CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE

May 1, 1969

Page 11063

GRANT CONSOLIDATION: SUPPORT FROM THE NEW ADMINISTRATION

Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I am pleased to sponsor the administration's Grant Consolidation Act introduced today by the senior Senator from South Dakota (Mr. MUNDT) which I feel would be another step along the way in meeting the management crisis which is threatening our Federal grant-in-aid system.

It would provide a necessary adjunct to the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act which was enacted last year by the Congress.

The Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations, which I chair, has over the past 4 years made an intensive investigation into the problems faced by State and local officials in their administration of federally assisted programs.

During the 89th Congress, a special subcommittee survey highlighted the fact that State and local administrators were disturbed and confused with the fragmentation of Federal assistance, and the red tape of the Federal bureaucracy which were frustrating comprehensive development, particularly in our urban areas.

Following this survey, the subcommittee launched a series of hearings seeking solutions to the problems of creative federalism. We heard from the Bureau of the Budget, key cabinet officials, governors, mayors, city managers, regional officials, and representatives of public interest groups, who laid out in detail the magnitude of the management crisis, and provided the subcommittee with a wealth of recommendations for immediate congressional action.

We discovered a proliferation of over 500 separate Federal-aid programs administered by over 150 departments, agencies, and bureaus in Washington and oven 400 Federal offices in the field.

There were project grants and formula grants; incentive grants and multi-functional grants. Some went through the States, others directly to local governments and agencies. Some were conditioned on cost-sharing and planning requirements; some were not. All combined to provide a barrage of conflicting standards, regulations, and planning requirements which were straining the patience of State and local officials.

We learned that many grants were overlapping in the same general areas. There are 50 different programs to aid general education, 57 programs for vocational and job training; 35 programs for housing; 62 for community facilities and 28 for recreation. Of all the grant programs, those most criticized for duplication and conflict involved grants for water supply, sewers, and sewage treatment facilities, presently being administered by five separate agencies.

This duplication of function at the Federal level leaves State and local governments at a loss to know what assistance is available, in what form, and on what terms, to enable their development projects to go forward. Delays in processing of applications compound the difficulties and uncertainties.

The situation was getting so confused that States and localities were hiring professional "grantsmen" to find out what is available and how to cut the red tape. Too many communities unfortunately could not afford this special service and were losing out.

Thus, it became obvious that an overhauling of our Federal grant-in-aid system was long overdue.

One of the major pieces of legislation to grow out of the subcommittee's investigation was the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act of 1968 (Public Law 90577), Among other things, this legislation directed the President to establish regulations for uniform application among Federal agencies for coordination, formulation, and review of Federal programs and projects affecting area and community development consistent with and furthering the objectives of State, regional, and local comprehensive planning. Regulations implementing the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act are expected to be issued in the near future.

However, in developing this legislation, it was obvious that tightening up program management and other administrative procedures in the grant system was not enough. We had to make a concerted effort to reduce the number of grant programs, which we found to be one of the major causes of the confusion. Accordingly, I instructed the subcommittee staff to work with the staff of the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations to offer proposals to give the President authority, at least to make a start in combining related grant programs with congressional consent. Their recommendations relied on the Executive Reorganization Act approach and were included in S. 698, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, which I introduced on January 26, 1967.

The administration's Grant Consolidation Act is essentially the same approach which was a part of S. 698, and I am very pleased that the President has seen the merit to this approach and has followed the pattern laid out by the subcommittee.

However, it should be noted that hearings on S. 698 did bring opposition from various quarters to the consolidation feature. It was necessary to drop that item from the bill, while the other features of the legislation were eventually enacted into law.

The administration's measure, unlike S. 698, does contain some limitations of the President's power in sending a consolidation plan to Congress. It provides that programs must be closely related; terms and conditions must be limited to the range already provided; no consolidation plan could extend an authorization, no additional eligibility could be provided; and there are other related sanctions.

It may be that these limitations, and a further refinement of the legislation to meet the specific objections of some Members of the Congress, will strengthen its chances for acceptance.

