviewing such applications, the Secretary of Defense
considers the factors set out in the law, which include the
extent to which a group's members were subject to military
justice, discipline and control, the extent to which members
were permitted to resign, their susceptibility to assignment
for duty in a combat zone, and the extent to which they had
reasonable expectations that participation would be considered
active military service.
At least twice the Secretary of Defense has accepted the
unanimous recommendations of a Review Board that participation
in the Cadet Nurse Corps alone is not sufficient to establish
veteran status.
VA accepts those recommendations and believes that the
review process that was established by Public Law 95-202 works
well and should not be circumvented.
H.R. 1982, the ``Veterans Entitlement to Service Act of
2009,'' would require VA to acknowledge the receipt of any
claim for medical services, disability compensation, or pension
within 60 days of receiving the claim. It would also require VA
to acknowledge the receipt of any other communication relating
to such services, compensation, or pension within 60 days of
receiving the communication.
While VA recognizes the importance of providing timely
communications with claimants, the provisions of this bill are
problematic and VA cannot support the bill as written.
First, we believe the bill would impede our efforts to
streamline and speed up claim processing by adding an
additional and unnecessary administrative burden which would
not materially advance the merits of the claim.
As a general rule, VA contacts individuals who submit
claims or other communications well within 60 days of receiving
their claims. In addition, as a matter of claims procedure, VA
communicates with the claimant several times during the
processing of the claim.
Requiring a special acknowledgment of receipt would add no
value to the current process. In fact, it would significantly
burden VA when the Department is trying to reduce a claim
backlog and it would further delay claim adjudication by adding
another step to a complex process.
The vagueness of the bill language is also a major concern
for VA. The term other communication could easily be construed
to include the submission of evidence in connection with a
claim, e-mails, and telephone calls.
The administrative requirement to acknowledge the receipt
of every such communication would detract from VA's core
mission of processing veterans' claims. We cannot accurately
estimate those administrative costs with enactment of H.R. 1982
because of the vagueness in the language.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony, and I would be
pleased to answer any questions you or other Members of the
Subcommittee may have.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Mayes appears on p. 27.]
Mr. Hall. Thank you, Mr. Mayes.
H.R. 1982 attempts to deal with a problem that we are
familiar with and have spoken about before here since the
problems with misdating, shredding and misplacing files came to
light last fall.
What recent steps has VA taken to ensure that documents are
not being lost or destroyed?
Mr. Mayes. Well, we have put in place a number of steps
which we have testified on in previous hearings. We have
designated management officials in our Regional Office who are
responsible for reviewing the shred material before it is
shredded so documents that are either redundant or are not
relevant to any individual's claim and can properly be
shredded, those have to be reviewed by officials within the
Veteran Service Center or the Regional Office before they are
destroyed.
We also implemented really rather extraordinary procedures
for veterans who assert that VA lost a document related to
their claim within an 18-month period prior to us stopping all
shredding in Regional Offices. And we did this following the
Inspector General (IG) identifying, I believe, it was 30 some
documents that should not have been in the shred bins.
And we stood down. We ourselves went through everything,
every piece of paper in every Regional Office, and we found
slightly more than 400 documents that were mishandled.
So what we said was if a veteran asserts that a piece of
evidence was submitted within that year and a half prior to us
stopping that shredding and standing down, then we would take
their assertion on its face and go ahead and attempt to find
the document. If we could not find it, accept a similar
document from the claimant and adjudicate the claim based on
that document. And we would use the date that the veteran
asserted they submitted it as the date of claim.
So that was extraordinary. We did that as well. So we took
this very seriously.
I want to put out we get some 2.6 million pieces of mail a
year in our Regional Offices. Well, almost 900,000 claims were
decided last year alone requiring a rating decision and the
collection of evidence. So we do get a lot of evidence and we
are taking every step that we can to make sure we do not
misplace or mishandle any documents.
Mr. Hall. I understand that. Thank you for taking those
steps and for describing them to us and, for granting the
veteran the benefit of the doubt in those cases when documents
were missing or shredded during that time period.
If a claimant has not received a VCAA notice, then what is
VA's process for handling those claims as protocol for
responding to the veteran?
Mr. Mayes. Well, if a veteran submits a claim, then we have
a requirement to send out a notice acknowledging the claim. And
we have a requirement, and it is a statutory requirement, to
notify the claimant what evidence that we will get and what
evidence they are responsible for getting. That is our duty to
notify. It is in 38 U.S.C. Sec. 5103.
So if a veteran submitted a claim and they did not get a
VCAA notice, then that means something did not work as it
should have because that is a legal requirement. We take it
very seriously. We send them out on all these claims.
If the veteran notifies us that they sent a claim in and
they have not heard from the VA, then we are going to do an
exhaustive search of our records to try and find that claim or
that communication. And if we do not find it, we will ask them
to resubmit it and then we will send out the notice.
Mr. Hall. Just a simple, but maybe a practical thought. A
number of delivery services besides the U.S. Post Office offer
a confirmation of delivery.
Many of our veterans are living close to the edge. In fact,
many of them are over the edge and homeless, as we discussed
with the Secretary yesterday, among other occasions. You are
keenly aware of this, I am sure, especially in this economic
time.
Would it be feasible for us, with funding through the VA,
to reimburse veterans so that they could send their claim in
certified return receipt requested or send it FedEx, so that
they automatically get the confirmation of delivery. It would
not be paperwork for you, or the employees at VA to add to
their already prodigious load of work. What do you think about
that commercial approach?
Mr. Mayes. I would be reluctant to comment too much on that
because I am not sure how that would work because I believe
that would be a requirement that would be on the U.S. Postal
Service.
A lot of the evidence that comes into our Regional Office
comes into P.O. Boxes that are uniquely set up for our Veteran
Service Center, because we try and segregate out that evidence
that is associated with claims so that we can more efficiently
handle it.
And, frankly, I just do not know what the implications of
implementing something like that would be. It is something I
would have to study further.
Dick, do you have anything to add on that?
Mr. Hipolit. Yes. That is an idea that we have not really
considered at VA. I think it is one worth taking a look at, but
we do not have a position on it at this time because it is a
new idea. We have not----
Mr. Hall. It just occurred to me that many people do this
with their tax returns, or other important documents, that not
just veterans, but any person or business that is sending
sensitive or important documents or checks wants to be able to
prove that they were received. There are services out there
available and provided by a number of companies that could be
used.
I wanted to ask you also, in the paperless system that we
are moving toward, both DAV and AFGE in their statements
submitted for the record, agree that a paperless system would
enhance VA's ability to process claims. I am sure you would
agree with that basic premise. I also understand you have
contracted with an integrator to make this happen.
What has been accomplished since the contract was awarded
and what are the next steps in your strategic plan?
Mr. Mayes. Well, the contract with the integrator is to
help us take a look at what we have currently today and then
look at what applications are in development and help us
identify which applications we really need to prioritize to
achieve this vision that we have, which is truly a paperless
claims processing system.
I believe that they are, if they do not have, they are
close to an overarching plan that will help us understand those
priorities.
One of the other things that is occurring right now as we
speak is we have a contract with a company that is helping us
work on our VONAPP application. It is the VA online
application.
So today veterans can submit an application electronically,
but it is not as, I guess--we would like to improve the
interface, the front-end piece, make it a little bit more easy
to use and leverage some rules-based technology so that people
are really walked through almost a structured interview
process.
And so we have a company that is helping us redesign that
front-end piece and then there are two other things that need
to happen with that VONAPP application.
We need to collect the data and the data that is collected
through the electronic application interaction needs to then be
utilized by our claims processing system. So that is kind of
what the EDS or the integration contractor would help us do was
align that with our long-term vision, is that integration of
the electronic application with the claims processing system,
and then also the imaging system because while we are
processing a claim in one system, we have also got an imaging
system that allows documents to be viewed by a VA claims agent,
for example, that might be answering the phone.
I would envision in the future the claimant or their
accredited representative being able to go in there and look at
those documents as well. So it is those integration pieces that
are so critical for our future success.
Mr. Hall. This is all interesting and challenging for you
and also for us in our oversight role because VA is such a
moving target. You are upgrading your systems and moving
forward with these things, which is good.
But I am just curious. Last week, Judge Kasold from the
U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims was here and he
testified that the claims that they are seeing on appeal are in
digital files. I asked him if he knew at what point they got
digitized and he did not know.
So do you know?
Mr. Mayes. I believe the claims that are being handled at
the Court, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, are being
digitized at the General Counsel level. And I will turn that
over to Dick, if you want to add to that.
Mr. Hipolit. Yes. I think that is correct that they do not
get digitized until they have been through the VA process. They
are not coming up through the system that way. It is when the
case goes to court, then they go into that format.
Mr. Mayes. Unless, unless it was a Benefits Delivery of
Discharge claim. And those claims start at the very beginning
of the process. We image all of the paper documents.
I acknowledged that we start out with paper documents from
the claimant and from the Service Department, but we image
those and then those claims for the remainder of their life
will be paperless in that any paper we get we will digitize.
And if that goes to the Board of Veterans Appeals, for
example, the Board, I am aware of at least one case where the
Board has actually adjudicated an appeal in the paperless
environment.
So it is relatively new that we would have an all paperless
claim that is working its way through the system first to the
point where the agency of original jurisdiction makes a
decision which would be in a Regional Office, then it gets to
the Board and then it goes on to the court.
So I think you will see more of these cases that are all
digitized making their way to the court.
Mr. Hall. Have you discussed with the integrator as part of
the plan, electronic notification to the veteran as a claim is
moved to another level or as a decision is made or the fact
that it is received?
Mr. Mayes. Yes. We have discussed that with the integrator
to the extent that we have described what we would like the
claims process, the electronic claims process to look like in
the future.
Mr. Hall. I was in Balad a couple weeks ago at the trauma
center, at the hospital there, and they bring in wounded from
the helicopters right in the door to the ER and immediately
start entering information into UltraLite, which can be
uploaded into the full-blown Ultra program.
They have MedWeb in use so that they can have doctors
anywhere in the world look at an MRI or a CAT scan or X-ray or
a test result of some sort.
Somewhere between there and the CAVC level where digitized
files exist this world that I am sure your integrator is
working on and you, and your IT people are working on trying
to----
Mr. Mayes. Connect those, yes.
Mr. Hall [continuing]. Bring those ends together because it
must be infuriating to you or frustrating to you as it is to
veterans and to us on the Committee to see that there exists a
medical record that is electronic in the field and in DoD's
world and then on the other end at the appellate level, there
exists an electronic record, but in between there is a paper
record. We are all looking forward to these records meeting.
It is kind of like the railroad being built from both ends
of the country and then driving that last spike that joins the
east and west.
I want to ask you regarding, if we could just go back for a
moment to VCAA notices, at an earlier hearing this month, we
discussed poorly written VCAA notices. I realize that training
is an ongoing thing. You have got new personnel being hired.
But, what else are you doing or can you do at the moment to
improve the quality of VCAA notices to veterans?
Mr. Mayes. Well, there are a couple of things. One thing
that we have done is we have modified the letter and we have
put some of the legal requirements into an attachment to try
and simplify the actual letter.
But I would like to take the opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to
acknowledge your work because I believe it was section 201 of
the ``Veterans Benefits Improvement Act of 2008,'' directed the
Secretary to promulgate new regulations on VA's notice
requirements for original claims, reopened claims, and claims
for increase.
And so we with the Office of General Counsel's help are
working to promulgate new regulations that would simplify the
letter, not take away rights that afford protections, but to
simplify the letter because we feel strongly that maybe some of
the legal elements of the current notice serve more to confuse
than they really do to inform veterans.
So to that end, we would like to modify our regulations so
that
we can simplify the letter. And we are working on that as we spe
ak.
Mr. Hall. Thank you, sir. Speaking for the non-lawyers
among us, I thank you for that.
I would ask you if you are going to, I think you said,
submit your observations or your testimony in writing about
Ranking Member Buyer's bill, if you could include in that what
workload expansion you expect would be caused by having nurse
cadets, Flying Tigers, and the other two dozen or more groups--
I do not know if you have any more information than we do about
the numbers of people who are still alive in those categories,
but hopefully that can be part of your written submission.
Mr. Mayes. We will do that, Mr. Chairman, to the extent
that we can uncover those numbers.
[The Administration Views for H.R. 2270 and cost estimate
for H.R. 1522 were provided in a followup letter from Secretary
Eric K. Shinseki, dated August 5, 2009, which appears on p.
32.]
Mr. Hall. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate your
coming to testify again and the ongoing work you are doing for
our veterans.
This hearing is now adjourned.
Mr. Mayes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Whereupon, at 11:20 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Prepared Statement of Hon. John J. Hall, Chairman,
Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs
Good Morning Ladies and Gentleman:
The purpose of today's hearing will be to explore the policy
implications of three bills, H.R. 1522, H.R. 1982 and H.R. 2270, that
were recently referred to the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs'
Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs Subcommittee.
The first bill we will discuss is the United States Cadet Nurse
Corps Equity Act, H.R. 1522, introduced by Representative Nita Lowey.
If enacted, it would grant veteran status to the members of United
States Nurse Cadet Corps of WWII, making them eligible for benefits and
services administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs. I commend
Congresswoman Lowey for her 13-year commitment to these nurses and I
welcome her and cadet nurse Elizabeth Yeznach whose service to the sick
and wounded of World War II makes her a patriot we should all be proud
to know.
The second bill on today's agenda, the Veterans Entitlement to
Service or VETS Act of 2009, H.R. 1982, is sponsored by Representative
Carolyn Kilpatrick. This bill directs VA to acknowledge receipt of
medical, disability and pension claims and other communications
submitted by veterans within 60 days. As many of you may recall, this
Subcommittee jointly with the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations conducted an investigatory hearing on the thousands of
pieces of mail found unprocessed at Regional Offices during mail
amnesty periods in 2007. We continue to exercise vigorous oversight of
this serious problem and other claims processing irregularities that
have plagued VA over the past 2 years. I am interested to hear how this
bill will improve upon the Veterans Claims Assistance Act requirements
already codified in statute and in the procedural instructions outlined
in VA's regulations. I thank Congresswoman Kilpatrick for her activism
in this area and look forward to her testimony.
Finally, I am looking forward to hearing more about the Benefits
for Qualified World War II Veterans Act of 2009, H.R. 2270, which would
establish a compensation fund for payments to qualified World War II
veterans with ``such sums as may be necessary.'' At a recent May mark-
up, Ranking Member Buyer brought to my attention and to the attention
of the full Committee that there are other groups of WWII veterans who
deserve the same benefits that H.R. 23 would provide for the forgotten
service of the Merchant Mariners of WWII. And, despite his previous
apprehensions over fiscal stewardship, he has followed Chairman
Filner's lead as a veterans' advocate and introduced H.R. 2270. It is
my pleasure to welcome here today Mr. Ed Stiles, one of the surviving
Flying Tigers who will explain to us how Ranking Member Buyer's bill
will help him and his generation of veterans.
I thank the other witnesses for joining us today and look forward
to any further insight they may provide.
Prepared Statement of Hon. Doug Lamborn, Ranking Republican Member,
Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs
Thank you, Chairman Hall, for yielding, and thank you for the
opportunity to discuss the bills before us this morning.
I will start with H.R. 2270, the Benefits for Qualified World War
II Veterans Act of 2009, a bill introduced by Ranking Member Buyer to
provide a monthly payment to all World War II groups that were provided
veteran status under the GI Bill Improvement Act of 1977.
The impetus for this bill is H.R. 23, which was recently passed by
the full Committee, to provide the monthly payment to WWII Merchant
Mariners, but did not include the aforementioned veterans groups.
Like Mr. Buyer, I was opposed to H.R. 23 because it provides a non
service-connected pension regardless of income, something we do not do
for other veterans except Medal of Honor recipients.
But because it was approved, I believe that all groups with veteran
status under the GI Bill Improvement Act of 1977 should be entitled to
the same benefits.
One such group consists of members of the American Volunteer Group
known as the ``Flying Tigers.''
This was a group of pilots and ground crew who helped defend Burma
and China before and after the attack on Pearl Harbor.
The Flying Tigers are credited with destroying an impressive 297
enemy aircraft and had one of the best kill ratios of any air group in
the pacific theater.
There were approximately 80 pilots that flew for the Flying Tigers,
of which 21 died in service.
An amazing 19 of them had five or more air to air victories, which
makes them aces.
Of the over 300 original members of the Flying Tigers, only 18 of
them are still with us today.
And we are honored to have with us this morning, Mr. Ed Stiles
Senior, who served with this courageous group of aviators.
Thank you for being here Mr. Stiles, we look forward to your
testimony.
Another bill we are discussing today, H.R. 1522, also pertains to a
group of individuals who served our country during WWII.
This noble group, the United States Cadet Nurse Corps was
established by Congress in 1943 to train nurses for both governmental
and civilian agencies.
While there is no doubt the Cadet Nurse Corps filled an essential
war-time need, I do not believe Congress should bypass the process it
established, via the GI Bill Improvement Act of 1977, to have the
Secretary of Defense determine--based on criteria established by
Congress--if the qualified service of a particular group constitutes
active military service.
Congress did so, so that objective and consistent consideration was
applied to any group seeking status as a veteran, and I don't believe
we should abandon that process.
Despite these concerns, I look forward to hearing the testimony of
Elizabeth Yeznach who served with this dedicated group of patriots.
We are privileged to have you with us today, Ms. Yeznach, and I
thank you for being here.
Finally, we will discuss H.R. 1982 which would require VA to
acknowledge the receipt of any claim or other communication within 60
days.
Although this is a well-intended measure, I am concerned that
requiring VA to acknowledge every item of correspondence would result
in an enormous volume of paperwork that would detract from claims
development and adjudication.
While this unintended consequence should be avoided, the need for
greater accountability by VA is a point well taken, and I believe it is
the intent of this bill.
I would also point out that what H.R. 1982 strives to accomplish
will be much more feasible when the VA utilizes a modern IT system and
information exchange is conducted electronically.
Mr. Chairman, we made a lot of progress in the last Congress toward
modernizing and improving the VA claims processing system, and it is my
hope that the reforms we put in place will help provide the assurances
this bill intends to offer.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Prepared Statement of Hon. Nita M. Lowey,
a Representative in Congress from the State of New York
I thank the Committee for holding the first hearing on the United
States Nurse Corps Equity Act today. I authored this legislation in
1996 to recognize and honor the service of women who served with
distinction in the Cadet Nurse Corps.
Sixty-six years after the end of World War II recognition parallel
to their great sacrifice and commitment has not been given to Cadet
Nurses. At a time when our country has been called to serve by our new
Administration, it is fitting to adequately express our gratitude to
those who have served our country during one of our most challenging
eras.
With limited positions in the military for women, many young women
joined the U.S. Cadet Nurse Corps during World War II to fill the
domestic nursing shortage in our country. H.R. 1522 will ensure that
the many women who served our country the best way they could, receive
the acknowledgement of veteran status that they deserve.
Other women's groups who served in WWII military services have
rightfully been granted veteran status and benefits. Despite their
historic and patriotic contributions, the women of the U.S. Cadet
Nurses Corps have been forgotten.
The legacy of the Cadet Nurse Corps is manifold, felt by all
Americans but understood by few. Many Cadet Nurses were deployed to
Army, Navy, Public Health facilities, and Indian health agencies during
their senior cadet service. As a result, World War II military veterans
came home to a strong health care system and were provided critical
care by Cadet Nurses. In order to properly recognize their patriotism,
the Cadets should be designated as veterans.
Three dedicated patriots who served in the Cadet Nurse Corps are
here today. My constituent, Anne Kakos from Yonkers, New York served as
a cadet nurse from 1943-1946. Caroline Bradford of Mechanicsville,
Maryland served as a Cadet Nurse from 1943-1946 and both their stories
have been submitted for the record. I would like them to stand up and
be recognized. I am also honored to introduce Elizabeth Yeznach, from
Galesferry, Connecticut, who served as a Cadet Nurse in Hartford,
Connecticut from 1943-1946 and will be testifying on this important
legislation today.
And now, I am pleased to introduce Elizabeth Yeznach who will share
her experience as a Cadet Nurse and the importance of this legislation.
Prepared Statement of Elizabeth Yeznach, Galesferry, CT,
as Presented by Anne R. (Mandzak) Kakos, Yonkers, NY
My name is Elizabeth Yeznach. I am here on behalf of the 180,000
women of all races and ethnicities who served our country during WWII
as members of the United States Cadet Nurse Corps [USCNC]. I, myself,
served as a Cadet Nurse from 1943 to 1946 at St. Francis Hospital in
Hartford, Connecticut.
First, I would like to extend a heartfelt thank you to
Congresswoman Nita Lowey, for consistently introducing the United
States Cadet Nurse Equity Act through the years. You kept our hopes
alive that someday the Cadet Nurse Corps would be recognized as
veterans. This hearing brings us one step closer and I am grateful to
the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs for
holding this hearing. I would also like to thank all the other
Congresspersons who cosponsored this legislation year after year
including Chairman of the Committee on Veterans Affairs Bob Filner.
During World War II, our Nation faced a desperate shortage of
nurses on the home front and a decline in nursing school enrollment.
Nurses who enrolled in the military left a dearth of nurses in civilian
facilities and as the war continued, the shortage of nurses became
acute both at home and overseas. The Federal government established the
U.S. Cadet Nurse Corps in 1943 to recruit young women to become nurses,
180,000 of whom provided 80% of the nursing care in our country during
the war.
The United States Cadet Nurse Corps offered an innovative solution
to the pressing shortage of nurses during World War II. Without us, our
domestic health care system could have collapsed and resulted in a sick
and demoralized nation. We were deployed to Army, Navy, Public Health
Facilities, and Indian health agencies. We abided by all the rules that
were applicable to military such as wearing uniforms and were required
to pledge 36 months of service. Yet, our contributions and commitment
during a tense time in our country's history remains virtually unknown.
We, the Cadet Nurses, worked tirelessly to care for sick civilians
and injured troops. We were exposed to infectious diseases and death;
worked 12-hour shifts, 6\1/2\ days a week; and cared for as many as 50
patients simultaneously.
As a Cadet Nurse and student at that time, I remember the stress of
providing emotional and physical support to multiple patients and their
families who faced major trauma in tragic events. For example, the
Hartford Barnum and Bailey Circus Fire of 1944, cadet nurses were
charged with providing complex care and attention to the many injured
while they endured painful and prolonged treatments. During my time as
a Cadet Nurse, I gained strong clinical experience and skills in
providing complete care--both physical and emotional--in challenging
settings.
Other women in WWII military services--the Women's Army Corps
[WACS], the Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service [WAVES], and
the Women Air Force Service Pilots [WASP]--have rightfully been granted
veteran status and benefits. Despite our historic and patriotic
contributions, we, the women of the U.S. Cadet Nurses Corps are
consistently dismissed and forgotten. We are not seeking special
recognition, just equal recognition!
Many former Cadet Nurses have already passed away and
unfortunately, I don't know how many remain. What I do know is that we
are passing on at the same rate as those of that generation, with many
former Cadet Nurses now more than 80 years old.
Passing this legislation is more important now than ever before as
66 years have passed since the inception of the U.S. Cadet Nurse Corps
was founded and our service remains unrecognized.
We came forward to help our country through a difficult time and
are proud to know that as part of a uniformed service, we contributed
to America's victory in World War II. Therefore, after all this
commitment and contribution, if we are not veterans, can you tell us
what we are?
Thank you.
__________
Statement from Cadet Nurse Corps Members
EXHIBIT 1
Mechanicsville, MD
May 18, 2009
What ever happened to the Cadet Nurses? We were there--a part of
the Greatest Generation. We enlisted by the thousands. We served our
country in civilian hospitals, Army Hospitals, Navy Hospitals, Indian
Reservations, Public Health facilities, and Visiting Nurse Societies--
often working 10 to 12 hour shifts. We lived in crowded dormitories. We
endured curfews and many ``military-like'' rules. We wore uniforms. We
could not marry ``for the duration.'' On weekdays, we had to be in our
rooms at 7:00 p.m.--study from 7:30 to 9:30--and lights out at 10:00
p.m. A ``House Mother'' checked on us between 7:00 and 7:30 and locked
the door so no one could enter without her knowledge. After 10:00 p.m.
she walked the halls to be sure all lights were out. On weekends, we
had one midnight pass and one 10:00 p.m. pass. Once a month we could
have an overnight pass with parental permission. We loved it! We were
proud! Proud to be Cadet Nurses!
The United States Cadet Nurse Corps was a uniformed service created
by Congress during World War II to supply nurses for the military,
Federal Government, and essential civilian hospitals. It was
administered by the U.S. Public Health Service. We were sworn in during
a ceremony conducted simultaneously throughout the country in July,
1943. We were issued uniforms and were given I.D. cards with a serial
number. We were under Commissioned Officers of the USPHS, Surgeon
General Thomas Parran, and Director of Nursing Education, Lucille
Petry. At the close of the war, President Harry S. Truman issued an
Executive Order declaring that service in the ``Commissioned Corps of
the Public Health Service'' was to be considered as military service
during World War II--thus giving them veterans status. For unknown
reasons Cadet Nurses were not given discharge papers. We were ignored
by our government.
We were again ignored by esteemed author Tom Brokaw. Not one
sentence in his book, ``The Greatest Generation,'' recognized our
service. Many members of the Disabled American Veterans remember us. We
dressed their wounds. We exercised their arms and legs while they were
in body casts. We medicated them. We listened to them. We laughed with
them.
Cadet Nurses wore clinical work uniforms with the Cadet Nurse
insignia and wore dress uniforms off duty. The buttons and insignia on
the dress uniforms were the same as those of the USPHS Commissioned
Officers uniforms. The insignia and dress uniforms were not to be worn
by any unauthorized person under the same Federal penalties provided by
the Act June 3, 1916, for the unlawful wearing of uniforms of the U.S.
Army, Navy, or Marine Corps (Public Law 248, March 4, 1944).
During my time in the Cadet Nurse Corps (July 1943-September 1945),
I worked 3 months at Saint Elizabeth's Hospital, a Federal hospital, 3
months at Children's Hospital in Philadelphia, and 6 months at Newton
D. Baker General Army Hospital. The rest of the time I worked at
Garfield Memorial Hospital in Washington, D.C. This was certainly
essential service. It had a defining influence on the rest of my life.
I ask that you support H.R. 1522.
Respectively submitted,
Caroline Bradburn Bradford, RN
Cadet Nurse
__________
EXHIBIT 2
Yonkers, New York
May 21, 2009
As an enlisted member of the World War II United States Cadet Nurse
Corps, I am submitting a history of my service on the home front as a
``trainee nurse'' for the military during this declared war that needed
nurses.
My trainee period was from September 13, 1943 to September 12,
1946. The last 6 months were spent in a Civilian Hospital as per my
pledge to serve our Nation until the end of Hostilities. I served in
the Emergency Room and the Physical Therapy Units. As a ``trainee,'' I
performed Nursing duties under the supervision of a registered nurse on
the day shift.
There was one registered nurse for the whole Hospital to supervise
the night and evening shifts.
Care included bedside nursing and well as the bedside units.
