July 29, 1975
Page 25712
Mr. MUSKIE. How much time remains?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine has 4 minutes remaining.
Mr. BROCK. Will the Senator yield I minute?
Mr. MUSKIE. I yield.
Mr. BROCK. Mr. President, the revenue sharing bill is a major cause of mine. I am for it. But we cannot equate this with revenue sharing. They are two entirely different concepts. This is counter cyclical. It deals with local government. I do not care how many public works bills pass, if we do not have strong local governments to implement them, nobody is going to be working in this country. That is the fundamental question we have before us. Are we going to keep our Federal system intact? Are we going to keep it viable? Are we going to make it work? Or are we going to destroy it with a Federal policy over which the local government, the mayor, the sheriff, the county judge, the governor or anybody else at that level has any control?
The purpose of this bill is to provide assistance to sustain the Federal system; and without that, all the jobs bills in the world are not going to work.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. MATHIAS). Who yields time?
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, how much time is left to me?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Three minutes remain to the Senator from Maine; 2 minutes to the Senator from New Mexico. Who yields time?
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I yield myself the remaining 3 minutes.
First of all, I ask unanimous consent that the names of Senators PELL and CRANSTON be added as cosponsors of the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, let me make these three brief points:
This is not revenue sharing; nothing like it. It is a grant program. If this grant program falls within the jurisdiction of the Finance Committee, the Finance Committee ought to get the water pollution program, the education program, the health program, and every grant program funded by Congress.
There was no trust fund connected with this. It is not a substitute for revenue sharing. It has never been called revenue sharing by those who conceived the idea or those who support it. When the bill was introduced, the Parliamentarian examined it closely at my request, to determine where it should be referred, and he determined that because there was no trust fund involved it should not be referred to the Finance Committee.
This is not revenue sharing. Secondly, it is not a substitute for it. So this comparison between the two is irrelevant.
I favor revenue sharing, which is an ongoing program of support to local governments on the basis of giving those governments a share of the Federal revenues generated within their borders. This is not that. This is an attempt to give assistance to local and State governments that are impacted by recession.
The Senator from Louisiana implies that those that are not impacted by the recession ought to share in it. Well, we had that kind of vote earlier this afternoon, which was won by those who vote against the need concept. Let us not make the same mistake here.
This is anti-recession program. Those jurisdictions which are hurt by unemployment and reduced production, whose revenues are shrinking and the total of that, may I say to the Senator from Idaho, is $8 billion, according to the Joint Economic Committee — are taking three kinds of budgetary action.
First, they lay off employees.
Second, they increase property taxes. Yes, revenues are up because of increased property taxes.
Third, they postpone ongoing capital improvement programs, which have to do with jobs directly.
Finally, if you have increases in property taxes that impact on private industry, which is already laboring under the burden of recession in these communities, and if they are impacted, there are more jobs lost, as was testified to by the President of the New York Stock Exchange last month.
Increases in taxes in New York resulting from the present situation in New York could cost 20,000 private jobs. So what we are talking about is not just a stimulus to help State and local governments, but a stimulus to help the economies which have undermined their revenues and created unemployment by drastic cuts in their budgets.
That is what this is all about; do not be misled by all this talk about committee jurisdiction and all this talk about whether it is revenue sharing, after all. It is not.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator from Maine has expired.