Boyle, Hon. Charles A., letter from_. 109 Fascell, Hon. Dante B., letter from, enclosing letter from Cecil R. 271 Harden, Hon. Cecil M., letter from__. 123 Latimer, Murray W., letter from, transmitting comments on H. R. 273 National Railroad Pension Forum, Inc.: Letter from Thomas Stack, president- 238 "Polecat" McMillan Honored With Casey Jones Fellowship, 213 Poff, Hon. Richard H., letter from, transmitting information from Railroad Retirement Board to correct figures given in previous Railroad Employees Clubs of America, Inc., letter from Jesse R. 240 Bills to amend the Railroad Retirement and Railroad Unem- ployment Insurance Acts pending before the House of Repre- sentatives, 84th Congress, March 1956___ Letter from Raymond J. Kelly, Chairman, transmitting statistics Statement by Mr. David B. Schreiber regarding increase of Railway Labor Executives' Association: 115 RAILROAD RETIREMENT LEGISLATION TUESDAY, JANUARY 24, 1956 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS, The Subcommittee on Transportation and Communications is meeting this morning to begin hearings on the many bills pending before the committee proposing to amend the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act. There are over 50 such bills pending before this committee, and there may be other bills introduced during the course of these hearings. As it will be remembered, the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce held hearings in the last session of Congress on the bill H. R. 4744, which was introduced by our distinguished chairman, the Honorable J. Percy Priest, and about 15 other bills that were identical to it, or encompassed by it. You will remember that the bill passed both Houses of Congress and became Public Law 383 of the 84th Congress. The principal provisions of the law are: 1. It increased the maximum spouse's annuity payable under the Railroad Retirement Act from the then existing $40 a month to the highest amount which could be paid to anyone as a wife's insurance benefit under the provisions of the Social Security Act, as amended from time to time. In effect, it will be recalled that this amendment established a new maximum of $54.30, beginning with January 1956. Further increases in the maximum will automatically take place if and when the Social Security Act is further amended to provide for higher benefits. 2. The law repealed the dual-benefit restriction on survivor annuities; that is, it repealed the second sentence of section 5 (g) (2) of the Railroad Retirement Act of 1937, as amended. The effect of this repeal is to permit a widow, dependent widower, child, or parent of a deceased railroad employee to receive the full amount of his or her survivor annuity without any deductions because he or she may be eligible to receive simultaneously a social-security benefit under the Social Security Act. 3. The bill had to do with Railroad Retirement Board personnel. The bill as it became law provides that practically all positions, with certain exceptions, to which individuals are appointed by the Railroad Retirement Board shall be in and under the classified [competitive] 1 civil service and it provided that they should not be removed or excepted therefrom. At the time of the hearings last year, which culminated in the report by this committee of the bill just referred to, and its passage, I announced that this committee during this coming session, during this session of Congress, would hold hearings on the remaining bills pending before the committee as soon as we had received the sixth actuarial valuation report of the railroad retirement system. This report is now available for members of the committee. The 53 bills introduced by our distinguished colleagues in the House, and pending before the committee, in which there has been so much interest manifested by so many Members and their constituents, and all railroad people, will be inserted at this point into the record by number and sponsor. I think this is appropriate because now we have at the outset of the hearings the number of the bill and the sponsor of each bill available for anyone who would like to see it. (The bills and sponsors are as follows:) H. R. 182, by Mrs. St. George, of New York; H. R. 306, by Mr. Wickersham, of Oklahoma; H. R. 738, by our colleague on this committee, Mr. Williams of Mississippi; H. R. 757, H. R. 760, H. R. 2573, and H. R. 3416, by Mr. Cunningham of Iowa, H. R. 856, H. R. 858, H. R. 859, H. R. 861, H. R. 2443, H. R. 7982, H. R. 7983, H. R. 7984, H. R. 7985, H. R. 7986, H. R. 7987, H. R. 7988, H. R. 7989, and H. R. 7990, by Mr. Van Zandt, of Pennsylvania; H. R. 2026 and H. R. 4301, by Mr. O'Konski, of Wisconsin; H. R. 3087, by Mr. Bennett of Florida; H. R. 3209, by Mr. Dorn of South Carolina; H. R. 3401, H. R. 8230, H. R. 8231, and H. R. 8587, by Mr. Boyle, of Illinois; H. R. 3590, by our colleague on this committee, Mr. Friedel, of Maryland; H. R. 3607, by Mr. O'Brien, of New York; H. R. 3612, by Mr. Rogers of Colorado; H. R. 3719, by Mr. Winstead, of Mississippi; H. R. 3795, by Mr. Poff, of Virginia; H. R. 3826, by Mr. Powell, of New York; H. R. 3938, by Mr. Radwan, of New York; H. R. 4305 and H. R. 4306, by Mr. Smith, of Mississippi; H. R. 4555 and H. R. 6833, by Mr. Bentley, of Michigan; H. R. 4787, by Mr. Broyhill, of Virginia; H. R. 5218, by Mr. Zelenko, of New York; H. R. 5272, by Mr. Denton, of Indiana; H. R. 5361, by Mr. Blatnik, of Minnesota; H. R. 5426, by Mr. Hyde, of Maryland; H. R. 5702, by our colleague on this committee, Mr. Bennett of Michigan; H. R. 5801, by Mr. Cretella, of Connecticut; H. R. 6838, by Mrs. Harden, of Indiana; H. R. 8338 and H. R. 8339, by Mr. Davis, of Georgia; H. R. 8399, by Mr. Sikes, of Florida; H. R. 8492, by Mr. Siler, of Kentucky; and H. R. 8702, by Mr. Perkins, of Kentucky. The 53 bills on which we will hold hearings can be grouped into a few principal categories. I think this will be helpful to all of us and to the hearings. There are some 14 bills which provide for retirement at age 60 and/or after 30 years of service, or after 35 years of service, with an annuity of not less than half of the employee's monthly compensation during his 5 years of highest earnings. We have some 5 bills which provide for retirement on a full annuity at age 60 and/or after 30 years of service, without changing the present formula for computing annuities. We have another category of about 10 bills which provide for a flat percentage increase in benefits, ranging from 10 to 25 percent. There is still another category containing some 12 bills which provide for the repealing of certain restrictions on the right of spouses and/or survivors to receive full benefits simultaneously under both the Railroad Retirement Act and the Social Security Act, or to receive more than 1 annuity under the Railroad Retirement Act. And then there are other measures. Some bills would lower the eligibility age for spouses from 65 to 60 years. Two bills would repeal the "last person" employer clause, and so on. So you can readily see that this committee has quite a job ahead of it.to consider these various bills. Copies of the reports on these bills from the executive departments and agencies will, without objection, be made a part of the record at this point. (The reports follow:) EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Washington, D. C., June 14, 1955. Hon. J. PERCY PRIEST, Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your letter of January 26, 1955, requesting a report on H. R. 182, a bill to provide that railroad employees may retire on a full annuity at age 60 or after serving 30 years; to provide that such annuity for any month shall be not less than one-half of the individual's average monthly compensation for the 5 years of highest earnings; and for other purposes. It is also in response to your requests for reports on the following related bills which would carry out the same objectives: H. R. 858, H. R. 3607, and H. R. 3826. These bills would liberalize the present retirement provisions of the railroad retirement program by permitting employees to retire on a full annuity at age 60 or after serving 30 years. They would also provide for annuities of not less than one-half of the individual's average monthly compensation for the 5 years in which his earnings were highest. The Chairman of the Railroad Retirement Board advises that enactment of this bill would increase greatly the present cost of paying benefits under the Railroad Retirement Act. This added cost would leave the railroad retirement system in an unsound financial condition, since the bill makes no provision for additional revenue to offset the cost increase. In the circumstances, the Bureau of the Budget recommends against enactment of H. R. 182 and the related bills, H. R. 858, H. R. 3607, and H. R. 3826. Sincerely yours, DONALD R. BELCHER, RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD, The Honorable J. PERCY PRIEST, Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, DEAR MR. PRIEST: This is a report on H. R. 182, introduced in the House of Representatives by