*3
Ci
TAPED INTERVIEW FOR THE NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL RADIO
NETWORK June 1967
It would seem to me that to take money from the people of Minnesota
to give to the people of South Carolina. or vice verse, to achieve
local purposes is the wrong thing to do to achieve national purposes.
The voice you just heard was that of the Honorable Farris Bryant.
Chairman of the Presidents Advisory Commission on Intergovern-
mental Relations and our guest this week on the NER WASHINGTON
FORUM, a weekly program probing the significant issues before us
as a Nation.
TODAY: A discussion on Federal aid to the fifty states. This program
was produced for the National Educational Radio Network through the
facilities of WAMU-FM, American University Radio in Washington,
D. C. I'm Bill Greenwood.
Chairman Farris Bryant is a man who wears many hats on behalf of
the President of the United States. He is a former Governor of the
State of Florida and now serves as Director of the Cabinet-level
Office of Emergency Planning. He is also President Lyndon Johnson's
chief liaison man with the fifty State Governors.
Governor Bryant. it sounds like you're a man pretty much on the go
most of the time.
To keep up with these several responsibilities. 1 do have to stay on
the move.
You have just been named Chairman of the President's Advisory
Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. Just what is that, Gov-
ernor?
The Commission is an institution established by the Congress in 1959.
It is composed of three private citizens, Senators, Congressmen.
three Cabinet officials, four Governors, four Mayors and some elected
county officials. It is a group which is designed to focus upon inter-
governmuital problems and to bring the experience and expertise of all
these levels of government to bear upon the particular problems that
they study.
You hadn't served on this Commission before being selected Chairman,
had you, Governor?
No. I had not.
national purposes. 1 would hate to see the time come when the
Federal Government began giving money back just for local purposes.
Do you feel that states and local governments possess the financial
strength? You point out that some have not yet adopted an income tax,
but many others have. Many others say there are no tax sources at
What do you feel will be the alternative solution for those
this point.
States? For example, New York State?
Well, New York State -- it's peculiar you would pick that one. It is
Governor
in the best financial condition of any State in the Nation.
Rockefeller actually seeks authority to pre-finance some Federal
projects that the Federal Government doesn't have money enough to
finance.
What about New York City. Governor?
That is a different situation, of course. The problem of the cities is
being approached by the Cabinet office of Housing and Urban Develop-
ment. 1 don't know what the answer is going to be. it is going to take
more than money to solve it. It's a complex of economic problems.
jurisdictional problems. because the central cities are surrounded
by other metropolitan areas that prevent it from expanding logically
or from tapping resources that they ought to be able to tap. it is a
complex of social problems, and I dont really know an easy answer --
certainly not just money -- to the metropolitan problem.
What you are saying, then, is that the problem does exist and further
studies will be made and are going on.
Thank you very much. Governor Bryant. Our time is up.
* Gindicates Bill Greenwood; B, the Honorable Farris Bryant.
-10-
Do you feel then. perhaps there is some special reason why you were
thrust into the lead of this group?
I think President Johnson has put a great emphasis upon Feds ral-State
relationships. and while the Intergovernmean Relations Commission
deals with many relationships other than Federal-State. nevertheless
that is a focus that has caught the President's attention for some time
now. I have been doing this kind of work for him as a sort of lay-product
of my OEP relationship, and I think it was natural for him to turn. in
this instance. to somebody who was already doing that kind of job.
You mention your many jobs and the many hats you wear. Does it appear
perhaps that you are spreading yourself thin with the government re spon-
sihilities you are now assuming?
Oh. I suppose one might think so. It does keep me going, but it has been
my experience that the more you have to do. the more you do. You
know. that's the converse of Parkinson's law ~- that the length of time
taken to do the job is the amount of time available for it. And. conversely,
you do what you have to do in the time you do have available.
With the many responsibilities you do have. I would imagine you are
forced to keep in pretty close contact with the President.
Reasonably so. I try to make the demands on his time as limited as
possible, and try to confer with him by memorandum and telephone as
much as I can.
What aspects of the jobs you hold in the field of intergovernmental rela-
tions do you see to be of most concern to President Johnson?
I think he is most concerned that as the Federal Government grows, it
grows in a pecularly American way so that the strength and vitality of
State and local governments is not capped. but is in fact increased. The
American genius has conceived of the grant-in-aid as a tool with which
to work the Federal-State relationship. And what the President is anxious
to do is to make the grant -in-aid tool the most effective onethat it can be
for the service of the people. So this is what he wants me to concentrate
upon. and that is what I have been doing.
There have been a lot of people recently saying that the United States
itself is using thi grant-in-aid to excess; that there are just too many
projects being formed in this period of time; and that some of them
may not he actual necessities. What do you feel, generally, about this?
JB
1 think it's undoubtedly true. I think some of them arent necessities.
Of course. you have a range of values. It is important to note that the
amount of money collected and spent by the Federal Government. except
for the Vietnam expenditures. is no larger in proportion to the gross
national product than it has been for many years. It runs about 18% --
so even with the grants ~in-ald and even with the proliferation of
Federal programs. there has been no unusual impact on the national
economy.
However. I am sure many congressmen introduce legislation which
other congressmen and other people think calls for grants that they
would not desire.
Governor, many people believe that one of your jobs is to snip away the
Federal red tape involved in some of these grants to the State and local
governments. How are you doing this, if in fact you are?
Yes. to some degree we are. The President is doing it in several ways.
First of all he has. beginning last year, begun issuing a number of orders
to his administrative people to consolidate Federal operations so that
when States and localities deal with the Federal (Envernment, they can
focus on one authority. He has also been trying to see that authority
from the Federal level is given to Regional Federal peOple so that, again.
State people. instead of having to come to Washington. can go to a
Region and get an answer there. In the case of the Bureau of Public
Roads. for instance. he is trying to give that authority back to the
District Engineer in the State so the decisions can be made there.
Then. the Partnership for Health Act passed last year provided for the
consolidation of a number of Federal grants so that a State can develop
a comprehensive health program and get grants for a comprehensive
program rather than for a number of small, fragmented programs.
There are many ways, therefore. that the President has, by adminis-
trative decree, brought about a reduction of the red tape involved.
Do you foresee any future reduction in this by the President?
No question about it. He directed in his quality of government message
the 17th of March that the Bureau of the Budget develop legislation
which would be designed to give the Administration the authority to con-
solidate grants-in-aid. even when they have not been consolidated by
the Congress. so that simplification of procedures and planning can be
achieved.
What exactly are you doing, Governor Bryant. to cut away this red tape
for the President?
I am trying to do two things. One is to establish lines of communica-
tion that ought to exist. We are taking the Federal people at the
policy-making level out into the field and confronting them with their
State counterparts. Something. perhaps not surprising but remark-
able nevertheless, does happen when this occurs. The Federal people
discover that State people are competent and the State people find out
that Federal people dont wear horns. that they have telephone numbers
and can be called on weekends. and that they can get responses if
they'll just understand the procedures and go down the roads that have
been prescribed procedurally. That is one thing -- communications --
that is so important.
The second thing is that most State people and Federal peOple are
learning that they have to adjust their procedures to conform to the
other. We find out at the Federal level that Alaska and Florida are
not alike. I think this is a very interesting example: one particular
agency is operating under a Congressional statute that says there shall
be an office for every so many thousand people in a State. That is fine
for Alaska along the sea coast. But then for all the remainder of
Alaska, there is only one office of this particular agency. This means
that most of the people in that whole area simply don't have recourse
to that Federal facility at all. Obviously, therefore. the law ought to
be adjusted to fit that particular situation. So the Federal people are
finding that States are different. The State people are finding that the
Federal programs can be coordinated much more effectively if they are
informed -- if they will take the trouble to learn what the programs and
procedures are. Then much of the red tape just disappears.
This group of experts in the field of the Federal Government which is
visiting States has been known by the news media recently as the so-
called Presidential Task Force. Is there any relation between this
group and the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations?
No, except that we do take advantage of the staff of the Advisory Com-
mission on Intergovernmental relations to help us face the State
problems and develop Federal responses. But there is no formal or
official relationship.
Governor. I suppose you are the general of this task force of Federal
soldiers. Could you tell us exactly how it is composed?
Yes. After a Governor has invited us to a State. we send one of our
men from the office here in Washington to visit with the Governor and
his top peeple to define the problems in Federal-State relations that
concern the Governor. When that has been done. he brings back his
report and we contact the Cabinet officers to have them assign a man
to that task force for that trip who will enable us to provide answers
-4-
n.)
to that Governor to the problems he has defined. 50 we may have
twelve members of the task force on one trip and thirty members
on the next. It just depends upon the needs of the particular State
and the desires of the particular Governor.
What has been the reaction from the leaders of the States you have
visited so far to this group. Governor?
There have been over twenty of them. and the reactions have been
varied. Usually we find -- not so much now. but when we started --
cordiality. of course. hospitality. but skepticism. They didn't really
believe that we were going to do anything about this Federal-State
relation, they didn't really think that when we left their Capital and came
back to Washington they'd hear any more about it. But as we come
back on the airplane. every man on the trip prepares a report which
goes to our follow ~up peeple. and it sets Out the problems. what was
suggested to the State people. what the proposed solutions are. and
who needs to do what next. Then our people in the office see to it that
the things that were promised to be done are done; that the solutions
that are sought. are {cund; that lines of communication that have been
established are used.
Governor. have you been refused an invitation from any of the States
which you would like to visit?
I don't think you could put it that way. Im quite sure that there would
be some States that won't feel the need for this service. Governors
will have other interests, they will think their relationships are
adequate as is. i don't say this is being refused an invitation. but we
probably will not be invited to all the States.
Has there been any real hostility on the part of leaders from States
you have visited thus far?
None. Absolutely none. Skepticism is the worst thing we have encoun-
tered. Hostility -- none at all.
Some reporters. particularly. as well as some opposition Governors,
have said in the past few weeks that this task force is really just an
image -building device for President Johnson in advance of the next
election. Would you comment?
I don't really believe any opposition leaders have said that. I think
maybe some reporters have said that. but I don't remember reading of
any opposition leaders saying that.
It is not a question of image-building. It is not a political venture
at all. We visit Republican States and Democratic States indiscriminv
ately so far as that's concerned. It is an exercise in the improvement
of Federal-State relations. Of course. to the extent that the President
does a good job. it does improve his image; and to the extent that he
does a poor job. it hurts it. So, I suppose you cant separate it. That
is not his purpose.
Do you know of any previous Presidents who have used a similar method
of improving links of communication?
1 think it is really interesting that this President. who has spent his
entire career in the Federal Government, has shown more concern for
State government than any other President that I know of in history. No,
i do not know of any other President who has done this.
What are the specific areas of exploration which you have pursued
during your meetings with the various State leaders?
They have varied. In areas of health. education and welfare. they are
concerned frequently that the funding time schedule is not effective.
For instance. let's say that for this fiscal year. 1968. which begins
July 1, Congress probably won't pass its appropriation bill before
September: but it will provide for Federal funds for State programs for
the year beginning July -- three months before the bill passed. After
Congress has passed the hill. then the agencies have to get the informa-
tion and make re commendations to the States. which will probably be
in October or November. The State will probably then have its Legisla-
tive session in January or February or later. So their appropriation
bill is passed perhaps as early as April, and then in May the State
people will get the money required to match the Federal funds for the
year that ends the very next month. This is a real problem. It is not
anybody's fault, it is just that the funding process is not consistent with
the realities. Congress has got to come to a recognition that they must
appropriate for more than one year at a time. or neither the Federal nor
the State governments can plan to use the money that Congress has
appropriated. There simply must be more lead-time in these operations.
Another thing that the States find difficult is dealing with a number of
agencies that have funds or programs in the same area. You might find
in vocational education the Department of Agriculture, Department of
Labor. Department of Commerce; you might find the Department of
Health, Education and Welfare, of course. So, as a Governor
approaches a particular problem, he might be faced with a whole range
of possibilities and have to do a shopping job to determine which best
fits his needs. This is not an easy process, and the President is trying
to consolidate the Federal activities and coordinate them so that a Cover.
nor will be faced with a range of options. but not with a competing and
overlapping situation.
.6 -
Which seem to be the most common problems to the different States?
Can you put them in a one two three order, Governor? You say
Health. Education and Welfare u what is the most crucial problem
facing the State governments at this point to your . .
In their relationship with the Federal Government?
Yes, sir.
Ignorance. Simply a lack of knowledge of the Federal programs, purely
and simply. and that comes from a lack of communication. Lack of
staffing at the State level is a big problem. But to go to substantive
problems, I would say that consolidation of grants is the solution that
they most want. The proliferation of categorical grants. which are
narrow in definition, doesn't give the Governor much range of discre-
tion as to which problems in his State he wants to attack. That is the
number one problem.
Governor Bryant. the Advisory Conunission recently made public its
Eighth Annual Report to the President, and it said the biggest problem
is the management dilemma. Is this what you're talking about now?
That's a two-word definition of all I've been saying.
It also suggested Federal guidelines may be too harsh in the relations
between States and Federal Government grants. Would you elaborate
on that, please?
I think it is frequently true. i think that when Congress passes a law.
it may include guidelines in the legislation or it may set out purposes
which Federal people then translate into guidelines designed to achieve
that purpose. They may have to do that. They may not be able to
qualify with the General Accounting Office or the Budget Bureau for the
funds unless they lay down guidelines that will permit them to qualify.
But frequently there is a Federal tendency, as there is a State tendency
towards local governments. to try to prescribe with too great detail what
the States must do to satisfy the requirement. One of our major objec-
tives is to set up procedures which will give credibility to State efforts
and allow initiative and resourcefulness at the State level.
In the Advisory Commissions Report is also mentioned Federal tax
immunity abuses by local governments. What exactly are some of these
abuses. Governor?
I think there are two. Recently. Ohio proposed a $100 million bond
issue which would involve tax-exempt bonds interest. so that the
bonds would bear a higher rate of interest on the market than non-tax-
exempt issues. Then having taken this money tax-free. the State of
Ohio would invest it in Federal Government issues at a higher rate of
return and the arbitrage or the profit would go into the coffers of the
State of Ohio. This was one thing that the Advisory Commission was
talking about. I think that is not a good practice. and I admire Gover-
nor Rhodes and the State of Ohio for withdrawing that proposition.
Another thing that they are talking about, and there is still considera-
ble doubt as to how it ought to be approached, is the use of tax-exempt
bonds to finance industrial development or industrial plants in a State.
where you have a plant say, "if you'll build us a building with tax-free
bonds, we'll locate in your area. This has good and bad aspects.
It is one of the things I'm sure that the Advisory Commission was
writing about.
They also talk in their Report of State financial aid to urban areas.
Could you elaborate on that a little?
Yes. This is something that clearly ought to be done. In the State of
New York. for instance. I was rather amazed to hear Governor Rocke-
teller, in responding to some television inquiries, point out that the
State of New York grants to a city of New York some $2 billion, 300
million per annum -- a fantastic sum of money. 1 think the Federal
Government only contributes to New York some $800 million. So the
State of New York gives more than three times as much aid, according
to those figures, to the City of New York as does the Federal Govermnent.
State metropolitan aid ought to be increased; but, again. the States have
the same problem that the Federal Government has. They ought to
give the local governments more discretion. more authority, and less
stringent guidelines. more exible criteria. All of the things that the
Federal Government does wrong with the State Governments. State
Governments do wrong with City governments. And they. too. are in
the process of trying to improve that relationship.
Governor. this State financial aid. of course, would have to come from
the State Treasury, and, of course. to do this the States must find
additional sources of money. Where could this money come from?
There are many places it could come from. if you'll look in the
Advisory Commission Report, you will find that only about thirty-three
of the States, for instance. have income tax. About forty of the States
(I dont know just the exact number without looking quickly). have sales
taxes. Thee are various business taxes that might be levied.
-3-
Im not recommending that these things be done: these are sources
of income to which many of the States could turn. They have many
problems. One of their great problems is the relief for the property
tax burdens at the local level. Another problem is the relief of the
personal property tax burden and the intangible tax burden. These
don't raise much money for the States or for the local government ~-
that is. the intangible tax and the personal property tax don't u but
they do cause real problems for the communities. However. until
they have some alternative source of revenue. they will have a hard
time giving them up.
One major source now for many programs, of course, is the Federal
grants which we have been talking about for some time. Do you feel
that the States are abdicating their role in this -- that perhaps they
are trying to shift the responsibility to the Federal level?
I don't really think of it in those terms. Most of the State governments
and the Federal government are just instruments of the people. They
don't have any excuse for being except to serve the common welfare
and the common defense. And i think as long as any program is
national in application. if it is more convenient to finance it through
the Federal Government revenue resources than it is through the State
Government revenue resources. 1 see no reason for it not being done.
The grant-in-aid is the American response to that problem. and if
we can keep the grant-in-aid. broaden it for administrative purposes.
give more discretion and authority to local government. we will
strengthen local government and we will strengthen the people down
at the level where the government programs work. We'll do that using
the revenue resources of the Federal Government and the manpower
and initiative of the local government.
Governor Bryant, we hear a lot about possible tax sharing -- the States
and localities picking up some of the excess money from the Federal
Government. Some bills have been introduced in the Congress which
would accomplish this. What do you feel about the possitiity?
Of course. the tax sharing preposal has many attractive features. 1
think We ought to remember that it was first proposed by Mr. Heller as a
means of disposing of projected surpluses in the Federal Government -
surpluses which would have existed but for the Vietnam war. I don't
think the proposal is germane in today's circumstance. 1 don't generally
like to see one area of government given money for which it is not in
some way responsible. unless there is a purpose -- not a guideline. not
a strict procedure but a purpose. The Federal Government does
express the national purposes. and there is no reason why money should
not be given back to State and local governments to achieve those
-9-
PAGE 1
TA .ED ..T.k..E ....E.T.NLEDCTINL A
PAGE 2
:. :L' ::. .. ... ... --..-.' .:. : .' --: -----i ..-..-.-. .1 .' -| ',-s. :., -t .i :--. -.|--:.I --:-. -.. | -.---.. -.---... |: .I i. 1:-..-i.1:. !\ ::1--| -...::1 .31.--: ..:. .---::1, I | .I :1 t|i ....1--. :1 -., .1-. 1:-.. 7 ---i 'l i 1-.: ..-' 15 -.:;:, -11 --iril, ".".:: I .:.. 1.. --.'.1!. ii. 1!1-. | |.1-... -. --..i. ': |. 1-1..---s1.. ..--..-. --.-:.:. .:.. -: .-:. .1 -.---. .-C : ----.. ---.--:1-. 1 .:31------;|--:-.------.:.-:-. -: -.. 1.1 ,.... .; -: -.:-..: ..1.. --. ; --.. --...-----: -.1-: ...--,. .---... -. .:-..-. 1 --..-: --. ...-' ,..-|;r -i .t--0: --|-.-.r .-1 :;) 11: : :" -.':". i.. 21: ---.r -. .p-:.-..: :--.-:r :1. .t 1:..-s .. ._. .:-.. 1 -1, ---s .-.-:.I 151' -| .-i-i., :n-: :i 1 '-1-.11|\ ---.. :-! ::11|-. ... --i--:1.. -ll;i' 1-1 -1 1---;1--l".' ... -. r -. .;-, -: .-, a --.1 |.-. -,.-.: .-.-..;.-: ., --: --. 1 -.... -.-: 1. 1 -||--...:!,.-I -:-:-1-!.r--.
PAGE 3
S ~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~ D. y.....hnpr.p.he.i.sm peil esn h ouw th6u, 1notela o hsgo B ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~. 1. 1..n Prsdn ono asptagetenhas, uo eea-t Ie insis and whih .h In.gvrmna ..atn ..mm....r deal win nany rlatonshps oherthanFedral ..at ...vr.l ... t.a .s ..ou .' .a .agh t. .rsdn' at.to o o etm
PAGE 4
.15 [ Lbiala it' -'.10de;-.:ljit-dj y i f:,1 .I tititir. Solne of ineirl ar21'1. 71-1 va:WiLit: s, em: c',e .you ]:stve ra r
r:ey i el. !?i:-ed .t:lti ::pe: I :ly the l'ederal G;-,-crjail:Utir ifal:e ao r the l e-Ita:11 .-xpenrlil.r:re', 1.8 n'', !:-s'Qt: r' ar |-ir:1purl.i..ir. I.r1 th!' ro:d a; u;-,1-ir:n prodr:el. : h:.in it h;ts la es: :or r:tarv ye-tres It rtsi..:(11mal l d'E so even u:th the gris r11..: -in-cie Lind e---e"! w irh I nc pr:>l ii:-r:stinr. o: 'r-dr r..i progrisms in:-e h;a:4 heen ne. tuataua. iv.s..:1;t t:ri : -:e riatie..r:aj e: t;u:ny, Howe--ee. i :.rn sure r:umy coryres--mco jr.1Fr>out a reeltation of 71... --,:r: r:1pe is ol.. ::d. G D:, y,,a r~eri-ses :sny -:ulure rede-liau in :--.j:. By ti.y Prs:cient? is n:rroc r-du ce s and ple:::ning c.s:: ac ;ie; ie-scil. U What t 0:3.-1 :\ -i rinr.. daille., f.Iove ra:Jr li ry-1nr !o t -.11 a.a a\1.":s i e re-ri trtpe 12thePre--ic.en:2 .;.
