Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-02-19
Sponsor IntimateS President
Prefers His Proposal to
DaIe'S Measure.
Continued From First Page)

| the Senate would have to be reckoned
with, and that in another body where
| there is unlimited debate" the Lehlbach
bill. an entirely new and unfamiliar
plan, might fall by the wayside.
Mr.. Stewards testimony was given
before a large crowd of active and re-
tired Government employees. Waiting
10 be heard were representatives Of the
/ Joint conference on retirement and
| the League OF the American Civil Serv-
ice, two organizations which have been
! opposing vigorously the new Lehlbach
bill and asking for the passage by the
House of the Dale bill, which already
has passed the Senate.
Before MIR. Steward took the stand
several other witnesses had given gen.
eral approval to the new Lehlbach bill
all of them having been called at Mr.
Stewards suggestion. One or two Of
them, however, made various sugges-
tons for changes in the bill.
Rapaspeck Questions Robbins.
At one point Representative Rams
peck asked l.. o. Robbins, representing
employees of the Department of Agri-
culture, a series Of questions about de-
tails of the new bill, over which there
is considerable controversy.
This discussion may delay action be
You'd this Congress-" remarked Mr.
Ramspeck Would not you rathe
have the Dale bin now than wait unit
the next Congress?"
Eyes," replied Mr.. Robbins.
When the hearing was resumed thi
morning, U. j. Billier of the Pension
Bureau. chairman of the subcommitte,
on retirement Of the National Fedora
ton Of Federal Employees, continued tn,
testimony which he began yesterda,
afternoon.
He referred to several tables prepare,
by himself, indicating that certain
classes Of employees in the lower-salarieC
grade would receive larger annuitie
under the new Lehlbach bill than unde
the Dale bill. Previously he had testi
fled that the two bills would benefi
employees receiving in the neighborhoo
Of $1,000 about equally.
Dallinger Wants Number.
Representative Dallinger of Massa
chusetts asked how many of the 400
900 Government employees were receiv
ing salaries less than 81 200. Mr.. Bile
, replied that he was not informed O
that subject, but he felt sure that tn
low salaries in the Government servic
. were going to disappear"
There was considerable discussion {
, the tontine plan, which has been in
corporated in the new Lehlbach bill. {
which many objections have bee
raised.
Isn't the tontine plan only a smal
, part of the bill, since tfe Government
proposes to give an annuity Of 5000
year regardless Of any annuity whicl
the employees may be able to purchas
under the other plan?" asked Represent
alive Mccormack of Massachusetts,.
| u =, u -.
, have an actuary answer that question
Mr.. MacCormack wanted to kno'
what Mr.. Biller thought about the at
titude of an employe who knew or eX
pected he would not remain in tn
Government service toward the propos.
In the bill for a deduction of 81
month from his salary, which woul
be forfeited upon his leaving the serv
ice.
Biller Hesitates 10 Reply.
such an employee would know tina
was part Of his position" replied Nj
Biller. Personally, would not min
it."
Lets be frank" declared Mr.. Mac
Cormack. +As O matter of fact, thi
part of the bill Is intended to help tn
high-Salaried people, isn't it? II W
1
we only have to grant them q pension.
When Mr.. Biller hesitated to repE
Mr.. Mccormack remarked that h
merely wanted the committee to I'm
derStand what appeared to be the pur
pose Of this part of the bill.
Frank G. Ashburn, biologist of tn
Bureau of Biological Survey, Depart
ment of Agriculture, representing
committee Of professional employees o
that department and also q genera
committee of so representing employs
Of the Department OF Agriculture. wa
the next witness. He said that thu
group for which he spoke was favor
able to the new Lehlback bill.
Mr.. AShburn said his present Salar,
is $500 a year. He appeared to be |
young man, but did not give his age
He said the group Of employees to which
he belonged would not be eligible fo
retirement until they reached So year
of age.
Wants Discrimination Removed.
my group feels that the discrimina,
! ton should be removed that has resteC
against the unprecedented employees.
He went on to explain that thu
higher-salaried employees, at the rate Of
az per cent reduction from their sal.
aries under the present law and as pro-
posed in both new bills. were contribute
ing a much larger sum to the retirement
fund than the loWer-salaried employees
and vet, on account Of the maximum
retirement pay fixed in the law anC
proposed in the Dale bill, they could
never receiver after retirement pay in
proportion to the amount of money they
had contributed.
I'VE feel that the new Lehlbach bill
removes this discrimination to q great
extent" said Mr.. Ashburn.
Mr.. Ramspeck suggested that the con-
tributions made by the higher-salaried
employees to the retirement fund might
be helpful to the lower -salaried en-
ploye, but Mr.. Ashburn said he did not
think so.
The next witness was Mr.. Robbins OF
the Department of Agriculture, who said
that he was nearly go years of age and
had been about 81 years in the Govarn-
ment service and now was receiving a
salary of $4,000. He said he hoped to
retire at So.
Has Comparative Figures.
Mr.. Robbins said that he had worked
out the retired pay he would get each
year under the Lehlbach and the Dale
bills. If he retired at so years, he
figured he would get $l,207 under the
Lehlbach bill and 81 200 under the Dale
| bill.
If he retired at 10, he figured, he
would get $1,28584, under the Lehlbach
bill, which would be just 1854 greater
! than under the Dale bill.
| Mr.. Robbins then said that the group
represented by him considered 1t highly