CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE
October 27, 1969
Page 31544
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee amendments be considered en bloc.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered. The question is on agreeing to the committee amendments.
The committee amendments were agreed to en bloc.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1969 is a measure designed to help strengthen State and local governments through improved personnel administration and more efficient recruitment and training of personnel, particularly in the administrative, technical and professional categories of need. S. 11 came to the floor of the Senate with the sponsorship of 29 Senators, the endorsement of many Governors, mayors, and other public officials throughout the country, and the strong support of citizen groups devoted to the public interest.
This is proposed legislation equal in its potential effect upon the quality of American public administration to that initiated through the Pendleton Civil Service Act of 1883. It is crucial to the successful execution of programs of Federal aid to State and local governments which Congress has authorized. It is urgently necessary in order that government below the Federal level be able to assume its full share of responsibility for the public services demanded in this period of rapid growth and social change.
Specifically, the bill seeks to achieve the following purposes:
First, to provide for intergovernmental cooperation, through an advisory council appointed by the President, in the development of policies and standards for the administration of programs for the improvement of State and local personnel administration and training.
Second, to authorize the Civil Service Commission to make grants to State and local governments in order to plan and make improvements in their systems of personnel administration.
Third, to transfer to the Civil Service Commission responsibility for administration of existing Federal statutory provisions requiring merit personnel administration for State and local employees engaged in certain federally assisted programs.
Fourth, to authorize Federal agencies to admit State and local government officials and employees, particularly in administrative, professional, and technical occupations, to Federal training programs.
Fifth, to authorize Federal agencies administering programs of grants-in-aid to State or local governments, to provide special training for State and local government officials or employees who have responsibilities related to those programs.
Sixth, to authorize the Civil Service Commission to make grants to State and local governments and other appropriate organizations for carrying out plans for training State and local government employees, as well as for the development of such plans, and for Government service fellowships for employees selected for special graduate-level university training.
Seventh, to authorize the Civil Service Commission to join with State and local governments in cooperative recruitment and examining activities.
Eighth, to give the consent of Congress to interstate compacts designed to improve personnel administration as well as the training of State and local employees.
Ninth, to authorize the temporary exchange of personnel between and among the levels of government.
Tenth, to direct the Civil Service Commission to coordinate these activities, in order to avoid overlap and duplication of effort and thus insure maximum effectiveness of administration.
Mr. President, it is appropriate to recount the conditions that have brought about the need for the enactment of this measure.
A burgeoning population and increasing urbanization in America poses tremendous problems for government at all levels. The areas of need are well known -- slums and commercial blight, substandard housing, environmental pollution, crime, delinquency, unemployment, traffic congestion, to mention only some of the major problem areas. Our citizens demand more effective government. They require better education for their children. They demand more and better roads, recreation facilities, hospitals and programs for safeguarding the economic and social security of their being.
The major burden for providing these public services rests with our States and local governments. But, as these demands have mushroomed, their capacity to meet them has not. This is especially the case in terms of the numbers of qualified administrative, professional and technical personnel needed by State and local governments to plan, organize and administer the wide variety of programs authorized by past Congresses.
Between 1955 and 1965, State and local government employment increased from 4.7 million to 7.7 million persons. It is estimated that this total will increase to 11.4 million by 1975. Total recruiting needs for these employees, other than for teachers, are estimated at 2.5 million over the 10-year period, or an average of 250,000 per year. This, just to stay abreast of replacement and growth needs.
Nothing similar to this critical manpower situation has ever been faced by State and local governments before. There can be little question, that now and in the future, State and local governments face a serious problem of obtaining and retaining large numbers of high quality personnel. There can be no question that the general shortage of such trained and talented people throughout the country will compound this problem.
S. 11 is intended to help strengthen State and local governments in their efforts to recruit and train personnel to meet these needs. It is almost identical with the bill (S.699) which passed the
Senate in the 90th Congress by a substantial majority. House action did not take place and the measure died with adjournment.
Hearings were held on March 24, 25, and 26, and the bill was approved by the subcommittee on May 6, 1969. Favorable action was subsequently taken by the Committee on Government Operations.
The proposed legislation has now been considered in three Congresses. We have delayed much too long in dealing with the critical shortage of properly qualified personnel for the public service. Since the great expansion of public programs that occurred during the depression thirties, government has been chronically deficient in manpower. I quote from the report of the Commission of Inquiry on Public Service Personnel issued in 1933:
In spite of the vital importance of government and governmental services, American national, State, and local governments do not at the present time attract to their service their full share of men and women of capacity and character. This is due primarily to our delay in adjusting our attitudes, institutions and public personnel policies to fit social and economic changes of the past seventy years.
Mr. President, this should be revised to read "the past 100 years," for three and a half decades have passed and we have still not taken the obviously needed steps.
Such conditions are deplorable from any point of view, but they are intolerable when we consider that the vast programs of Federal aid, costing in excess of $20 billion annually, are largely dependent upon State and local governments for their execution. The burden grows constantly. S. 11 is intended to help strengthen State and local governments in their quest for improved administration of these many programs and providing for meeting their responsibilities within the federal system.
Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, S. 11 reported by the Government Operations Committee was considered by the Intergovernmental Relations Subcommittee in this Congress and in the 90th Congress.
There has never been any divergence of view that the purposes of this bill for improving personnel administration in State and local governments were needed to meet the growing demands placed on State and local governments for governmental services. This bill authorizes the Civil Service Commission to make grants to these governments for carrying out training programs of its employees, for inclusion of State and local employees in existing Federal training programs, and to provide fellowships for university and college graduate training.
In the last Congress when this legislation came to the floor of the Senate as S. 699, I led opposition on the floor to the manner in which funds authorized for a grant program for up to 75 percent of the cost of developing and carrying out programs and projects which the Civil Service Commission found were consistent with merit principles outlined in the bill.
In our hearings this year, Robert Hampton, Chairman of the Civil Service Commission, made suggestions for amending the bill to insure an important State voice in the developing and approval process by including a certification by the Governor that the State or local government's plan meets the merit principles of the bill. Chairman Hampton's proposals were agreed to by both the chairman and me and by other members of the committee.
For these reasons, I hope that the Senate will approve passage of S. 11 as an important step toward improvement of intergovernmental relations between the National, State, and local governments in providing services demanded by our citizens.
Mr. RIBICOFF. Mr. President, increasing demands for effective services are being made upon State and vocal governments across the country. The inability of local government to respond to these demands is becoming critical and should be of great concern to the Congress.
The Federal Government has helped expand State and local government programs without doing anything comparable to develop their professional, administrative, and technical capabilities.
If we are to appropriate billions of dollars each year to solve the problems confronting the Nation, it is surely sensible to spend a relatively small sum to insure that these programs will be properly administered.
The Government Operations Committee has now reported out S. 11, the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1969. This act is a meaningful first step toward developing effective State and local governments. As a member of the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations, I am pleased to cosponsor this legislation.
When enacted, this bill will provide Federal grants to State and local governments to improve personnel administration and employee training. In addition, Federal assistance in training State and local employees will be available and the exchange of Federal, State, and local personnel will be encouraged and facilitated.
S. 11 is a comprehensive, carefully constructed approach to the problems of governmental efficiency. The bill has been reviewed and discussed extensively in the past by committees in both the House and Senate and the Senate last year passed, by a substantial margin, a basically similar measure. The House, however, did not act upon the bill.
S. 11 as now reported incorporates several changes made following testimony on earlier bills considered by the Congress. Several problems disclosed earlier have been remedied by the bill which has been called the first comprehensive plan for intergovernmental cooperation since the Pendleton Civil Service Act of 1887.
It is my hope that, before the end of this session, S. 11 will pass the Senate and the House and be enacted into law. We have had enough delay in this important area.
There can be no doubt about the need for passage of S. 11.
Citizens are demanding action from their local governments. They seek better education, better police and fire protection, better roads and public transportation, clean and abundant water, unpolluted air, more and better recreation facilities, and more and better health services and hospitals.
The major burden of providing these and other such services rests on State and local governments. The demands made have far outrun the fiscal, administrative, and personnel capabilities of State and local governments.
The growth rates of State and local governments have been phenomenal. The number of Federal civilian employees rose from 2.4 million in 1946 to 3 million in October 1967 -- a 25-percent hike. On the other hand, State and local employee figures jumped in number from 3.6 million in 1946 to 9 million in 1967 -- an incredible 150 percent leap. Total recruiting needs for administrative, professional, and technical personnel at the local level are now estimated at 250,000 a year, and rapidly growing.
Linked with these developments has been an increase in intergovernmental assistance programs. Federal aid to States and localities amounted to $1.8 billion in 1948, and is expected to reach $25 billion for fiscal year 1970, a 1,290percent increase.
Expanded Federal assistance has aggravated personnel problems at the local government level. Federal programs have moved local government into new and complex areas and programs which have seriously challenged the knowledge and competence of present employees.
James Sundquist and David Davis of the Brookings Institution have described the situation well in "Making Federalism Work":
The irreversible nature of the changes wrought in the Federal system in the past decade gives special urgency to the administrative problems of federalism. While the Federal government will set objectives and allocate marginal resources available for new government programs to achieve the objective, it cannot administer the programs directly in most cases -- and should not, even if it could. . . . Administration, perforce, is thrust upon the state and local governments through grant-in-aid programs of various types.
Existing local resources simply do not permit long-range plans for training programs and other personnel services. Recruiting programs are generally feeble, underfinanced, and unsuccessful. Perhaps no greater problem faces local government today than that of attracting and retaining an adequate number of competent employees.
According to a survey conducted by the Public Personnel Association, little more than half of the 346 local government personnel agencies covered gave any attention at all to employee training. The amounts budgeted for this activity were small, commonly ranging from 2 to 10 percent of the total personnel agency budget.
A survey of the International City Managers Association revealed that only 30 percent of the local governments and 40 percent of the States responding conducted regular training programs for their key staff, and many of the programs that were conducted proved inadequate.
What we now have is an ineffective and piecemeal approach for Federal training and technical assistance efforts. Most programs now relate to the needs of specific grants and to the specific State and local personnel administering them. Neglected has been the overall workings of central personnel management and training, which give local government its day-to-day thrust and capacity.
There is now talk of even greater decentralization of Federal programs. State and local governments should have more responsibility for making their own decisions about program priorities and then administering these same programs. Implementing such proposals will be disastrous, however, if we are not concerned at the same time with the qualifications, abilities, and training of the local government employees who are to run these new programs.
S. 11 provides the mechanism to solve these problems.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill is open to further amendment. If there be no further amendment to be proposed, the question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed.
Mr. JAVITS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.