December 17, 1970
Page 42166
THE PRESIDENT'S VETO OF THE EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES ACT OF 1970
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, the President's veto of the Employment and Training Opportunities Act of 1970 reflects a callous disregard of the unemployment problems of the seventies.
The President showed no understanding of the purpose of this bill and no concern for the problems which it would help alleviate.
The President based his objection to this bill on the argument that it would create "temporary" and "dead end" jobs of a "WPA type." Yet, the President has insisted on enactment of the family assistance program, and we all know of the success of the Works Projects Administration.
Like the President's FAP program and the WPA, this bill would take people off the welfare rolls and put them to work. Like the WPA, this bill would provide useful public service jobs in areas such as public safety, health, pollution control – jobs which deserve neither the classification of "temporary" nor the condemnation of "dead end."
In fact, public service jobs are some of the most important in the economy. We need people to fill them, and the money to train them and pay them. A study completed in 1966 by the Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress estimated that over 5 million jobs could be filled through public service employment programs. The number is higher today.
This veto is also out of step with the President's commitment to reform social services programs and to provide work instead of welfare support. The administration's welfare reform package includes a public-service employment program for welfare recipients. The President's veto is inconsistent with that commitment.
This veto contradicts the President's own support for returning the responsibility for local programs to people on the local level. Last year, the President said that–
It is time for a new federalism in which power, funds, and responsibility will flow from Washington to the states and the people.
While other manpower programs are criticized for limited local involvement, this new program would give mayors of cities throughout the country an opportunity to play a major role in planning and operating manpower programs.
Finally, the President's veto offers little hope that this administration will make a significant effort to shift the priorities of employment. The WPA and the CCC of the thirties were successful not only because they gave people work, but also because the people who worked gave their country something in return – the benefit of their skills in public service. Given a choice, the President has vetoed a program which would have provided as many as 40,000 public service jobs in its first year, and he has supported an SST project that would provide half as many jobs at one and a half times the price.