Sometimes, as many as thirty patients were in one unit. Cadet nurses
were alone on the units. Working in the Delivery Room, Maternity and
Nursery Units were included. These were wives of the Military away
serving this Nation at War. As a ``trainee nurse,'' exposure to disease
and even injury was a challenge. This was the ``Polio Era.'' Many cadet
nurses were given assignments for the last 6 months in the Military,
Veterans, and Indian Reservations.
This Legislation is important to me and to my Cadet Nurse Corps
colleagues because we would be granted official recognition as
``benefited United States Veterans'' serving this great Nation of ours
during the Greatest World War II of the Twentieth Century.
Respectfully submitted,
Anne R. (Mandzak) Kakos
__________
EXHIBIT 3
I am writing to you in regard to U.S. Cadet Nurse Corps bill H.R.
1522. In a military service I was inducted into the U.S. Cadet Nurse
Corps where I served for two and one half years. This Corps was
established by Congress to help relieve the serious shortage of nurses.
I worked very hard during this time serving my country as a Cadet
Nurse. This hard work and devotion has been very beneficial to me in
later years of nursing. I am asking that your Committee give full
support in obtaining veteran's status for me and my colleagues as
former members of the U.S. Cadet Nurse Corps.
Thank you.
Helen Barber
__________
Quincy, MA
To Whom It May Concern:
Although I cannot be there at the hearing on May 21, 2009, please
enter my name and address as a supporter of H.R. 1522. It's about time
this uniformed regiment of young women receive the recognition owed to
them for over 60 years. American capability of caring for our wounded
men overseas was possible because the U.S. Cadets were caring for the
citizens on the home front. When our warriors returned, our Nation's
health care system was intact and the veterans continued to have access
to the best nursing care available.
All United States Nurses in one of the Uniformed Services of our
country serve as non-combatants. Whether they serve overseas or on the
home front, they are Veterans!
Thank you,
Shirley Anne Caswell Harrow, RN
__________
Oneonta, New York
May 17, 2009
Just another octogenarian giving her message to our legislators
about her ``stint'' in the United States Cadet Nurse Corps Service as
an enlisted and uniformed ``Trainee'' for the Military and the home
front as per the ``pledge'' to serve one's Nation until the end of all
hostilities of World War II. I am a World War II United States Cadet
Nurse Corps member, enlisted and served from February 1944 to February
1947 at the Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City. Toward the last
months of my ``trainee'' period, I was sent across the United States,
by train, to Tacoma Indian Hospital. Patients were suffering from
``tuberculosis.'' Patients were from the Indian reservation.
Congresswoman Nita M. Lowey's Bill H.R. 1522 is before you today (May
21, 2009). Please review this and let us be ``officially recognized as
these United States Veterans'' with a deliverance of the ``discharge
papers from the Department of Defense.'' It is close to 66 years that
Public Law 74 was signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt
granting the teenage women the right to enlist and serve this great
Nation of ours. I am proud to be an American with rights to choose to
enlist and to serve this great Nation.
Thank you for reviewing our bill, H.R. 1522.
Respectfully submitted by e-mail,
Nancy Wilson Danielson
Prepared Statement of Hon. Carolyn C. Kilpatrick,
a Representative in Congress from the State of Michigan
Subcommittee Chairman John J. Hall, Ranking Minority Member Doug
Lamborn, and esteemed Members of the Veterans Subcommittee on
Disability and Memorial Affairs, giving Honor and Glory to God, I thank
you for this unique opportunity and the distinct honor of allowing me
to testify and to have a hearing on my legislation, H.R. 1982, the
``Veterans Entitlement to Service (VETS) Act of 2009.'' I know that the
Subcommittee has many pieces of legislation to consider, and this
hearing clearly illustrates Full Committee Chairman Bob Filner and
Ranking Minority Member Steve Buyer, as well as the Subcommittee's
earnest commitment to issues that affect our veterans.
Over the last year, the 13th Congressional District of Michigan,
which consists of Detroit and seven cities, has received numerous calls
and letters of complaints from veterans expressing frustration over
getting no response from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) after
their diligent filing of various claims. These claims were often filed
for four to 6 months without a response from the Department of Veterans
Affairs. As the Subcommittee knows, there have also been many media
reports, which I have attached to my testimony, about thousands of
unreported claims.
For example, in an article of the October 16, 2008 edition of the
Army Times, it was reported that thousands of pieces of unprocessed
mail had been found in shredder bins or squirreled away in the desk
drawers of office staff. An audit determined that there were 16,000
pieces of unprocessed mail in Detroit and over 717 documents showed up
in New York during amnesty periods when workers would not be penalized.
Imagine the hours, the days and even months--along with the
frustration consumed by the veteran, the spouse or another family
member in the effort to track down the right person in the right place
in the VA--through an 800 number--to determine if the claim had been
even received.
As we all know, this situation didn't just suddenly happen
overnight. What is most troubling is the fact that it still persists
and exists. Our colleague and Chairman of the Veterans Oversight
Subcommittee and cosponsor of my legislation, Congressman Harry
Mitchell, has long had concerns about this matter and with the help of
the Members of this Committee illuminate the challenges faced by our
veterans by bringing this problem to the forefront.
The Veterans Entitlement to Service Act is simple. It would require
the VA to respond within 60 days to the veteran with an acknowledgement
that the veteran's claim had been received. Nothing more, but our
veterans deserve nothing less. The legislation requires no promise of
payment or determination of benefits. It is simply a way to let the
veteran and his or her family knows that the claim has been received.
This notification, this acknowledgement of the claim, will prevent
stress and build trust in the very first stages of the process. It will
provide the veteran with a sense of security instead of a feeling of
dread, wondering if the claim was received, much less shredded or
squirreled away.
While this bill will address some of the challenges facing our
veterans in Detroit, Michigan or New York, it is a bill that will truly
address the needs of all veterans, wherever he or she resides. When I
see quotes in the paper from a representative of the Gold Star Wives of
America--the non-profit organization made up of military widows/
widowers whose spouse died while on active duty or from service-
connected disabilities--stating that there are problems with survivors
trying to receive VA benefits, it underscores the importance of this
bill.
This Congress--this Committee--has been the driving force to
provide the necessary resources to enable the VA to electronically
store and transmit medical records. Last year, Congress passed the bill
that eventually became Public Law 100-389, the ``Veterans' Benefits
Improvement Act of 2008.'' After the revelations of the last 2 years,
this law is bold and long overdue. First and foremost, the bill
mandates a study of the feasibility and advisability of providing
expeditious treatment of compensation or pension claims to ensure that
such claims are adjudicated not later than 90 days after the date on
which such claim is submitted.
Further, presently under the same law, there is a study underway to
determine the amount of time it takes to process claims. However, how
does one make an accurate assessment of that performance or timeline
when an estimated 18,000 claims, according to published reports, have
not been included?
The appointment of retired U.S. Army General Eric Shinseki as
Secretary of Veterans Affairs by President Barack Obama is another way
of ensuring the resources this Committee approves are used correctly.