PAGE 5
P, J :mi irying 11: c.r, two thinps. Ors: ire -.t:establi:.a ~.irtei esi:irr.unisa. i.ien Ih;si ....:g|9 in t-xist, We are 1:ski::E the J-t:dar..:1 pi:..:ple a: t p.1 icy-:nni:-g ~:esel out irio the fie".tl red t:t.ntra::-i::c [iwici witz tN-ar Stare cow.nk rpart 2. Sosnes -.ine. Ie --imp:s ne-T. ::n --pri sirer but r.-1:-lark abit: :seve:'l-lielers. duei ~r.appeli wher; this e. : ars, The !%rler;i! pr..3phdis..:me" !!>;11. Sta:e peop.c are 1.u:r.pinent a:ni !!ic State people :ino --:ut tt.M Ecc.e ral pe. Ipit.. elor.'i wea:Itury:s, thsi l. : he; ':eve 1eiepro::e nurnbe r and .-at be er,1]eti on wer:-.gentis, -inc.. 11.1t !--.cy :-;-in ger responses ::f ihey'll last -.1::dar-it:ed the pro, taiore:4 ;iud pt, nov.n the :-r:,:tr1s :lisi |-.;0:0 M;r!! presr. ri":wr! proccacalle. l's i:one --i-ilt-' --,am-mt 'r.:a:-1:n-s -tl-ed i:: --o importan:. I'jese. <-.iltd tailtji s ha i r 1[:-81 ble.-e peOpIe :-Il-li l' 'dtra pt'O-de stre icii r:.ig 1!::-<1 r.11ey ha re to aclj-.:-1: LEe ir pros 1-cl.tre -1a .-r.,:-.forni -o i nc ol.~ner. KifLrtd out at the Feder-i! li--re! rhat A:a-e.1 a-.d Florida a re ::m alike. 1 ::aink 1.:Es is a very tntere.sting ex:llup e a:n' particual' gt:rty is oper;.i!.ing linder a (~migress'';--i si:-rui.r5:a seg miller -6:all be ;1r: a!~jice ter every su 1:ia:3y thi.:nnetud pc',!ale 53' a'-C lor -\last;a :almig the .sea i.:-rast, Det t! er ter ;111 in relytairuler af A~.a km. iir re i:o:-:ly Coe of:ji e a :ii -pii rticula r ene :,.. T111-. ri., -.-s -h;d nios1 o! tlic people i:. Eli.tt w:.1-se area simply d:In't a:tve recourse o t!,: 3~mler;al :~;1rility a :Eli. Obvil>s:.ly, therenire, Ihr. I.m o.Eht -. : be adiusted :n fil ih;il. p;srticillar rit'la[ion. S, irae i eri..ral poi,0 are ~i:al t; that Mate-: are r!if reni. I i-.e 81..1te peup'.e a re livingig t:-;il ille ]~ecier i. program: ran be inoNim:1!ari rn..::i:,::rc .11ectively 11 tal.-c :1rirfarineti --If I hey n ill 1:-'0.0 C:-1:'Ollder.: t.. It ::1 :-t-i w -. tt ille p rutt rl.'.1-l'3:.c prived:gres :gre. ~] Eri: 1:Nae!. e: the i'e': -ape 131. ciiscipletra, G "ha: group of exper1.:s in :lu: !~ielti ::.f Ihr Fede:-al 63-. t:ronon1 wh:.e': 12: vi:liis::g States -:tar been1->-.,wil l>y 15:< ill-w:r.-.eciet av..eritl', as 01.. --callrel l>resideittial Tad I arce. [9 tla ,air:: rejati: a Irav.en i i i Tr-no :r:c 1|ie Advile:l'U E:. I'lPlis --ion or: I 11"|rg:C\T TEC'e:lta ,i ti >T13 Y ll 31:3, em r:pithall. w e |LU tal:.e ar:.'..a nta e,1.f I ill: sla il el tile -idh 1::Or 111 11n --isir.>-. On I nl e rgove s':':1-lier1":l i l'el:1iens i ci :-.:-t-> a:: .::< e i!"i:t 1r |-Ir(1:31:-ni s :t nra clevelop l erle t'al t'o Ngo-M s .161 LNe ce i:no iut'In: a r offi, i 11 er-Jah'.m.anip. G Gover::or. l .aipper.e hva ;ire 1.--e gier-ti ..: !!ur. is I,f.ir., .rol S.dtiilr::. ( "r.131d yoti -211 u::. ex;1etly rien 1! -.:carl!p'.-.e:1 El ex. A :-c : a Gut.: r1-ti !|1sts illviti-d u:it' il 51:11 e'. w-.' 31---.d i1:<':! uu r mer. to::m Elar ofir..e :ere i:W;ssi-:iligter: to i1'-t.A i1h 1-ne (iourr.. -.1:31 his op people to slefine ille ,ribienis in Er'n-r:tl -%1,. re!:i-ions 1.m: cor.cer'. -5.. Gwernor, Wlien 11el hat: derdou--. iir bring I ack ure pr.:rt ;i ne; .:, e .:::-1a..-t 1lie (~,,t':,inet 1:.:!i.. e :-. 7::, 6 a-:Ihr :li ., y a ipn .: rtta r a tha' : a a f.1r. G.r Ihat t rip a h<. wij! eri.il e 0 -i :: -orm-iric en:m -.'r :-
PAGE 6
-.' i .... --.:1 -::.. ., p i-... --: -1 .. ---. -1:.-: -|7 ..:. .!.' :.:: .-.---, -|1 -. .. .-i -:. I i.e r s .. :: -r.. .. -:. ..-r :.-51 ..... .... .:Lt. .: I T I lis -y v.. --,. -r : : ..1. 1 .I i .... ; y ,, --.-i ., ; s ... -| ---...7. .::.._. 1. j--. --..----: -!. -. -.2 .s .-1 -------.. .1 -.x .: e .. --1. : ... -.. .e .. : .: -. ---.. -r : -----..--.-. ---.; .-is ---.: | ----... -1 -----, -! --,' 1. .a ... ., .:.1 I,. y -.-e .._ : r -.:.-... -..-..-[ --1 1; i -..r: .e. -. ., -, -.-....i. |1 .... s .. ..: :,11 1 ..I '|-3.1!. -i :! .-' !1 :.--i: -i i .. E 's. .1 --1 i : .i -: .i '.. A r --, --'. .-. : 1.x t. .--.-. 1:. : -r : -.:.7 y r -:: -.". r -.--.--r -. -.c.. 4:.-.. .:.. ., e 1 ..i-, .. -,. .si : --. --1|| -a .s. a. ., ....... ...;.-. ,.r. --:--. -..-i-:. -: | I --L ---|I 1.. ..,.:t ---.. ...-. .. ..: -... .. -.. s -: i ..-.--1. -:. --.. --:r.: -_ -.. -'an -: .-... I i. -, 1. e i-.
PAGE 7
.r. 3----.:...:. .-:. -. --.. -... 1.-|i ..I : -. -... -1.._: :: -..,-. ". ..,, :1.-...:-. I'. : .r .-.s. -:| --.. -.1: .-. I.e V -. .:-1:..1:. '' -.:-.. --r .-.. !i .2 .::. ---:"".2--1. t : .. .:J:-t -. -..-%.-1-. --.-. ..i. ..-.1 s 1 --' '. .--.'.: ':1' -i": --:: .'"| ..s .. .n. 1--!,. ;-: : : .3 .-..1: : --::.--. --:.3 -. ...-... .-. -! ---------.1 1.-...i 3. -..-. .-. '.:. t .: : | "e.-..": -....-.-'.: :-.Jr ...--.--3-. .::. .:.."t .-1-. --.--1..----!:---.1 : .-. --'.i. ':1.. ..i. -.-r T--:-1--li : ---: !.I -: -s-o.". i ::3:. :-::. : 's .-:..-1 .. '..:. -.::I -:n --, -. A .. ! : ---.. I i--. .:. .-: -. s.. ...--1. -.--..-:'.-. I c. ..3 --.-. :--.. --.-:!::...: ::. ...i. : .-: :-' I -.e _-. .-.. -:...' -: Li-. -.--1 -1 .1. !. 1.....-. .. i 1--.:1-:>t-.-1, :13 .. e.-. '! : :'.-311-. .-. -1 --. 9|.:.-: .-: is .1 t'. -siji :.: -1 --1 -: : -t -------. -...:''. .. -.|:.:.si---:.' -... : --:) --. |! ---.-.--_r. -..i ..: 7..-.::...:.. i. --. --..--:.-.s-t : -----,-:-. -.. --. ...-s-::1 .--_-i. .. .-.!-. i .--.. ;..-, .i.. :. --n-.;1 ". i -:.r \--se-::!i. 1, ... .'..-!1 1 .-s .---i' --.-.' -.d'. -. T. -.-.3-. !: ..1:-.s : t---::.r-..--. .-3: 1r. .-L .--r ---.--.1. :-1::. .::: .-.:.-! .i-..1. --.i.. .'. '. --.. ::: .1 -: 1:. -. : -...-.--' .----.--1.. 1: I .t ..: .--|'. ---1. !". .i .: ---r--.1 -.. 1: ... --. -.::. ..:-. .1. --. -_-..1 -: -. -. ... -. -1 -,-i :.. --1: -. i ...-1 .... -:' .....-, -r l' -.--r... -i--1..:..:.: -. r ti, -:.. ...-: :-. -. .---!.. .9-.:-. -. .l. -. -:. :-e -: -----!. .1..:. -:!-.Is :. .::.': .L: 1 -. .-:. -11 : 1: -1 ..:I ....: : .:.:-:ii:-" 1:2 -:-.|.-.:-. -...h-1-i :.. 1!. si: t. --.3.-:.. :-. --.. --.. -. 11 -:l! .-.-!. .!..!. ..! 1. .--9-: -. !:..--. --: .-rs.-. N.., ..-. .(0:-.. :::-..-.r 5.:. !-.e.-:. --is .1.:. .ar1.l.1:s :-. :.-.. .-:! ,1: -1. :.'.'. -.--I :... :: :3-.--::! .:!!!:. -.-1.1. '.:: -C: -... :31.-:. -I ':: -1|.-'. -.l. -. -.. .-.I .-. ::.: :'. 1:..: .: :. .!-.. :-.-:..: -. .---..2.--.i ----1 --, --.. .-. : .!i :-.:. -. .. -.:-1. .-.. .| -..'.i .31|:
