January 15, 1965
PAGE 734
INTRODUCTION OF S.561, INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION ACT OF 1965
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce, for appropriate reference a bill to enable greater cooperation and coordination among Federal, State, and local governments in order to strengthen our great Federal system and more effectively to meet the needs of the American people.
For over 2 years the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations, of the Committee on Government Operations, has been examining questions of Federal-State-local relations, including the rapid growth in number and complexity of Federal grant-in-aid programs, and the vexing problems of governmental relationships in our burgeoning metropolitan areas.
I think that the President, in his state of the Union message last week, had these problems in mind when he suggested that "we make an all-out campaign against waste and inefficiency." He also pointed out that "in our urban areas the central problem today is to protect and restore man's satisfaction in belonging to a community where he can find security and significance. The first step is to break old patterns -- to begin to think, and work, and plan for the development of entire metropolitan areas."
In furtherance of both the concern and the goals stated by the President, I am introducing the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act of 1965. This, I hope, is the first of an annual series of measures designed to keep our Federal system abreast of these rapidly changing times. This proposed act includes five titles: Title I: Improved Administration of Grants-in-Aid to the States; Title II: Periodic Congressional Review of Federal Grants-in-Aid to States and to Local Units of Government; Title III: Permitting Federal Departments and Agencies To Provide Specialized or Technical Services to States and to Local Units of Government; Title IV: Coordinated Intergovernmental Policy and Administration of Grants for Urban Development; and Title V: Acquisition, Use, and Disposition of Land Within Urban Areas by Federal Agencies in Conformity With Land Utilization Programs of Affected Local Governments.
Most of the provisions grow out of studies of the subcommittee, of which I am privileged to be chairman, and from recommendations of the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, on which I and my colleagues, the senior Senators from South Dakota and North Carolina, serve as members.
The grant-in-aid is one of the most useful devices of our system of government for meeting a national problem while at the same time maintaining the strength of State and local government. The vitality of State and local government as we now know it would be diminished without the support of the various grant-in-aid programs. Further, it would be extremely difficult and highly undesirable for the Federal Government to establish its own direct operating programs in each of the more than 100 grant fields with the consequent expansion in the size of the Federal establishment.
It has been the particular responsibility of our subcommittee to observe the overall pattern and impact of these Federal aids. Our conclusion to date, and I believe it is shared by many, is that a welter of confusion and inconsistent procedures has been established, often pursuant to law, by many Federal departments and agencies administering these programs; many programs, once established, have not been reviewed and revised by the Congress in light of changing needs; Federal agencies often lack authority to provide technical services to State and local agencies that would prove economical for all three levels of government; in our urban areas there has been inadequate concern on the part of some Federal agencies with overall local goals and desires; individual Federal agencies sometimes overlook the interdependency of their program with other Federal, State, local, and private activities; some Federal programs have supported or encouraged the establishment of special districts, further complicating the pattern of local government; and there is insufficient recognition in Federal grant-in-aid programs of the need for the many governments in our metropolitan areas to work together to solve common problems.
Title I of this bill authorizes that full information be made available to the Governors on funds granted within their States, and provides for more uniform administration of Federal grant funds. This title would also improve the scheduling of Federal transfers of grant funds to the States, resulting in a saving in Federal interest costs. It permits the States to budget Federal grant funds in much the same way as they budget other revenues, thereby achieving a greater degree of regularity in financial planning for the operation of their agencies. The provisions of this title permit simplification of organizational arrangements at the State level for administering grant-in-aid programs.
Title II provides for periodic congressional review of new Federal grant-in-aid programs to insure that such programs are examined systematically and are reconsidered in light of changing conditions and new program requirements.
Mr. Kermit Gordon, Director of the Budget, writing in Saturday Review's special issue of January 9, 1965, on the "Challenge of Prosperity," emphasized the necessity for a "reexamination of the premises of existing programs, for a weighing of alternatives" to meet new challenges and opportunities. He stated that we should "look carefully at the programs that have already found a place in the Federal budget. They are not suspect simply because they are there; but neither does their long tenure exempt them from periodic scrutiny to determine whether their shape and size are appropriate."
This title was unanimously passed by the Senate as S. 2114 in the last session, but not acted upon by the House.
Title III authorizes Federal departments and agencies to render technical assistance and training services to State and local governments on a reimbursable basis. This will enable State and local governments to avoid the expense of unnecessary duplication of specialized or technical services, and permit more economical use of Federal facilities. Congress previously has authorized the provision of such arrangements in the case of the Bureau of the Census, the Internal Revenue Service, and a number of other agencies.
Title IV establishes a coordinated intergovernmental urban assistance policy. It also requires local government review of certain applications for Federal programs and encourages a broader approach for review, at the metropolitan area level, of applications for loans as well as grant projects affecting urban development. The title, therefore, serves to strengthen metropolitan planning machinery and encourages more orderly metropolitan growth. The fourth section of this title was unanimously passed by the Senate as S. 855 in the last session, but was not acted upon by the House.
Also, this title favors the eligibility of units of general local government -- cities, towns, and counties -- as recipients of Federal aids -- in contrast to special purpose districts and authorities.
Finally, title V amends the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act by prescribing a uniform policy and procedure for urban land transactions and use undertaken by the General Services Administration. Acquisition, use, and disposal of land in urban areas by this agency shall be consistent, to the extent possible, with local zoning regulations and development objectives. Like title IV, this title will help make urban planning more effective.
The major organizations of governmental officials in this country -- the Governors' Conference, the National League of Cities, the National Association of Counties, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and the American Institute of Planners -- have formally endorsed practically all of the principles embodied in this legislation. These officials and organizations are deeply interested in a full examination and subsequent action by the Congress to improve intergovernmental relations. Various Federal agencies and departments have also expressed interest and support on different provisions of the bill.
I look forward to prompt and thorough hearings on this important legislation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill, together with a section-by-section analysis, be inserted in the RECORD immediately following my remarks, and that the bill lie on the table for 10 days so that other Senators may join in cosponsoring it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill will be received and appropriately referred; and, without objection, the text of the bill and the section-by-section analysis will be printed in the RECORD. Also, without objection, the request that the bill lie on the table for 10 days is granted.
The bill (S. 561) to achieve the fullest cooperation and coordination of activities between the levels of government in order to improve the operation of our Federal system in an increasingly complex society, to improve the administration of grants-in-aid to the States, to provide for periodic congressional review of Federal grants-in-aid, to permit provision of reimbursable technical services to State and local governments, to establish coordinated intergovernmental policy and administration of grants and loans for urban development, to provide for the acquisition, use, and disposition of land within urban areas by Federal agencies in conformity with local government programs, and for other purposes, introduced by Mr. MUSKIE, was received, read twice by its title, referred to the Committee on Government Operations, and ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows.