Page images
PDF
EPUB

First, in no case will an individual lose any part of the social security benefits to which that individual is otherwise entitled merely because he is also entitled to a railroad annuity.

Secondly, in no case will an individual lose any part of a railroad annuity to which that individual is otherwise entitled merely because he is also entitled to a social security benefit or to another railroad annuity.

I have some individuals in my congressional district, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, who fit in and who would be benefited by the provisions of this bill. I have not obtained up to this time the figures as to what the cost of this amendment would be, but I will do that and I will furnish it in a supplemental statement and if there are other items of information which the committee would like for me to get and file in support of this bill, why I would be glad to do that. Mr. HARRIS. Thank you very much.

Any questions, Mr. Hale?

Mr. HALE. No questions.

Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Dolliver?

Mr. DOLLIVER. Judge, you are as sincerely interested as the other witnesses in keeping this fund solvent?

Mr. DAVIS. I know it must be kept solvent if it is to benefit the railroad employees.

Mr. DOLLIVER. You certainly would not want any amendment passed here that would destroy that solvency?

Mr. DAVIS. No, indeed, I would not.

Mr. DOLLIVER. Thank you, sir.

Mr. HARRIS. You discussed primarily your bill, H. R. 8338.

Did you discuss the provisions of your bill, H. R. 8339?

Mr. DAVIS. No, sir; I wanted to say just a word in behalf of that now, if you will permit me.

Mr. HARRIS. Yes.

Mr. DAVIS. H. R. 8339 is a bill, the purpose of which would be to permit a physically disqualified employee, railroad employee, to draw a full pension when he has passed the age of 50 years.

I have in my congressional district some retired disabled railroad employees who are over the age of 50 years, but not as yet having reached the age at which they can draw railroad retirement benefits, and this bill would permit such employees to draw a full pension instead of a partial pension after being physically disqualified and after passing the age of 50 years.

As I said, I have some constituents who would benefit by this bill and I have not, as I said, obtained the figures yet as to what the cost of it would be, for the reason that I explained at the outset, that I had not anticipated coming before the committee at this early date, but I will do that and will furnish that information in a supplemental statement.

I would like to say also, Mr. Chairman, that I heard the chairman interrogate the previous witness as to whether there were any similar bills on this subject and I am unable to answer that question with reference to these two bills that I have just discussed. I had these two bills prepared by the legislative counsel and I do not know whether there are any other bills on the same subject.

Mr. HARRIS. I might say to our colleague that there are other bills similar to the one you propose to repeal the dual benefit restriction on spouses' annuities.

Mr. DAVIS. Well, it is a matter in which there is a good deal of interest and I, of course, would not be surprised that there should be other bills on the subject.

Mr. HARRIS. I believe there are some provisions in other bills similar to your proposal to allow the survivor to receive benefits under both social security and railroad retirement on the basis of the same employee's earnings.

There are also bills containing the provision to remove the restriction on dual survivor benefits under the Railroad Retirement Act. Now, so far as I have been able to ascertain, you have been the only one to propose retirement due to occupational disability at age 50 with 10 years of service.

Therefore, I wanted to inquire: Was there not a provision similar to that in the social security bill that passed the House in the last session and is now before the Senate?

Mr. DAVIS. Offhand, Mr. Chairman, I am unable to answer that. Mr. HARRIS. It seems that I recall in the amendment of the Social Security Act in the 83d Congress there was a provision with reference to disability which I think froze the status of the individual regarding his social security credits. Then in this last session of Congress the Ways and Means Committee, as I recall, reported a bill which would eliminate the so-called freeze status and permit totally and permanently disabled to draw their disability at age 50.

Mr. DAVIS. I appreciate the chairman calling it to my attention and I will get that pending bill and study it.

Mr. HARRIS. In considering that I wanted to call to your attention the fact that in 1951 we integrated social security with railroad retirement for certain purposes.

There was a joint committee report filed following the 1951 amendment.

The joint committee was set up to study the entire program and we filed a rather extensive report early in 1953. But the integration feature with the social security program is of interest because should the amendment to the social security program that I have just indicated finally become law, then you very likely would have your proposal as part of the law.

I think you might explore that to see how the Social Security Act amendment would affect what you propose here should the Senate concur in the provisions of the House.

I am sure that we will be able to get more information on this as these hearings proceed.

Mr. Hale?

Mr. HALE. No questions.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Dolliver?

Mr. DOLLIVER. No questions.

Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, the clerk has just given me some information here which I might give to the committee; that is, the cost of H. R. 8338 would be about $30 million a year and H. R. 8339 would he approximately $5 million a year.

Mr. HARRIS. Very well.

We will probably get more detailed information as to the effect of those proposals later on. We appreciate having your testimony in behalf of these proposals.

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you for your courtesy.

Mr. HARRIS. You may have permission to file such supplemental information as you would like.

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you, sir.

Mr. HARRIS. We are delighted at this time to welcome to this committee our esteemed colleague from Indiana, Mrs. Cecil M. Harden. Mrs. Harden, you introduced H. R. 6838 to amend the Railroad Retirement Act. We, of course, have known of your interest in the Railroad Retirement Act and the railroad employees over the years. In consideration of these many proposals, we are very glad to have you bring to this committee the information which I know that you have in support of your legislation.

STATEMENT OF HON. CECIL M. HARDEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF INDIANA

Mrs. HARDEN. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I wish to commend this committee for giving attention and such early attention to this very important legislation, and I wish to thank the chairman and the members of this subcommittee also for the opportunity to testify in behalf of my bill, H. R. 6838.

The bill is not a complicated one. It calls only for a 15 percent increase in annuities and pensions paid under the Railroad Retirement Act.

I feel sure that testimony to be heard by your committee will show that an increase is necessary to meet changes in the cost of living since present scales were established.

There are other improvements which I hope can be made in the Railroad Retirement Act. I would like to see amendments which would:

(a) Permit full retirement at age 60 with 30 years' service, of after 35 years of service, regardless of age. Several bills accomplishing this purpose are before the committee.

(6) Remove restrictions which prevent wives of retired workers from receiving full spouse benefits and social-security benefits earned in their own right. Congress has seen fit to remove the dual benefits restriction from retired workers and from widows of retired workers. It would seem but a logical third step to make the same provision for wives. Several Members have introduced bills to this effect.

(c) The last session increased the maximum spouse's benefit from $40 to $54.30, but made no such change in widow's benefits. Removal of the restriction against dual benefits did not, in itself, result in an increase to many widows, since those not qualified for social security received no increase.

I recommend, therefore, an increase of at least 15 percent in the present widow annuities. This increase is provided in the bill I have introduced.

In closing, I again wish to thank the chairman and the members of the subcommittee for this opportunity to appear in behalf of the retired railroaders, their wives and widows, in the Sixth Congressional

District of Indiana. I know the subcommittee will give conscientious attention to their problems and to the recommendations which I have made in their behalf.

I do realize it is very important to keep the fund solvent and what a very complex problem the committee now has before it, but I shall be happy to support any legislation that the committee thinks will be beneficial to those people coming under the Railroad Retirement Act. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee. Mr. HARRIS. Thank you very much, Mrs. Harden.

Any questions, Mr. Williams?

Mr. WILLIAMS. No questions.

Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Hale?

Mr. HALE. No questions.

Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Dolliver?

Mr. DOLLIVER. Have you made any estimate as to the cost of the provisions in your bill?

Mrs. HARDEN. I don't happen to have those figures with me. I thought I did have, but I can provide them for the committee.

Mr. DOLLIVER. Would that not be advisable?

Mr. HARRIS. I think it would.

Mrs. HARDEN. I know that is very important and I thought I had those with me, but I came away in a hurry and I will be glad to provide them.

Mr. DOLLIVER. You recognize, of course, that what you propose will cost some money?

Mrs. HARDEN. Yes, I do.

Mr. DOLLIVER. Thank you.