General Shinseki's reorganization of the Office of the Secretary is
committed to improving accountability and service to veterans. As a
West Point graduate, highly decorated combat veteran, and four star
general, General Shinseki, along with President Obama, have brought a
transformational vision that will focus on new technologies and new
commitments to today's veterans. The Department of Veterans Affairs
will spend $200 million of Stimulus Recovery Act Funds to hire and
train up to 1,500 claims processors and pursue needed information
technology systems initiatives that will improve service delivery to
our veterans. The VETS Act can add to that technology the ability to
forward a letter to the veteran as soon as the claim is received and
posted. We already have this acknowledgement for our Social Security
recipients; it is time that we do the same for our veterans who were
either drafted, or volunteered, to sacrifice a comfortable life for
themselves and their families in defense of the Constitution of the
United States.
In closing, the sole purpose of this bill is--at the very minimum--
a simple acknowledgement of the receipt of a claim. The bill does NOT
take a position on the qualifications of any claim in any manner. I am
a liberal, and I am a proud Progressive. Regardless of your position on
any issue in any war, liberals and conservatives recognize that we
should--we must--take care of those individuals, and their families,
who consist of less than 2 percent of our population, who protect 98
percent of us each and every day, all over the globe. My legislation is
not just an acknowledgement of the receipt of a claim; it is a matter
of simple respect and dignity to our veterans.
I know that while the Recovery Act will hire and train up to 1,500
VA claims processors, there is a hiring freeze at the Department of
Veterans Affairs. It is my hope and desire that this audit and
assessment is quickly concluded so that the business of the people can
continue. I understand that my bill will add another step to Veterans'
claims and may become another burden on an already understaffed agency.
Hopefully, the hiring of additional claims processors will help
alleviate this challenge. Finally, I am sure that there are some
Members of Congress, organizations, and groups who will assert that my
bill does not go far enough, and that it should be expanded to include
the notification of any movement of the claim along the process. As the
VA moves more and more into digitally recording and electronically
providing various records, this task should be facilitated soon.
Yet, we are not at the date when records can be electronically
transferred. My legislation is a short-term solution until electronic
filing is a reality for all of our veterans.
Some might say that there is a tremendous potential cost in sending
up to 300,000 postcards or letters that would certify whether or not a
claim is received. I counter that those individual veterans, men and
women, know that the potential price of being drafted or volunteering
to fight for our country could be their very lives. What is, however,
the cost of informing our veterans that his or her claim has been
received? I would imagine if I am a veteran and I am wondering if my
country or my military is going to keep its end of the bargain?
Priceless.
I am an Appropriator, and have been an elected legislator for more
than three decades. While I know the needs of the 13th Congressional
District of Michigan, I make no assumption on the wisdom and guidance
of the Members of this Committee. I offer this legislation to be
amended by the august and esteemed Members who make it their duty to
care for our veterans and their families. I thank the Committee for
this hearing and consideration of my bill, H.R. 1982, the VETS Act of
2009, and I look toward its speedy consideration and adoption into law.
I thank the Chair and the Ranking Minority Member for their time.
Prepared Statement of Major Ed Stiles, Sr., USAFR (Ret.) Poland, OH,
on behalf of American Volunteer Group (Flying Tigers)
Chairman Hall, Ranking Member Lamborn, and Members of the
Subcommittee:
My name is Ed Stiles, Sr., and I am pleased to have the opportunity
to appear before you today on behalf of my comrades, both living and
deceased, of American Volunteer Group (AVG), also know as the Flying
Tigers. I am here today to express the AVG's support for H.R. 2270, the
``Benefits for Qualified World War II Veterans Act of 2009.''
H.R. 2270 would provide a $1,000 a month payment to qualified
flying tigers and members of the other 28 World War II civilian groups
that were given veterans status under the process set up by the GI Bill
Improvement Act of 1977. While I am not eligible for this payment I am
here to represent the other flying tigers who are eligible.
Between June 27, 1941, and June 27, 1942, I had the distinct
pleasure of serving as a crew chief for the AVG. We served the Chinese
government in attacks against Japan before and after Pearl Harbor. Our
pilots eliminated 297 enemy aircraft of which 229 were done in the air.
There were approximately 80 pilots that flew for us, 19 of which were
aces. Twenty-two of these brave pilots died in service.
In my role as a Crew Chief, I was in charge with the maintenance of
the P40's. To service each aircraft so that our pilot's had a reliable
aircraft with which to locate and destroy Japanese targets, which at
that time were decimating the Burma Road, and supply routes to the
China Mainland.
My first contact with the AVG was while I was in the Army Air Corp
stationed at Mitchell Field in Long Island, New York. A representative
came to our base caring a signed document from President Roosevelt
granting those interested in going to China, under the command of the
superior air tactician, retired General Claire Chennault, to fight back
the aggression of the Japanese Air Corp, with a $350.00 monthly salary
and an honorable immediate discharge from my present position.
The experience that I had during my contracted time with the AVG
Flying Tigers could never be expressed fully today in my allotted time.
The friendships and military bonds that were created have sustained me
for the past 68 years. Please understand that the mission that the AVG
members undertook ultimately slowed the Japanese aggression in the
Pacific Theater and also revitalized the morale of the American people.
I felt proud and rewarded along with my fellow AVG members the day
we received the Bronze Star Medal on December 8, 1996.
We served our country with honor and gallantry and many of our
members did not receive the World War II GI Bill. However I did not
come here today to seek sympathy but to seek equity.
It is not my place to say that members of the AVG are more or less
deserving of as members of the Merchant Marine but, I believe that if
Congress is going to provide service pensions for the Merchant Mariners
that they should provide this pension to the living members of all of
the 28 groups including my comrades in the AVG.
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 2270 provides this equity and has my full
support. This concludes my statement and I appreciate being given the
opportunity to testify today and I am available to answer any questions
you or the other Members of the Subcommittee may have. Thank you.
Prepared Statement of Bradley G. Mayes,
Director, Compensation and Pension Service,
Veterans Benefits Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am pleased to be
here today to provide the views of the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) on H.R. 1522, the ``United States Cadet Nurse Corps Equity Act,''
and H.R. 1982, the ``Veterans Entitlement to Service (VETS) Act of
2009.'' I cannot address today H.R. 2270, the ``Benefits for Qualified
World War II Veterans Act of 2009,'' because VA received it in
insufficient time to coordinate the administration's position and
develop cost estimates, but, with your permission, we will provide that
information in writing for the record. Also, we could not in the time
given develop a cost estimate for H.R. 1522, so we will also provide
that in writing for the record.
H.R. 1522
H.R. 1522, the ``United States Cadet Nurse Corps Equity Act,''
would deem participation in the United States Cadet Nurse Corps during
World War II to have been active duty in the Armed Forces for purposes
of VA benefits laws. It would prohibit the payment of benefits
resulting from its enactment for any period before the date of
enactment.
Congress in 1977 set up an administrative mechanism for the
consideration of requests by various civilian groups to qualify for
benefits historically provided to veterans of the Armed Forces proper.
Congress created this process to discourage the use of the legislative
process to make such determinations. This bill would override that
deliberative process.
Title IV of Public Law 95-202 authorizes the Secretary of Defense
to review applications to confer Veteran status upon groups who
rendered assistance to the Armed Forces in capacities which at the time
were considered civilian employment or contractual service. In
reviewing such applications, the Secretary of Defense considers the
factors set out in title IV of Public Law 95-202, which include the
extent to which a group's members were subject to military justice,
discipline, and control; the extent to which members were permitted to
resign; their susceptibility to assignment for duty in a combat zone;
and the extent to which they had reasonable expectations that
participation would be considered active military service.
VA does not question that the Cadet Nurse Corps provided valuable
contributions in the nursing field. However, participation in the Corps
alone does not meet the criteria specific to active military service
and subsequent Veteran status. At least twice the Secretary of Defense
has accepted the unanimous recommendations of a review board that
participation in the Cadet Nurse Corps alone is not appropriate for
this status. The review board found that Congress established the Cadet
Nurse Corps primarily to increase the supply of nurses for civilian
hospitals in wartime. Participants were neither employees of the
Federal Government nor legally obligated to future government service.
They received Federal scholarships while attending nursing schools that
received Federal grants-in-aid, and they were allowed to resign at any
time. Some were allowed to train in military and other Federal
hospitals during the last 6 months of the curriculum but still were not
obligated to Federal service. However, certain members of the Cadet
Nurse Corps performed additional service by choosing to enlist upon
graduation. Those nurses who served honorably in this capacity are
already considered Veterans for VA-benefit purposes.
VA believes that the review process established by Public Law 95-
202 works well and should not be circumvented. Moreover, this process
led to appropriate analysis and determinations by the Department of
Defense. VA did not have sufficient time to prepare benefit cost
estimates for this provision.
H.R. 1982
H.R. 1982, the ``Veterans Entitlement to Service (VETS) Act of
2009,'' would require VA to acknowledge the receipt of any claim for
medical services, disability compensation, or pension within 60 days of
receiving the claim. It would also require VA to acknowledge the
receipt of any other communication relating to such services,
compensation, or pension within 60 days of receiving the communication.
While VA recognizes the importance of providing timely
communications with claimants, the provisions of this bill are
problematic, and VA cannot support this bill as written. First, we
believe the bill would be detrimental to VA efforts to streamline and
speed up claim processing by adding additional paperwork and
administrative workload which would not materially advance the merits
of a claim. As a general rule, VA contacts individuals who submit
claims or other communications well within 60 days of receiving their
claims or communications. In addition, as a matter of claims procedure,
VA communicates with the claimant several times during the processing
of a claim. Requiring a special acknowledgment of receipt would add no
value to the current process. In fact, it would significantly burden VA
when the Department is trying to reduce a claim backlog and would
further delay claim adjudication by adding another step to an already
complex process.
The vagueness of the bill language is also a major concern for VA.
The term ``other communication'' could easily be construed to include
the submission of evidence in connection with a claim, e-mails, and
telephone calls. The administrative requirement to acknowledge the
receipt of every such communication would be a tremendous workload that
would detract from VA's core mission of processing claims.
We cannot accurately estimate the administrative costs enactment of
H.R. 1982 would entail because of its vague language.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to
answer any questions you or the other Members of the Subcommittee may
have.
Statement of American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO
Chairman Hall and Members of the Subcommittee:
Thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the American
Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) on H.R. 1982, the ``Veterans
Entitlement to Service (VETS) Act of 2009.''
AFGE does not support this legislation because it will adversely
impact veterans by adding an unnecessary reporting requirement to the
claims process that will cause further delays, which in turn, will
significantly increase the current backlog. The proposed notice
requirement will require a response to every piece of correspondence or
evidence received by VBA, requiring the issuance of millions of
additional notices every year.
In addition, it will require Rating Veteran Service Representatives
to review each received correspondence to ensure that the notice
requirement has been met prior to rendering a decision.
The Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) is already required to
provide a very effective notice to veterans in the form of a detailed
list of the evidence included in a Rating Decision (RD) or other
adjudicative document. Upon receipt of an RD or other adjudicative
document, the veteran is able to determine whether all of the evidence
submitted in support of his or her claim has been received and
considered, and how best to proceed based upon the evidence listed and
the claims decisions made up to that point.
Absent an increase in staff to comply with this new requirement,
this requirement would dramatically increase the amount of time that
veterans wait to receive a decision on their claims. If, on the other
hand, Congress improved the current work credit system, as required by
Section 103 of the Disability Claims Modernization Act enacted, and
gave employees adequate credit for providing the new notices, this bill
would have a much smaller impact on the claims process. However, we
question whether the additional work hours needed to comply with this
requirement are warranted in view of the other notice requirements
already in law and the many other competing needs for additional VBA
employees.
Finally, if and when VBA institutes a paperless claims process, the
need for this notice requirement will become moot, assuming that
veterans will be able to access the contents of their claims files
electronically and determine if all evidence and correspondence was
received.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to present AFGE's view on this
matter.
Statement of Hon. Steve Buyer,
a Representative in Congress from the State of Indiana
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
H.R. 23, as amended, which was recently passed by the House, would
provide a $1,000 monthly payment to WWII Merchant Mariners, but the
bill did not include many other similar WWII veterans groups.
As a result, I introduced H.R. 2270, the ``Benefits for Qualified
World War II Veterans Act of 2009,'' to provide a monthly payment for
all World War II groups that were provided veteran status under the GI
Bill Improvement Act of 1977.
I opposed H.R. 23, as amended, because it provides an unprecedented
non service-connected pension to WWII Merchant Mariners regardless of
income, which is something we do not do for any other veterans except
Medal of Honor recipients.
But because it was approved, I believe that the other 28 groups
with veteran status under the GI Bill Improvement Act of 1977 should be
entitled to the same benefits.
One group of veterans that would benefit from my amendment is the
American Volunteer Group known as the Flying Tigers. This was a group
of American pilots and ground crew who worked for the Chinese
government in defense of Rangoon and parts of China before and after
the attack on Pearl Harbor.
The Flying Tigers are credited for destroying an impressive 297
enemy aircraft and had one of the best kill ratios of any air group in
the pacific theater. There were approximately 80 pilots that flew for
the Flying Tigers, of which 21 died in service. An amazing 19 of them
were credited with five or more air to air victories which makes them
aces. Of the over 300 original members of the flying tigers only 18 of
them are still with us today.
In his praise of the Flying Tigers President Roosevelt stated,
``The outstanding gallantry and conspicuous daring that the American
Volunteer Group combined with their unbelievable efficiency is a source
of tremendous pride throughout the whole of America. The fact that they
have labored under the shortages and difficulties is keenly
appreciated. . . .''
Another group I would like to highlight is the Women Air Force
Service Pilots (WASPS). WASPS were female pilots who flew every type of
mission that any Army Air Force male pilot flew during World War II,
except combat. They freed up male pilots by flying planes from
factories to airfields and overall flew 60 million miles in every type
aircraft in the Army Air Force arsenal--from the fastest fighters to
the heaviest bombers.
Mr. Chairman, I submit to you that if we are going to help the
Merchant Mariners than we must also help groups like the Flying Tigers
and the WASPS and the members of the other groups.
To not do so would be unfair, and I encourage Members of both
parties to do what is right and support H.R. 2270. I yield back.
Statement of John L. Wilson,
Associate National Legislative Director, Disabled American Veterans
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
On behalf of the 1.2 million members of the Disabled American
Veterans (DAV), I am honored to present this testimony to address
various bills before the Subcommittee today. In accordance with our
congressional charter, the DAV's mission is to ``advance the interests,
and work for the betterment, of all wounded, injured, and disabled
American veterans.'' We are therefore pleased to support various
measures insofar as they fall within that scope.
H.R. 1982
The Veterans Entitlement to Service (VETS) Act of 2009, introduced
by Representative Kilpatrick on April 21, 2009, directs the Secretary
of Veterans Affairs (Secretary) to acknowledge the receipt of any claim
for medical services, disability compensation, or pension under the
laws administered by the Secretary for Veterans Affairs, or other
communication relating to such services, compensation, or pension,
submitted to the Secretary by a veteran within 60 days of receiving the
claim or other communication.
Although this legislation is well-intentioned, it is DAV's view
that the VA already has practices and policies in place to communicate
with veterans, their dependents and survivors. The VA sends letters to
veterans, their dependents and survivors in response to compensation
claims. Letters may be sent in reply to veterans, their dependents and
survivors inquiries with VA Contact Centers. Letters are sent to
veterans for each Notification of Disagreement that is received.
Letters of transmittal are sent with each Statement of the Case and
Supplemental Statement of the Case when new evidence is submitted.
In fiscal year 2008, the VA received in excess of 9 million pieces
of correspondence for all claims and other communications. It is our
perspective that this bill, if enacted into law, would place an undue
and unattainable goal on the VA and will greatly delay claims
decisions. The DAV would rather continue the focus, in concert with the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Veterans' Affairs
Committees of the House and Senate, on ways to streamline the claims
process.
H.R. 1522
The United States Cadet Nurse Corps Equity Act, introduced by
Representative Lowey on March 16, 2009, seeks to provide that service
of the members of the organization known as the United States Cadet
Nurse Corps during World War II constituted active military service for
purposes of laws administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
The DAV has no resolution on this bill. It also falls outside the
scope of our organization's mission. However, we have no objection to
its favorable consideration.
H.R. 2270
Benefits for Qualified World War II Veterans Act of 2009, was
introduced by Congressman Buyer on May 6, 2009. It seeks to establish a
compensation fund to make payments to qualified World War II veterans
on the basis of certain qualifying service.
The DAV has no resolution on this bill. It also falls outside the
scope of our organization's mission. However, we have no objection to
its favorable consideration.
MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Washington, D.C.
August 5, 2009
The Honorable Bob Filner
Chairman
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I write to provide the views of the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) on H.R. 2270, the ``Benefits for Qualified World War II Veterans
Act of 2009,'' and to provide a cost estimate for H.R. 1522, the
``United States Cadet Nurse Corps Equity Act.'' Although the agenda for
a May 21, 2009, legislative hearing before the Disability Assistance
and Memorial Affairs Subcommittee of the House Committee on Veterans'
Affairs included these bills, VA was unable to provide this information
in time for that hearing.
H.R. 2270
H.R. 2270 would establish in the U.S. Treasury the ``Qualified
World War II Veterans Equity Compensation Fund'' to fund payments by VA
to certain eligible individuals who are recognized pursuant to section
401 of the GI Bill Improvement Act of 1977 as having served on active
duty.\1\ VA would pay $1,000 per month to each such individual who
applies for these payments within 1 year from the date of enactment of
this bill and has not received benefits under the Servicemen's
Readjustment Act of 1944. The bill would authorize appropriations for
the fund with no predetermined year of expiration. In addition, it
would require VA to include in its budget submissions to Congress each
year detailed reports about the administration of the compensation fund
and, not more than 180 days after enactment, to prescribe regulations
to carry out its provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The bill, at line 8 of page 3, erroneously refers to ``section
1401'' of the GI Bill Improvement Act of 1977.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA does not support this bill. First, to the extent that H.R. 2270
is intended to offer belated compensation to individuals whose civilian
or contractual service is now considered active duty, these individuals
and their survivors are already eligible for Veterans' benefits based
on such service. Pursuant to the authority granted by section 401 of
the GI Bill Improvement Act of 1977, Public Law 95-202, the Secretary
of Defense has determined that the service of 33 such groups
constituted active military service. As a result, these individuals are
eligible for the same benefits and services, including health care and
old age pensions, as other Veterans of active service. This bill
appears to contemplate concurrent eligibility with benefits that
members of these groups may already be receiving from VA, a special
privilege unavailable to other Veterans.
Second, although there can be no doubt that the service groups that
were conferred Veteran status pursuant to section 401 of the GI Bill
Improvement Act of 1977 were exposed to many of the same rigors and
risks of service as those confronted by members of the Armed Forces
during wartime, the universal nature and amount of the benefit that
H.R. 2270 would provide for eligible individuals are difficult to
reconcile with the benefits VA currently pays to other Veterans. H.R.
2270 would create what is essentially a service pension for particular
classes of individuals. Furthermore, this bill would authorize the
payment of a benefit to the members of these groups, based simply on
qualifying service, greater than a Veteran currently receives for a
service-connected disability rated as 60 percent disabling.
During the May 21, 2009, hearing, the Subcommittee on Disability
and Memorial Affairs requested VA to include in its supplemental
written testimony the number of Veterans remaining from each of the
service groups that would be eligible for this benefit. However, this
information is not available to VA. Currently, 33 groups, identified in
38 C.F.R. Sec. 3.7(x), have been recognized pursuant to section 401 of
the GI Bill Improvement Act of 1977 as having performed active military
service. VA confirms Veteran status for individuals from these groups
if they apply for VA benefits, but VA does not maintain statistics on
the various organizations in which they served.
VA estimates that enactment of H.R. 2270 would result in a total
additional benefit cost of approximately $185.5 million in the first
fiscal year and $780.6 million over 10 years. It would result in
additional administrative costs of $490,000 for the first year and $2.6
million over 10 years.
H.R. 1522
H.R. 1522, the ``United States Cadet Nurse Corps Equity Act,''
would deem participation in the United States Cadet Nurse Corps during
World War II to have been active duty in the Armed Forces for VA
benefit purposes, but would prohibit the payment of benefits resulting
from its enactment for any period before the date of enactment. VA
estimates that enactment of H.R. 1522 would result in a total
additional benefit cost of approximately $14.5 million in the first
fiscal year and $79.9 million over 10 years. It would result in
additional administrative costs of $1.9 million for the first year and
$12.3 million over 10 years.
The Office of Management and Budget has advised that there is no
objection to the submission of this report from the standpoint of the
Administration's program.
Sincerely,
Eric K. Shinseki