ists will have a better opportunity to participate. Generally speaking, we think that the training facilities for reservists in most areas are entirely inadequate. Many reservists, in order to maintain their active status, are required to travel each week or twice a month, 50 or more miles, to participate in a 2-hour drill period. We believe that the Reserve program will be more effective by the establishment of units more convenient to the reservists with the proper facilities for training. We must have an adequate defense force in the United States and among the nations of the free world if we are to meet effectively the threat of Communist aggression. We must always keep in mind that this period of tension may be of long duration and, therefore, we must develop programs designed to most effectively utilize our limited manpower resources. We believe that this can be accomplished first, by the continuation of the selective-service program; second, by the expansion of the civilian components of our Armed Forces through a more adequate and systematic program for training both officers and enlisted reservists; and, third, by the expansion of the military-training program in our colleges and universities. As we build and expand the Reserve program, we believe that the standing Army can be reduced and still maintain an effective striking force to meet any contingency, and at the same time reduce the budget for defense. We hope that this committee will give consideration to the suggestions we have made and that the principles embodied in H. R. 5426 will be approved by the Congress. Senator LONG. Are there any questions, Senator Hunt? Senator HUNT. I do not believe I have any questions. Do you approach this from the standpoint of both the Enlisted Reserve or of the commissioned officer? Mr. LYNN. I approach it from both, sir. I think many times the officers are more inclined to become active in Reserve than the enlisted men because of the indefinite situation with regard to the enlisted men. I know of some cases where enlisted men, veterans of World War II, came out and began farming operations of a section of land, and without any notice hardly whatsoever they were called after having a family and so on. Certainly this applies to both officer and enlisted reservists. Senator HUNT. Generally speaking, since World War I our Reserve program has been built primarily around officers. The situation will change and eventually it will run about 10 enlisted men in the Reserves to 1 officer, so that the program should be slanted toward the training of the enlisted men equally, perhaps, even more so than the officers. Mr. LYNN. I certainly agree, sir. Senator LONG. We thank you very much for your testimony here today. If there are no further questions, the committee will be in recess until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning. (Whereupon, at 12 o'clock noon, the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene at 10 a. m., Wednesday, May 28, 1952.) ARMED FORCES RESERVE ACT WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 1952 UNITED STATES SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED FORCES, Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 10 a. m., in room 212, Senate Office building. Present: Senator Long (presiding). Also present: Verne D. Mudge, of the committee staff. I am sorry that Senator Hunt is tied up today. Senator Hunt especially wanted to be here today and he made every effort but he could not work it out. He especially wanted to be here because as former Governor he is familiar with the National Guard problems and wanted to hear the testimony of the National Guard representatives. Of course, he will review the testimony in the record but he regretted he could not be here personally. Likewise, Senator Cain is unavoidably absent. The subcommittee will proceed with consideration of H. R. 5426, the Armed Forces Reserve Act. We have scheduled today a very distinguished panel of witnesses representing the various associations of Reserve officers, and the National Guard. Our last witness scheduled for today represents the American Federation of Labor. This organization was originally planned to be heard on Tuesday with the CIO. It is my understanding that Tuesday was not convenient for the witness so we have changed our schedule so as to accommodate him to the best possible advantage. The Senate resumes consideration of the Mutual Security Act at noon today, and it will not be possible for the subcommittee to meet this afternoon. If the Senate does not meet this evening the chairman hopes that the subcommittee can hold an evening session. However, if the Senate recesses late, and an evening session of the subcommittee is impracticable, it will be necessary to postpone any remaining witnesses on today's panel until Friday or Monday. This will permit us to proceed tomorrow with the regular order of witnesses as previously scheduled. At this particular point in these hearings it might be well to again emphasize that, beginning in August of this year, the composition of our Reserve components will begin to undergo a rather basic transformation. This transformation comes about as a result of the fact that, beginning in August, hundreds of thousands of enlisted men with obligated periods of service in the Reserve components will be returning each year from the active military forces, and will be re quired to enter the Reserve, and remain therein, subject to all the obligations for future active duty, for periods which will range from a minimum of 3 years to an ultimate high of 6 years. The rate of flow of these enlisted men into the Reserve components will begin with a rather modest trickle of some 50,000 per month. It will then drop off for a few months, but within the space of a rather short time this trickle will expand to a very sizable flow approximating some 700,000 or 800,000 men per year. I mention this because the subcommittee is deeply concerned over the vital necessity of focusing attention upon the welfare of the enlisted man in the formulation of our Reserve legislation. We cannot do this in terms of generalities. We must be specific, because the possibility of a second recall of the individual reservist is in his mind no generality-it is stark realism. Inasmuch as yesterday the testimony of various organizations related to scientists and engineers and professional people, I believe it is well to bear in mind that 90 percent of the reservists are still to be enlisted men, and they were the ones, the group which suffered the greatest hardship upon being recalled for this last emergency, and I hope that our witnesses will keep that in mind as they develop this record. As the first witness here I will call, as representing the National Guard Association of the United States, Maj. Gen. Ellard A. Walsh, and as the second witness representing that organization we have Maj. Gen. Milton A. Reckord, both of whom are to testify this morning. General Walsh. General Walsh, I see that you have some additional guests here, for whom we are delighted to find seats. I understand these gentlemen are representatives from the State selective service boards, selective service directors, and staffs. We are happy to have you here today. We are very happy to have you gentlemen of the selective service and adjutant generals of the National Guard who are in town today. Will you proceed, General Walsh? STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. ELLARD A. WALSH, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL GUARD ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES General WALSH. Mr. Chairman, this morning I am accompanied by Maj. Gen. Milton A. Reckord, adjutant general of Maryland and chairman of our legislative committees; Maj. Gen. William H. Harrison, adjutant general of Massachusetts; Maj. Gen. Donald W. McGowan, adjutant general of New Jersey; Col. John Strauss, adjutant general of Missouri; Lt. Col. Raymond Nelson, of Virginia; Lt. Col. Rolla Van Kirk, of Nebraska, and Maj. Allan Crist, of the District of Columbia. In addition, we have many of the adjutants general of the several States and Territories who are here in connection with this selectiveservice conference. I would like to submit a list to the reporter if I may, to be headed, "Selective Service Directors and Staffs." Senator LONG. Very well. (The list referred to is as follows:) L SELECTIVE SERVICE DIRECTORS AND STAFFS Col. Donald A. MacGrath, deputy State director of selective service, New Jersey Lt. Col. J. L. Brause, chief medical director, District of Columbia selective service system Brig. Gen. S. H. Mitchell, adjutant general of Montana Brig. Gen. George M. Carter, adjutant general and director of selective service, Maine Col. L. E. Lilygren, director of selective service, Minnesota Lt Col. Leo W. Davis, chief, manpower division, selective service, Louisiana Brig. Gen. John E. Walsh, adjutant general and director of selective service, Col. Francis H. Mason, headquarters, selective service, Oregon Brig. Gen. R. L. Esmay, adjutant general and director of selective service, Wyoming Brig. Gen. James May, adjutant general, Nevada Brig. Gen. Charles R. Fox, adjutant general and director of selective service, West Virginia Col. John P. McFarland, assistant adjutant general, New Mexico Col. Robert E. White, deputy director of selective service, Delaware Maj. William J. Hatcher, chief, manpower division, selective service headquarters, Georgia Col. J. T. Johnson, Jr., director of selective service, Alabama Col. Howard E. Reed, director of selective service, Colorado Brig. Gen. H. L. Edwards, adjutant general and director of selective service, North Dakota Brig. Gen. Ernest Novey, director of selective service, Connecticut Col. Henry C. Stanwood, director of selective service, Maryland Lt. Col. Arthur A. Holmes, director of selective service, Michigan Brig. Gen. Guy N. Henninger, adjutant General and director of selective service, Nebraska Brig. Gen. Theodore Arndt, adjutant General and director of selective service, South Dakota Brig. Gen. Robinson Hitchcock, adjutant General and director of selective service, Indiana General WALSH. Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I will proceed. I have prepared a rather brief statement and by giving this statement which is essentially an oultine of what would be said, I believe we can conserve the time of the subcommittee. Senator LONG. We hope to expedite these hearings just as much as possible, General Walsh, feeling that unless these hearings are concluded at a very early date it will be impossible to have any consideration of this legislation during this Congress. That is the reason we are asking everyone to make their statements as brief as possible. BACKGROUND OF PRESENT BILL General WALSH. In January of 1951, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee directed the Secretary of Defense to submit to the Congress, on or before March 1, 1951, a bill relating to the Reserve components of the Armed Forces which would have for its over-all purpose the establishment and maintenance of a more effective Reserve system, and which, in the opinion of reservists and others, was long overdue. The task of preparing such a measure was delegated to the Reserve Forces Policy Board in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. At the time this was done the Reserve organizations were afforded an opportunity then and subsequently to appear |