Mr. HARRIS. Thank you very much, and you may supply the additional information.

Mrs. HARDEN. Thank you again.

(The information referred to follows:)

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C., January 26, 1956.

Hon. OREN HARRIS.

Chairman, Subcommittee on Railroad Retirement,
Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,

New House Office Building

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I wish to again thank you for the courtesy extended to me this morning in regard to my testimony before your subcommittee on H. R. 6838 and other proposals relating to amendment of the Railroad Retirement Act.

In my prepared statement I did not make reference to the cost of the 15 percent pension and annuity increase provided by my bill, since the committee had at hand an estimate by the Railroad Retirement Board and the Bureau of the Budget placing the cost figure at "as much as $110 million a year."

Presumably this estimate is an accurate one and it is true that my bill does not provide an increase in contributions with which to meet the additional burden on the fund. Let me stress, however, my belief that the fund must remain solvent. In other words, I would not object to an increase in contributions if the committee feels that this must be done in order to grant an increase in pensions and annuities.

Again, my thanks for the opportunity to appear before your committee.

Sincerely yours,

75199-56-9

CECIL M. HARDEN.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

211 Mr. HARRIS. The next witness is our colleague from Kentucky, Mr. Seri Mr Siler, we will be glad to hear your Siler introduced H.R. 8492. 1STATEMENT OF HON. EUGENE SILER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN ed lliw CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KENTUCKY 7998 ed A tumorite being on Ideen listened Mr. SILER, ME, Chairman and Mr. Chairman and committee members, I deem it a privilege to appear before your committee and to make this statement in favor of proposed legislation providing, among other things, for an tile increase in the benefits payable to retired railroad employees all over America. While I do not pose as an expert on cost of living indexes nor on railroad retirement problems, yet I do come from a distries in Kentucky having many retired railroad employees and I feel that I know them as friends and neighbors and that I have a good underthem as friends and neighbors an standing of their daily burdens and their general way of life, ivor liffieivor I The cost of living is not a Democratic nor a Republican issue It is not a Kentucky nor a New York question, But it does constitute a kind of universal problem reaching from Maine to California and encompassing all political parties and all colors and creeds, WereFently read that Bureau of Labor statistics now indicate that the retail of December 1955, or just last month, 10915 percent of the average for the 1947-49 period. This would mean, of pourse, that my retired railroad friend down at Somerset. Ky, who is now bent with many years of toil and whose hands well demons strate his more than 30 years of good service to one of our great failroad systems, now pays almost a dollar and a dime for the small ad aeroceries that he formerly carried home for only $1, Byen kast year, at a time of comparative stability in the cost of living, our hous ing costs, laundry, medical care, rents, household services, cpal, gas, electricity, and clothes continued to increase slightly so that retired railroad employees had to pay just a little bit more for these things than they had previously done only the year before.

Je pricedex was, as

I

ur railroad people are among the best, most faithful, most patriotic citizens in America. I have never heard of a railroadnian beinga Communist, although there may be some few over the country that do bear allegiance to the hammer and sickle. As a group, the railroaders are splendid people in time of of peace and valiant soldiers in time of war They too should be remembered as we increase our postal em ployees, our interstate commerce minimum wage workers, our Federal judges and our own selves as Congressmen. Maxwell House Coffee als jou bin na mayonnaise dressing to go on the retired raft bager o same as on the Congressman's and their price tags always look just as obnoxious to them as to usWhen it comes to the price of beef, the Jumped over the moon for the retired railroader just a little moher maybe than for us here in 1009 пi 9289Toni a ghivorg foa baut ed a nebud

J.

Stable

few years ago I rode on an & Railroad passenger train from oxville, Tenn., to my hometown in Kentucky very late at night Suddenly the brakes were applied and the train jerked to wostop! as the engife was deraffed by sizable log off the track. Not a person chor was hurt and all reached their homes safely after a delay of only a few hours. I later remembered the vigilance of the engineer and sat down and wrote him an appreciative letter, commending him for his alert

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »