April 13, 1976
Page 10726
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, I ask the attention of my friend from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE), and I might say my cooperative colleague, although we disagree at times within the committee and on the Senate floor.
On page 4 of the Senator's amendment, there is language that requires the balance of State funds to be reallocated to local governments. This reallocation, as I understand it, must be based on a plan approved by the legislatures of the States. The National Governors' Conference has called to our attention that 26 State legislatures have concluded their sessions for 1976. Thus those legislatures could not approve a reallocation plan until 1977. West Virginia is one of those States where the legislature has adjourned.
I am sure that the Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE), in discussing this question, will add to the colloquy that we are now engaged in an explanation of how these 26 States where the legislatures have adjourned could reallocate the balance of the State funds before the1977 session.
Mr. MUSKIE. May I say that the Senator from Tennessee raised this point earlier. We have addressed ourselves to it, and are preparing a modification of the language to make it clear that in the event the legislatures are not in session, the Governor of the State is authorized to submit an alternative plan.
I ask unanimous consent that I may make that modification of my amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
On page 4, at the end of section 3, c, ii; insert the following:
In the event that a State legislature is not scheduled to meet in regular session within 3 months after the effective date of this title, the governor of such State shall be authorized to submit an alternative plan which meets the requirements set forth in section 206(a), and is approved by the Secretary under the provisions of section 206(b).
Mr. BROCK. Mr. President, will the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH) yield for a question in that regard?
Mr. RANDOLPH. I am happy to yield to the Senator from Tennessee (Mr.BROCK).
Mr. BROCK. It is the understanding of this Senator — and as Senators know, I am a cosponsor of the amendment, and support it — that the Governor's plan shall, to the maximum degree possible, fit within the parameters of the plan, as we envision, that would be adopted by the State legislature. In other words, we are just authorizing the Governor to do what the legislature would be required to do within the same parameters.
Mr. MUSKIE. That is right.
Mr. BROCK. And not just use personal discretion and initiative.
Mr. MUSKIE. The Senator is correct.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr: President, I appreciate the responses made, and the colloquy to make this point clear.
Mr. MUSKIE. I appreciate it, also. It was just an oversight on my part, and I appreciate having the distinguished Senator from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH) with his usual carefulness about draftsmanship, bring it to my attention.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, the bill now before the Senate is in a very important sense the fulfillment of a promise made by the members of the Senate Public Works Committee at the time, on February 19, after by a narrow margin of three votes we had failed to override the Presidential veto.
I do not want to overstep the bounds of factuality when I make this statement, but I stood where I now stand at that time, following the veto, and I said:
The vote this afternoon reflects the approval of the Senate for a public works program but the disapproval of the Senate from the standpoint of the necessary two-thirds vote to override the President's veto.
Those were my words then, that I think we in the Senate must understand as we come to grips with the vote on the amendment as it is presented today.
On that occasion, I perceived that the Senate would not want members of the Committee on Public Works to give up on our obligations to produce a measure that would become law. For that reason, I used the words that I now repeat:
I pledge to my colleagues that, hopefully, next week the Senate Public Works Committee can return to the drafting board and bring out a measure that will be agreed to by the President and by the House, a measure that, although lesser in degree in meeting this responsibility to place people at work at gainful employment, will go part way toward the effort we have made in the Senate.
That was done, and the members of the Senate Public Works Committee, within that frame of time, including the Senator from Maine (Mr. Muskie) , gave attention to this matter. The Senator from Maine has addressed himself over and over again to the problem, for which I commend him.
I commend all the members of the Public Works Committee for sharing in this responsibility which the chairman expressed a few minutes after we had failed to override the veto. I was gratified at that time to be joined by the diligent Senator from Tennessee (Mr. BAKER), the ranking minority member of our committee. As we ended our discussion on that afternoon of February 19, I said:
We do have a responsibility, as the Senator from Tennessee knows, as all the Members of the Senate, I think, know, that we must return and attempt to meet the issues realistically and, as I used the word, hopefully with the cooperation and the understanding of the President of the United States.
Mr. President, we have done what we said we would do, and the measure that is before us this afternoon would commit the resources of the Federal Government in a realistic degree to restoring economic health to one of the most seriously affected sectors of our national economy.
It has been very difficult for me to come to this conclusion, but in so doing I think I am doing right. I regret that I must oppose the amendment offered by the able Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE) and others. I know, and he knows, that I supported the countercyclical amendment when it was adopted last year as part of the public works bill passed in the Senate. I support the concept of countercyclical assistance in principle.
I would enthusiastically work for its adoption if it were before the Senate this afternoon in a separate measure to be considered on its own merits.
But, Mr. President, during a long tenure of my congressional career on this Hill, I am above all else a realist. It is my objective thinking, as I express it today, that we must produce legislation that will become law. I am not one who is happy when confrontation surfaces and when we become polarized to the point that we cannot seek a possible adjustment of our differences.
So, I have a firm belief that the President of the United States will veto this measure if it carries the amendment which has been presented by Senator MUSKIE so very cogently this afternoon.
What I want, however, and what I think the country, if it understands all of the concerns that we have and the issues that must be met, wants is a law, and this law must be signed by the President of the United States.
We need to implement immediately such a law to place unemployed Americans in productive jobs. The addition of the amendment that I mentioned surely brings another veto at a time when we need action.
I am not certain whether the amendment will be agreed to or whether it will be defeated. As far as those of us who now think as we do, we are not abandoning a principle; we are coming today with the realism which I think is necessary that the Senate understands and that the Senate commits itself to as I have explained the position I have just stated.
Mr. MONTOYA. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
Mr. RANDOLPH. I yield.
Mr. MONTOYA. I call to the attentionof the Senate that we are not going to be restricted to the amendments that we agree to here today, that is, the authorization bill that was reported out by the committee, plus whatever amount may be authorized on this amendment.
We still have the additional situation whereby the House of Representatives may insist, as it did last summer, in increasing the authorization. Last summer in the Senate we passed a $1 billion authorization here for accelerated public works. The House of Representatives had passed a bill for a $5 billion authorization. Then we went into conference. In conference we whittled this sum down to $2.56 billion.
So it stands to reason that we should anticipate that the House of Representatives will insist on a higher figure than the $735 million that we had for accelerated public works. And for job opportunities we had $1 billion and the House of Representatives reduced it to $500 million. On business loans we had $125 million and the House of Representatives agreed with us on $125 million.
So, in addition to this — and this has not been mentioned in the debate — the authorization under the proposed amendment is for five quarters; whereas the authorization for the public works bill that was reported out of committee is up to September of next year. So, this, in essence, is an authorization that will ride tandem with the proposed legislation on general revenue sharing.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. FANNIN). Under the previous order the Senate will proceed to the vote on the amendment.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, point of order. I was not aware we had reached the vote time. I have about 2 minutes more I wish to use.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The agreement to vote was 2:45 p.m., and it is now 2:45 p.m.
Mr. MUSKIE Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may have 2 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I want that time primarily to offer a modification to the amendment on page 8 under the subject "Payments." I wish to include language in there which would require that payments would have to be made not later than 5 days after the beginning of each quarter.
That is an appropriate amendment, and I ask unanimous consent that I may qualify my amendment to that effect.
Mr. MANSFIELD. I agree.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The amendment is so modified.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, what I am asking is for the Senate to support the congressional priority that has been stated in three successive congressional budget resolutions, the priority that has been urged on us by the leadership of the House of Representatives. The leadership from the House of Representatives stipulated this package that I am offering. This is what they would like to be able to act upon. This is a congressional priority. Yesterday we undertook to honor congressional priorities in seven successive votes. I suggest we do it once more in behalf of the unemployed.
Mr. BUCKLEY and Mr. MANSFIELD addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair advises the Senator from Maine that the desk does not have the modified amendment.
The modified amendment is as follows: On page 8, on line 2 of Sec. 2096 after the word pay, insert:
"Not later than five days after the beginning of each quarter."