What pleases me is that President Nixon has recognized this critical area of intergovernmental relations, and has taken steps to develop the tools to cut down the administrative tangle in the grant-in-aid program. He can be assured of my cooperation, and with his acceptance of our proposal, I think we should be able to gain more legislative support for grant consolidation -- both by this bill, and the regular process of program legislation.

Mr. President, in the interest of legislative history, I ask unanimous consent to have included in the RECORD a copy of title VI -- Consolidation of Grant-in-Aid Programs, of S. 698, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act of 1968, as introduced January 26, 1967.

There being no objection, the copy of title VI was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

TITLE VI -- CONSOLIDATION OF GRANT-IN-AID PROGRAMS

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

SEC. 601. (a) The President shall from time to time examine the various programs of grants-in-aid provided by law and shall determine what consolidations are necessary or desirable

(1) to promote the better execution and efficient management of individual grant programs within the same functional area;

(2) to provide better coordination among individual grant programs within the same functional area; or

(3) to promote more efficient planning and use by the recipients of grants under programs within the same functional area.

(b) The Congress declares that the public interest demands the carrying out of the purposes of subsection (a) and that the purposes may be accomplished in great measure by proceeding under this title, and can be accomplished more speedily thereby than by the enactment of specific legislation.

PREPARATION AND TRANSMITTAL OF PLAN

Sec. 602. (a) When the President, after investigation, finds that a consolidation of individual grant-in-aid programs within the same functional area is necessary or desirable to accomplish one or more of the purposes set forth in section 601(a), he shall prepare a grant consolidation plan for the making of such consolidation, and shall transmit such plan (bearing an identification number) to the Congress, together with a declaration that with respect to each individual program consolidated under such plan, he has found that the consolidation is necessary or desirable to accomplish one or more of the purposes set forth in section 601(a).

Each such consolidation plan so transmitted

(1) shall place responsibility in a single agency for administration of the consolidated program, and

(2) shall specify in detail the formula or formulas for the making of grants under the consolidated program, and shall set forth the differences between such formula or formulas and the formula for making grants under each of the individual programs consolidated under such plan.

(b) Each grant consolidation plan shall provide for only one consolidation of individual grant programs.

(c) The President shall have a grant consolidation plan delivered to both Houses on the same day and to each House while it is in session.

CONGRESSIONAL CONSIDERATION

SEC. 603. (a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c), a grant consolidation plan shall become effective at the end of the first period of ninety calendar days of continuous session of the Congress after the date on which the plan is transmitted to it unless, between the date of transmittal and the end of the ninety-day period, either House passes a resolution stating in substance that the House does not favor the grant consolidation plan.

(b) For purposes of subsection (a)

(1) continuity of session is broken only by an adjournment of the Congress sine die, and (2) the days on which either House is not in session because of an adjournment of more than three days to a day certain shall be excluded in the computation of the ninety-day period.

(c) Under provisions contained in a grant consolidation plan, a provision of such plan may become effective at a time later than the date on which such plan becomes effective under subsection (a).

(d) A grant consolidation plan which becomes effective shall be printed (1) in the Statutes at Large in the same volume as the public laws and (2) in the Federal Register.

SEC. 604. (a) This section is enacted by the Congress

(1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate and the House of Representatives, respectively, and as such it is deemed a part of the rules of each House, respectively, but applicable only with respect to the procedure to be followed in that House in the case of resolutions described in subsection (b) ; and it supersedes other rules only to the extent that it is inconsistent therewith; and

(2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of either House to change the rules (so far as relating to the procedure of that House) at any time, in the same manner and to the same extent as in the case of any other rule of that House.

(b) The provisions of sections 910 through 913 of title 5 of the United States Code shall apply with respect to a grant consolidation plan and, for such purposes

(1) all references in such sections to "reorganization plan" shall be treated as referring to "grant consolidation plan", and

(2) all references in such sections to "resolution" shall be treated as referring to a resolution of either House of the Congress, the matter after the resolving clause of which is as follows: "That the does not favor the grant consolidation plan numbered     transmitted to the Congress by the President on    , 19      .", the first blank therein being filled with the name of the resolving House and the other blank spaces therein being appropriately filled.

EXPIRATION DATE

SEC. 605. The authority of the President under section 602 to transmit grant consolidation plans shall expire three years after the date of the enactment of this Act.