Mrs. St. George on January 5, 1955, and referred to your committee for consideration. This bill provides full annuities, at not less than one-half the employee's average monthly compensation for the 5 years of highest earnings, for employees who have completed 30 years of service or who have attained age 60. The enactment of this bill would increase very greatly the present cost of paying benefits under the Railroad Retirement Act; it provides for liberalization of benefits but does not provide for any additional revenue to meet the added cost of such liberalization. Such added cost, since the bill makes no provision for additional revenue to offset it, would leave the railroad retirement system in an unsound financial condition. Regardless of other considerations, therefore, the Board, for that reason alone, recommends that no favorable consideration be given to this bill. Moreover, the Board believes that no consideration should be given to bills to amend the present Railroad Retirement Act until the sixth actuarial valuation of the railroad retirement system has been completed. The Bureau of the Budget advises that it has no objection to the Board's submission of this report and concurs in recommending against enactment of this bill. Sincerely yours, RAYMOND J. KELLY, Chairman. EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT. Hon. J. PERCY PRIEST, BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Washington, D. C., June 14, 1955. Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, Washington 25, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your letter of January 26, 1955, requesting a report on H. R. 306, a bill "To amend the Railroad Retirement Act to provide that a railroad employee who has completed 30 years of service may retire on a full annuity, and for other purposes." The bill would permit railroad employees with 30 years of service to retire on full annuities regardless of age or physical condition. The chairman of the Railroad Retirement Board advises that enactment of this bill would increase greatly the present cost of paying benefits under the Railroad Retirement Act. Since the bill makes no provision for the additional revenue required to defray this cost, its enactment would leave the railroad retirement system in an unsound financial condition. In the circumstances, the Bureau of the Budget recommends against enactment of H. R. 306. Sincerely yours, DONALD R. BELCHER, Assistant Director. RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD, Hon. J. PERCY PRIEST, Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, DEAR MR. PRIEST: This is a report on H. R. 306, introduced in the House of Representatives by Mr. Wickersham on January 5, 1955, and referred to your committee for consideration. The bill provides full annuities for employees who have performed 30 years of service, regardless of age or physical condition. The enactment of this bill would increase very greatly the present cost of paying benefits under the Railroad Retirement Act; it provides for liberalization of benefits but does not provide for any additonal revenue to meet the added cost of such liberalization. Such added cost, since the bill makes no provision for additional revenue to offset it, would leave the railroad retirement system in an unsound financial condition. Regardless of other considerations, therefore, the Board, for that reason alone, recommends that no favorable consideration be given to H. R. 306. Moreover, the Board believes that no consideration should be given to bills to amend the present Railroad Retirement Act until the sixth actuarial valuation of the railroad retirement system has been completed. The Bureau of the Budget advises that it has no objection to the Board's submission of this report and recommends against enactment of the bill. Sincerely yours, RAYMOND J. KELLEY, Chairman. EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Washington, D. C., June 16, 1955. Hon. J. PERCY PRIEST, Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This will acknowledge and reply to your requests for the views of the Bureau of the Budget on H. R. 738, H. R. 757, H. R. 857, H. R. 2026, H. R. 2591, H. R. 3416, H. R. 3719, H. R. 3743, H. R. 3796, H. R. 5272, H. R. 5361, and H. R. 5801, bills to amend the Railroad Retirement Act. These bills include a number of provisions which are similar to one or more of the provisions included in H. R. 4744. The views of the Bureau of the Budget with respect to H. R. 4744 have been set forth in our recent report to your com |