August 3, 1978
Page 24138
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I would like to commend the distinguished Senator from South Carolina for his efforts in shaping and reporting the appropriations bill before us. It is clear that he brought to this task the same critical judgment on spending priorities that he exercises so well as a member of the Budget Committee.
I would like to draw the chairman's attention to one provision in the report accompanying the bill and solicit his assistance in clarifying that language. On page 44 of the report the last paragraph in the provision describing the appropriation for administration of the economic development assistance programs, the committee conveys its strong recommendation that economic development representatives be maintained in each State and that provision for an economic development representative in each State not be adversely affected by reorganization efforts. I heartily endorse the committee's position in that regard and look forward to location of a regional office in New England with, I might add, mounting impatience. State economic development representatives can play a vital role in assuring that economic development assistance programs are made available to local communities. I share the committee's concern that these positions be maintained in each State. I would ask the chairman's assurance that we are not, in this report language, attempting to tie the hands of Economic Development Administration officials in the area of personnel management. I assume that the committee, in the language on page 44 is referring to retention of these positions and not attempting to freeze particular individuals.
Mr. HOLLINGS. The Senator is correct. In fact we have added $1.3 million to the EDA administrative budget to give them the sufficient personnel to open up the regional offices without bothering the present setup in the States. We need EDA personnel at both locations — in the States and the regions.