October 13, 1966
Page 26523
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION OF PLANNING AMONG FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL OFFICIALS
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, on September 2 of this year, President Johnson issued a special memorandum calling for the coordination of development programs and planning at the Federal level and for Federal cooperation with State and local development agencies in establishing common planning bases and in sharing facilities and resources.
The memorandum specifically recognizes the need for "comprehensive planning" in solving State, metropolitan and regional problems, and calls for an end to “conflict and duplication” where Federal assistance is involved.. It also recognizes that the boundaries for federally assisted development and planning districts should be the same as those of comparable State districts.
In the flurry of executive and legislative business, this September 2 memorandum may have been missed by many of my colleagues. It is an extremely significant document. I hope it represents the beginning of a renewed Executive effort to put the Federal administrative house in order, and to develop a more effective intergovernmental relationship between Federal administrators in Washington and the field, and their State and local counterparts.
The fact that the President is concerned about this problem of intergovernmental coordination should now be a signal to department heads to get moving in this area, and develop an effective policy of metropolitan and regional development before the physical and human crises of our cities and rural areas become unmanageable.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the President's memorandum be inserted at this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the memorandum was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
COORDINATION FOR DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
(Memorandum From the President Requesting Coordination at the Federal Level, September 2,1966).
Memorandum to: Secretary of Commerce; Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare; Secretary of Housing and Urban Development; Secretary of Interior; Secretary of Agriculture; Director, Office of Economic Opportunity; Co-Chairman, Appalachian Regional Commission; Director, Bureau of the Budget.
Subject: Coordination for Development Planning
The Federal Government, through a number of departments and agencies, is now authorized to require and assist State and local governments and specialized agencies to formulate and carry out development plans.
Comprehensive planning covering wide areas is a promising and extremely important beginning to the solution of critical State, metropolitan, and regional problems. It is essential that it be done well.
At the Federal level, we must coordinate our efforts to prevent conflict and duplication among federally-assisted comprehensive planning efforts.
This should have two aspects:
State and local development planning agencies should be encouraged to work together in using common or consistent planning bases (i.e., statistical and economic estimates), and in sharing facilities and resources.
Boundaries for planning and development districts assisted by the Federal Government should be the same and should be consistent with established State planning districts and regions.
Exceptions should be made only where there is clear justification.
I am requesting the head of each of the departments and agencies concerned with these matters to work with the Director of the Bureau of the Budget to insure the fullest coordination in fixing the boundaries of multi-jurisdictional planning units assisted by the Federal Government.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, we have been talking about this problem of intergovernmental relations for far too long. Now is the time to put our words and studies into a solid, active policy of intergovernmental cooperation -- to use the best resources and manpower at every level to zero in on the big problems of public development and solve them.
The President's call for action in his memorandum is particularly gratifying to those of us who for some time have been trying to identify and emphasize the real dangers we face for the future in our Federal system if we do not bring some order out of the chaos of proliferating public programs, haphazard planning, and conflicting governmental authorities. With 173 Federal aid programs, administered by 13 Federal departments and agencies through more than 125 bureaus and hundreds of State and local offices, we can no longer tolerate administrative inefficiency and confusion at the Federal level. With over 92,000 units of local government, each with its own degree of independent autonomy, taxing and financing power and operating capability, there is an obvious need for developing jurisdictional and planning coordination at State and local levels.
And with an anticipated growth in population to 225 million by 1975, 80 percent of which will be crowded into our urban metropolitan areas, there is a critical need for establishing comprehensive governmental machinery to cope with the local public services the people of this country will demand.
Earlier this year, in a speech on this floor -- March 25 -- 1 warned that there was too much tension and conflict in the implementation of Great Society programs -- from top Federal policymakers to State and local officials -- and I called for a wholly new policy of coordinating Federal aid, and working with the State and local governments to help them improve their administrative effectiveness and to meet the growing demand for more and better public services.
The point that I made then -- and I repeat it now -- is that during the past five sessions of Congress we have concentrated on brave new substantive programs for social and economic development, but now the spotlight must be shifted to procedures for making these programs work in the fastest and most effective way. We must take a hard look at our federal system of government, and see where it is failing to meet the challenge of the 1960's and of the decades to come.
In my speech I made some 13 suggestions which I felt would provide a good beginning in the modernization of our administrative machinery and better working relationships between Federal, State, and local governments. The President's memorandum is, in part, a response to some of these suggestions. Two of my proposals, however, require the mandate and support from Congress, whose responsibility for strengthening our federal system is equal to that of the executive branch.
The first such area concerns the development of a new, comprehensive Federal aid program designed to help State and local governments upgrade their public service and improve their intergovernmental cooperation in the personnel field. This is the subject of the proposed Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1966, S. 3408, which I introduced on this floor on May 25, and on which hearings have been held.
The second area involves the establishment of a new, and permanent, operating unit in the Executive Office of the President for developing and enforcing the coordination of Federal programs and policies, for resolving interdepartmental conflicts, and for keeping in constant touch with State and local leaders to encourage their cooperation in joint action programs. This is the subject of S. 3509, which I introduced June 15, 1966.
These two legislative proposals, together with S. 561, the intergovernmental cooperation bill presently being considered by the House, could provide a very creative and far-reaching effort toward developing a total governmental approach to economic and social development problems in line with the President's desires and instructions.
Mr. President, recently the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, which is a bipartisan organization established by Congress to inquire into Federal, State, and local relations, reported on intergovernmental problems with respect to the antipoverty program. The Commission found problems of confusion and duplication in the administration of an increasing number of Federal grant programs affecting the war on poverty, particularly within the same geographical areas. The Commission recommended:
That States authorize and encourage the creation of multicounty bodies to undertake various planning and development programs in nonmetropolitan areas;
That where States have taken such action, Federal agencies administering grants for planning and development be required, by statute or Executive order, to first, require use of the geographic base established pursuant to such State action as a condition of Federal grants in such areas; second, use, to the extent feasible, such agencies as recipients of such grants; and third, where other than the multipurpose agency is used, require adequate checkpoint procedures to assure coordination with, and maximum use of, the resources of such agencies.
I am informed that the Advisory Commission's recommendations and study were given careful consideration by the Executive Office of the President, and that the Commission staff was asked to assist in helping to implement the second part of its recommendations set forth above. It is significant that the President's memorandum specifically instructs that boundaries for planning and development districts assisted by Federal programs be the same and consistent with those established by the States, which is in line with part of the Commission's recommendation.
I am also informed that with respect to the first part of the above recommendation, the Commission has drafted a suggested State statute authorizing and providing State financial assistance for regional planning and development commissions. This model act will be distributed to State officials in the Commission's "1967 State legislative program."
As a member of the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, I am extremely pleased with the assistance which its staff has given in the development of this executive Policy on program coordination.
Finally, Mr. President, I should like to advise my colleagues in the Senate and in the House and all other persons interested in this important governmental area, that the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations of the Committee on Government Operations will begin hearings on November 16 of this year with respect to the problems of managing Federal grant-in-aid programs at Federal, State, and local levels, giving particular consideration to the merits of S. 3509, which would establish a National Intergovernmental Affairs Council in the Executive Office of the President, and to Senate Joint Resolution 187, introduced by the junior Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. KENNEDY], which authorizes an inquiry into the need for an informational service system for State and local public programming and planning.
I expect these hearings to be extensive and comprehensive -- to go to the heart of intergovermental coordination and management problems and identify the obstructions, conflicts, and misconceptions which are putting our Great Society programs in jeopardy, and which, if allowed to continue, may in time undermine the basic foundation of our federal system.
The inquiry will be more than a search for immediate legislative solutions to the problems of governmental management. It will be an in-depth assessment of the capability of our federal system of government -- National, State, and local -- to meet the changing and burgeoning public needs of the generations to come.