September 21, 1978
Page 30570
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I would very much appreciate clarification of a point of great concern to me and, I expect, to other Senators; particularly those who are members of the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
In a review of the other body's counterpart measure, the Rehabilitation Services Amendments of 1978, the Governmental Affairs Committee staff noted that that bill would exempt the vocational rehabilitation program from the Joint Funding Simplification Act. I refer particularly, Mr. President, to section 122 of the other body's bill. That section declares that the provisions of the Joint Funding Simplification Act shall not apply to the administration of the vocational rehabilitation program.
As you know, Mr. President, the Joint Funding Act allows Federal agency heads and State and local program administrators to work together to combine funds from a number of separate categorical programs and focus them on a single local project. It is one way that State and local officials can convert separate programs which address pieces of a problem into a single, comprehensive approach. The act's provisions are a small step toward overcoming the fragmentation and duplication inherent in the vast number of Federal programs which States and localities must administer.
I would welcome your assurance that no similar exemption exists in the measure we are now considering.
Mr. CHILES. If the distinguished Senator will yield, I would like to add my concerns to his. Mr. President, the provisions of the Joint Funding Simplification Act to which the distinguished Senator has referred are more than mere technical niceties. They are key elements in a series of intergovernmental management tools Congress has made available to State and local governments. Joint funding simplification provides these units a measure of flexibility in the ways they can organize and administer Federal categorical assistance programs. This flexibility, property and creatively used, can result in reduced red tape and lower administrative costs.
Mr. President, in the face of the rising tide of taxpayer anger over the high cost of government, it would be a mistake for us to dismantle the very tools we have created to help States and localities manage programs better. I, too, would welcome your assurances that provisions exempting the vocational rehabilitation program from the Joint Funding Simplification Act are not included in this bill. Exemption of this program would inevitably lead to exemption of others until the Joint Funding Simplification Act is rendered useless.
Mr. RANDOLPH. I assure my two distinguished colleagues that the bill now before the Senate does not include such provisions. I am well aware of the advantages of the Joint Funding Simplification Act.
Mr. MUSKIE. I thank the Senator. May I say that Joint Funding Projects are currently underway. State and local governments in Rhode Island, Maine, South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Indiana, Minnesota, New Mexico, Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, Utah, Arizona, California, Washington, and West Virginia are presently involved in such projects. Clearly, this intergovernmental management tool is working. I hope the distinguished chairman and other Members of the Senate who are conferees on this bill will be mindful of our concerns when they meet in conference with the other body.
Mr. RANDOLPH. I thank the Senators for their statements of concern. I assure you that I will be mindful of them at such times as a conference committee is convened.