CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE

March 22, 1967

Page 7602

THE PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE ON THE QUALITY OF AMERICAN GOVERNMENT

Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, the message on the quality of American Government, which the President sent to the Congress last Friday, is a document deserving the most careful and thoughtful analysis by every Member of the Senate. Indeed, I hope this message will be read and its meanings taken to heart by every official of government at the Federal, State, and local level who bears responsibility in our federal system.

For in this message the President has faced and calls upon us all to face what needs to be done to enable our federal system to meet the demands of our increasingly populous and complex society. He has set in motion a course of action in which we all must join if it is to succeed, as it must if we are to preserve the principle of self-government in this country.

The President tells us that substantial improvements need to be made in the machinery of government to insure that it will respond effectively to the will of Congress and the people. With that, Members of Congress can heartily agree. There has been much concern among us over the proliferation of narrow and sometimes inconsistent and duplicating Federal programs and the confusion they have generated at the State and local level. The splendid legislative achievements of the past few years may fail unless we can devise institutional machinery capable of translating these laws into benefits to those for whom they are intended.

The President tells us of his plans to intensify use in the executive branch of the planning, programing, and budgeting system which was instituted some months ago. He asks that Congress approve the funds for this purpose requested in the budgets of the various Federal agencies. In this he deserves our full support.

The drive to reduce the Government's cost of doing business will, the President says, be continued. A new Advisory Council on Cost Reduction will be formed to broaden and strengthen that effort.

Then the President reminds us that government is people -- men and women shape the laws, make the decisions, translate programs into action. He points out that in the years ahead government will need more and better trained and skilled manpower. That need will be greatest in State and local government, where public service employment is growing at four times the rate in the economy as a whole.

To meet this challenge, the President makes two legislative proposals:

First. The Public Service Education Act of 1967 would authorize the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare to provide fellowships for education in Government service and to extend financial support to universities in developing their capacity to provide training and education for public service careers;

Second. The Intergovernmental Manpower Act of 1967 would authorize a variety of measures to improve the skills of personnel in State and local government. Fellowships would be provided for further education of public employees. Grants would be available for comprehensive training programs and for strengthening personnel administration systems. State and local employees would be admitted to Federal training programs. Provision would be made for interchange of personnel between the Federal Government, on the one hand, and State and local governments, on the other, for periods of up to 2 years.

These Presidential proposals are particularly gratifying to me, and I am sure to other Senators, since they correspond so closely with the provisions of the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1967, which I and a number of cosponsors introduced earlier this year. Hearings on a similar bill were held last summer by the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations, of which I have the honor to serve as chairman.

Judging by reactions to the legislation already under consideration, the President's proposals should have a warm reception from Congress and the country. We shall want to examine them in the light of the studies we have made and the judgment of those best qualified in public administration and personnel management.

The President stresses the need for full and free communication among responsible officials at every level of government. He sets forth an "open door" policy to encourage consultation between Federal officials and those of State and local government. The Johnson administration has done much in recent months to stimulate this kind of cooperation, and has been greatly aided in this by Vice President HUMPHREY and by Gov. Farris Bryant, Director of the Office of Emergency Planning and now Chairman of the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. We applaud this new emphasis.

To improve programs requiring the cooperation of Federal, State, and local governments, the President has taken an important initiative. He proposed a two-stage effort to streamline and modernize the grant-in-aid system through which broad national strategy is fused with local knowledge and administration.

In the first stage, under general legislation which he will submit, Federal agencies would combine related grants into a single financial package, reducing red tape without disturbing the separate authorizations, substantive requirements, and appropriations. He has directed the Director of the Bureau of the Budget to form a task force which will develop a plan for this first-stage consolidation within 30 days.

The second stage will be basic consolidation of grant-in-aid authorizations, appropriations, and statutory requirements in all areas where this is feasible. The President has directed the Budget Director to review the range of programs to see where this can be done, and the necessary legislation will be submitted area by area as the studies are completed.

Here again the President is hitting at a problem that has long vexed Members of Congress. Indeed, the complexity of the Federal assistance programs and the attendant delays and red tape is one of the major causes of friction within the federal system. It is imperative that better means be found for administering these vital programs.

Abundant evidence of the seriousness of this problem has come to us through the hearings on creative federalism that have been conducted over a period of months by the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations, and on legislation I and others have introduced.

The Intergovernmental Cooperation Act of 1967, which I introduced on January 26, following the general line of the act passed by the Senate last year, contains a provision for consolidation of Federal grants-in-aid. It would accomplish the same purpose as the President's proposals. Our bill would allow the President to submit grant consolidation plans in the same manner as reorganization plans, to take effect in the absence of a disapproving resolution by either House.

We shall give the President's proposals the most serious consideration. We will want to ask whether they go far enough, whether they should be coupled with other provisions of the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, to which the Senate has already given strong support.

The President has submitted a challenging set of recommendations. Also, he has accepted the responsibility to act through the executive machinery now available to him for improving administrative procedures. It is highly significant that he has charged the Bureau of the Budget to delve deep into the problem of Government management and come up with constructive solutions.

This message from the President is charged with significance for the future of the country. Our response to his initiative should be prompt and thorough consideration of his proposals and initiatives of our own wherever we see additional needs. It is time for a new emphasis in the Congress on legislation that will strengthen our federal system and improve the quality of government in America.

Improving the quality of our Government is essential if we are to improve the quality of life for all Americans, their health, their jobs, their rights as citizens, and their security as free men. And this, after all, is the first objective of our democratic society.