February 8, 1965
PAGE 2180
INTRODUCTION OF S.1023, A BILL TO PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY TO STATES IN THE USE OF CERTAIN PUBLIC HEALTH GRANTS-IN-AID.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, for myself and Senators BARTLETT, ERVIN, MCCARTHY, McGEE, MOSS, MUNDT, PEARSON, PROUTY, RANDOLPH, and WILLIAMS of New Jersey, I introduce, for appropriate reference, a bill which would provide greater flexibility to States in the use of certain public health grants-in-aid. I ask unanimous consent to have this bill lie on the table for 7 days so that other Senators may join in cosponsoring it.
The proposed legislation implements a recommendation of the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. The senior Senator from North Carolina, the senior Senator from South Dakota, and I have been members of the Commission since it was established.
In the last Congress I introduced similar legislation, S. 1051, but the bill I introduce today differs substantially from S. 1051. It does provide greater flexibility in the use of Federal grants for certain public health programs. But, unlike S. 1051, it does not seek to standardize Federal procedures for the allotment of grant funds.
The bill amends the Public Health Services Act. It permits States to transfer up to one-third of the Federal funds granted in any one of five health categories. These transfers must be to one or more of the other categories in this group of health programs. The categories involved are: general health assistance, cancer control, heart disease control, tuberculosis control, and venereal disease control. Other health grants are not affected for administrative reasons.
Mr. President, the sole purpose of the bill is to provide greater flexibility in State use of Federal grant funds. For many years now these funds have flowed to the States within the rigid confines of the categorical structure. At first, most of these public health programs were established to initiate or stimulate specific types of activity. Today, as a general rule, the major cost of these health activities is borne by the States. The Federal Government plays only a supporting role.
Further, the needs of the States vary considerably. Therefore, the States should have greater discretion in the use of the Federal funds. If the States can transfer up to one-third of the funds in these categories, State health officers will be able to meet unusual and frequently changing needs. With this flexibility, the overall purpose and integrity of the State health programs will be strengthened.
Many groups support this legislation: the Governors' Conference, the National Association of State Budget Officers, the National Association of Attorneys General, the National League of Cities, the National Association of Counties, the Executive Committee of the National Conference of State Legislative Leaders, and the National Legislative Conference of the Council of State Governments. Each of these important national organizations has adopted a formal resolution urging adoption of this measure.
The enactment of this bill, Mr. President, would eliminate one of the obstacles to better Federal-State relations. I ask unanimous consent that its text be inserted in the RECORD immediately following my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill will be received and appropriately referred; and, without objection, the bill will be printed in the RECORD, and will lie on the desk, as requested by the Senator from Maine.
The bill (S. 1023) to amend section 314 of the Public Health Service Act, by providing greater flexibility to States in the use of certain public health grants-in-aid, and for other purposes, introduced by Mr. MUSKIE (for himself and other Senators), was received, read twice by its title, referred to the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, and ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: