« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
agency, and instrumentality is authorized to cooperate with the Commission and, to the extent permitted by law, to furnish such information to the Commission, upon request made by the Chairman or by the Vice Chairman when acting as Chairman." Sincerely yours,
PHILLIP S. HUGHES,
Assistant Director for Legislative Reference. Senator CLARK. I am sure of that, Mr. Chairman. Perhaps after their statement is submitted it will be possible for the proponents of the bill to file, in writing, a rebuttal to whatever the Bureau of the Budget may say. (The statement referred to follows:)
August 7, 1959.
DEAR SENATOR: The staff of the Government Operations Committee has been kind enough to furnish me with a letter dated August 3, 1959, from Phillip S. Hughes, Assistant Director for Legislative Reference of the Bureau of the Budget, commenting adversely on S. 1431, my bill to provide for the establishment of a Commission on Metropolitan Problems.
May 1, in turn, comment briefly on the Budget Bureau's position prior to the meeting of the committee at which I understand S. 1431 will be on the agenda.
The report of the Bureau discusses, at some length, current metropolitan studies said to be going forward in various agencies of the executive branch of the Federal Government as well as certain private studies in the same field and concludes that it is not necessary to create a study commission on metropolitan problems at this time.
In regard to the Federal studies cited in the report, I would point out that in each instance the office said to be making the study is one with limited authority and concerned with only one aspect of metropolitan problems. While the studies involved are undoubtedly of great assistance, they are plainly not designed primarily to assist Congress in assessing the role that the Federal Government does and should fill in assisting metropolitan areas to meet the many complex problems confronting them.
So far as local and private studies are concerned, they are also extremely helpful, of course. There is, however, in my judgment, a great need to bring them together, correlate their findings and come out with recommendations for Federal action which would, in substantial part, be based on a consideration of these local and private findings.
The Bureau of the Budget also recommends a number of changes in the composition, duties, and rights of the Commission in the event the Congress should decide to authorize the establishment of a Commission on Metropolitan Problems,
In my judgment, most of the comments of the Budget Bureau are based on a misconception of the kind of commission S. 1431 contemplates. S. 1431 does not contemplate a commission to be controlled by the Executive. It does contemplate a commission to be controlled by the Congress. In the interests of getting the views of all concerned, it calls for the appointment of a minority of noncongressional members representing local elected officials, Governors, and representatives of the Federal bureaucracy. In my judgment, it is essential, if the work of the Commission is to be effective, that it should be primarily a congressional and not an executive commission.
I also believe that the 18-man membership of the Commission proposed in S. 1431 is about the right size, since it will be desirable to conduct hearings all over the country and a membership of 18 will assure the presence of several members at all hearings. If, however, the committee should decide in favor of a small commission, I would urge that the proposition of two-thirds congressional and senatorial to one-third Presidential appointees be kept, and that the President should be required to appoint local and State executives to membership.
I feel quite strongly that the report of the Commission should be made to the next President of the United States for his consideration.
For this reason I would oppose calling for a report by December 1, 1960, as suggested by the Bureau of the Budget. Any legislative action which might result from the deliberations of the Commission should be submitted to the President who will participate in the legislative process of the 87th Congress, not to a President who will leave office a few weeks later.
So far as the Bureau's comments with respect to conflict of interest statutes and withholding of information from the Commission are concerned, I see no reason to modify the present provisions of S. 1431, although in this regard I would of course, be happy to have the committee give whatever attention it thinks desirable to the views of the Budget Bureau.
It is my understanding that a somewhat similar adverse report was forwarded by the Budget Bureau to the committee in connection with Senator Muskie's bill S. 2026, which was favorably reported by your committee to the Senate a short while ago. Sincerely,
JOSEPH S. CLARK. Senator CLARK. I have just been handed a note which tells me two of my colleagues are waiting to testify, and I do not wish to detain the committee any longer, except to make two comments.
First, it has been called to my attention that it might be wise to amend the duties of the Commission to include a study of the library needs of metropolitan areas.
We have some zealots in the American Library Association. I think it is a good thing, and I would have no objection to including that.
It is a relatively minor matter compared to these others, but we all know the enormous need to expand library service around the country, and it is a problem in a metropolitan area as to how you are going to have efficient library service in view of the proliferation of local governmental units.
Senator HUMPHREY. I think that ought to be listed among some duties of the Commission, duties broaden scope, and that is, libraries, arts, recreational facilities.
Senator CLARK. Now, let me mention briefly and with all candor, one deliberate omission from this bill.
I have omitted any concern at all with the critically difficult problem of race relations. This is a difficult problem in our cities and our suburbs and elsewhere. I am interested in getting a bill through the Congress and getting this Commission to work on metropolitan problems. I know that some Members of the Senate may have doubts as to what is in the mind of the sponsor on this score. I would like to state categorically that so far as the sponsor of this bill is concerned, he intends to stay entirely away from the whole question of race relations, which, I think, can best be handled in another manner. Inclusion of this subject would inevitably throw unnecessary controversy into the workings of the Commission. I think, Mr. Chairman, we have to be practical about this matter. It is for that reason that I make as forthright a statement as I can, that I do not intend to have the subject of race relations brought up in any way, shape, manner, or form, in connection with this resolution.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, you will note that section 5A of the bill authorizes appropriations in such amounts as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this act.
Now, maybe that is a weasel. Maybe a specific sum should appear there, but on balance, I think not.
Let me say this, Mr. Chairman, in all candor. If this study is to be meaningful, it cannot be cheap. It can't be done in a lickety-split manner with a few volunteers and somebody going off and writing a report and letting it go at that. This ought to be a serious matter; it ought to be adequately financed, and I think I would be less than candid if I did not say that I do not think that $250,000 per annum would be too large a sum for the next 2 years to bring in a report which means something.
Having stated that point of view, I will, of course, abide by whatever the committee decides to do in that regard. I know our problems both on the Appropriations Committee and on the floor in this connection, but I have indicated what I think should be done.
Finally, the question may be asked, why should this not be just a Senate committee; why is it necessary to have a joint congressional and executive committee?
There again, let me say it would be far easier to have just a Senate committee. It could be set up more easily and with less fuss. But I do not think the impact of a Senate committee report would have the national significance of one arrived at by Members of both bodies of Congress and by members of the executive arm of the Government, and representatives of the local government and State governments. It was for this reason that I recommended a broad executive-legislative commission rather than a Senate committee.
Let me thank my friend from Minnesota and my good friend from Alaska again for the careful attention they have given to this testimony.
Let me apologize to Senators Keating and Williams for keeping them awaiting, and let me express the hope that the committee will see fit to bring in a favorable report on this bill with such amendments as the committee deems desirable.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator HUMPHREY. Senator Clark, first of all, our thanks to you for an excellent statement. You are the main author of the bill and, indeed, your interpretation of the bill and its application has been most helpful.
We have, as of yesterday, I believe, activity in the full Senate Committee on Government Operations on a bill, S. 2026, introduced by the Senator from Maine, Mr. Muskie, with a number of cosponsors,
That bill establishes an Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations.
Of the 27 members of the Advisory Commission, 21 would be appointed by the President of the United States and 3 each would be appointed by the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives from among the membership of the respective Houses of Congress. Of those appointed by the President, three would be officers of the executive branch of the Government and three would be private citizens, all six of whom must have had experience or familiarity with intergovernmental relations; four would be chosen from a panel of at least eight Governors submitted by the Governors' conference; three from a panel of at least six members of State legislative bodies submitted by the board of managers of the Council of State Governments; four from a panel of at least eight mayors submitted jointly by the American Municipal Association and the U.S.
Conference of Mayors; and four from a panel of at least eight elected county officers submitted by the National Association of County Officials. In the case of Governors, State legislators, mayors, and county officials, not more than one may be from any one State; and in the case of mayors, at least two appointees must be from cities under 500,000 population.
Senator CLARK. Could I inquire what the functions of the Commission will be
Senator HUMPHREY. In carrying out its duties, the Advisory Commission would be expected to (i) bring together representatives of the Federal, State, and local governments for the consideration of common problems; (2) provide a forum for discussing the administration and coordination of Federal grant and other programs requiring intergovernmental cooperation; (3) give critical attention to the conditions and controls involved in the administration of Federal grant programs; (4) make available technical assistance to the executive and legislative branches of the Federal Government in the review of proposed legislation to determine its overall effect on the Federal system; (5) encourage discussion and study at an early stage of emerging public problems that are likely to require intergovernmental cooperation; (6) recommend, within the framework of the Constitution, the most desirable allocation of governmental functions, responsibilities, and revenues among the several levels of government; and (7) recommend methods of coordinating and simplifying tax laws and administrative practices to achieve a more orderly and less competitive fiscal relationship between the levels of government and to reduce the burden of compliance for taxpayers.
In addition to making such studies and investigations as are necessary or desirable in the accomplishment of these purposes, the Commission would also be required to (1) consider, on its own initiative, ways and means for fostering better relations between levels of government; (2) submit an annual report to the President and the Congress on or before January 31 of each year; and (3) submit such additional reports to the President, the Congress, and any unit of government as the Commission may deem appropriate.
Now, you see, that language is broad. The specificity, the detailed requirements and duties that you have in your bill, S. 1431, is not to be found in the broad language of this bill for the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations.
Senator CLARK. Is the Commission to be permanent or temporary?
Senator HUMPHREY. It is a permanent, bipartisan commission, to be known as the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations.
Senator Clark. You wanted to ask me a question ?
Senator HUMPHREY. Yes, I would like to know whether or not you felt this Commission would properly fulfill the requirements and duties that you had envisioned in the Commission on Metropolitan Problems.
Senator CLARK. I do not.
Senator CLARK. Well, of course, I feel that there is a great need for the sort of study of techniques of government that is envisioned for the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. This is the kind of problem that can be successfully handled by a permanent advisory group whose main function is to overlook or to supervise technical aspects of intergovernmental relations as they develop. But it will be readily seen that such a group bears little relation to the purpose of the Commission on Metropolitan Problems described in my bill. The Commission on Metropolitan Problems would be a temporary group, set up to look into immediate and pressing metropolitan issues, and required to produce a report on a definite date that would contain suggested solutions to the questions involved. In other words, the Commission on Metropolitan Problems would deal with existing substantive problems presently confronting the Federal Government in metropolitan areas, while the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations would deal chiefly with technical or procedural problems of intergovernmental relations across the board in all types of activities. Both are necessary, and there would be no overlap.
Senator HUMPHREY. Might I add, Senator Clark, as a cosponsor of Senator Muskie's bill to establish an Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, that having served on the Nuclear Bomb Test Suspension Commission, and having introduced in the past several Congresses a resolution pertaining to intergovernmental relations, that I feel that the scope of the Intergovernmental Advisory Commission is so broad that the detailed examination required of urban problems will be, not by intention, minimized.
It appears to me further that the country has arrived at a point where the problems of urban living, urban development, urban growth, or just urbanization, require major public attention at the highest councils of government.
I believe that the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations is very necessary because of the Federal-State relationship and what is happening to it under the power of the Federal Government with its grant programs and defense programs which directly affect local governments. I still feel, however, that the Commission on Metropolitan Problems gets at the basic and immediate need, namely, the 60 percent of the population living in urban areas that have little or no consideration given to their problems in a coordinated, consistent, and comprehensive manner by the Congress.
I I gave you my reasons on both bills. I support your bill, as you know.
Senator Clark. I would prefer to have the Senator on my bill.
Senator HUMPHREY. That isn't necessary. I will give you all the help I can to get it out.
Senator CLARK. Your statement is most heartening.
Senator HUMPHREY. I had the privilege, as you know, of recently appearing before the U.S. Conference of Mayors in Los Angeles. It was a remarkably good conference.
During my discussion with some of the mayors and in my remarks at a luncheon, I suggested that possibly the time had arrived for the Congress to establish a joint select committee to consider metropolitan problems, just as we have done in the instance of small business. Although the Senate Select Committee on Small Business has no legislative jurisdiction, I believe it does a great deal of good.