PAGE 8
Whit. mer-i to ise -he :r.o::t C..n:mt.m probjei:1:= 1::-11,0 elila~oren1 St:1t<:s:' C.m ys: p;.t thei:1 in a one -two three order, Governor? You -:av ealth. le|..t:atio:: ;..nt: Wel~4tre --want is iht mos: cr:u-int pre.bau seine :he State c:werr.ments at 6:1:= pr>i::t to you, B i:: de:ir wl:.t:ionship with -he Feder:.11 Goveenwnt 6 Yes, sir. ld Lynorano. Sirnply e lat:k al lui.medy .a tre F.:r!er:0 pre>gr:t:ns, purely w:1 si:c.psy, ;md that ::enn:s tram ..t 10<:2 ei :ummtmie:ttion. :ek of si:sf1-ir.g at t.hr Staw levn is a big proba:r:1. &:t to go la subs1.:triire pr-.ihl::r:e., I wc>uld say 1.h:ai. c:rmsolitiraion a: gr-1:its i:a the solniion that they mo:ir. we..t. The prolueration a :::-uegorical greints, whii.h :s:-e narrov: in delniLior., r!Oesn~t gi-ze the G.a ernor muc!s r;snur D: C'.iKr.tion ;as to which psy.ems Jn hLs 5t;ee he w;.int.s u .et;aek. 1h..it it, tre nunaber c.ne probic:n. G Gover..ar Bryant 1.he Arivi:+:ary Conuriission rm emly -na!:. pub".ii. its r:ivath Annual Repor: to te P:-esirlen1., and il. sair the hitgest problem is tixm.-inas.meni dilemrmi. Is this wh;at you're 1.-a!kine ;,beut now? 3 That% ;-t Iwo-word elefir.ii.ion or~ all ~~ve beau sayi::g. G 11 ..1180 suggests:t! k cleral g.aitteli:ws niay be lau carsh in the reaitions between Seal.ee a::ti bi:tleral Gavern:neire grants. Wu.:ld y:;u einborate on t~r.;il., ple:-Ise" 11 ~ thini.. 11 is freelaMN trus. I 1.hina ih;t1. when C.mpress passes a I;iw, it ma y 1:xade pidelines; in ihn leglslatirr. or ~:: may .ses .,at purpose-i v.hich Feder::li Ir:-ople then trar.siate i e se.idelines de:signed to :schieve that purpu-Je, They eney in-:e to d,: that. They may not be ab'.e. ro Cin:tlify v.itla 6:e Gene-as Accounting O Jive or the lludget Bureau for Clae :nmis unic.as they 5.y cown guidelines thit will per:uit them a; tta::.lity. But frerluenliy ihere is ,3 Falt:ral wndency, --13 Lhcre is a SLate Leudem y towards inca. gover:-ments, ::: I ry t.; presi: ribe with too ori:;d r1ni.iti! wha. the S-.ates must do 1.o s.uisfy the rerairt.-men!. D.e 01o-.:r majo:obja tive:s is a set .tp pro. c
PAGE 9
l 1515::2:. !:-t'rt' til'e "suO. Reger.rly, Ohio 11Trip-.1:41:d -t Sili') mi.llis|1 buli-e ,;f reiurn aral de ebitr;ge or :ne preli1 wUnid go i.nio lhe coli~e rs of the State ::t Olli:.a Thir: v.as ny:e t':irothat the Arl-.:iri:.r:. C.arimiss-ar>n was talking abo-.t-.. L think tjuet is not a g:1:al prat:tist:, 3-:01 i acu:iire Gmer war T= pl:-I nt s--I y '-if you 51 beuld m; -i ballriir.g wiL:. tax -| ree bygda v.. e '!) [.1,:ste in troli.:trat. Tlij-; h;.. a: raond :ir.d he.ti .:aper:ts, Tt -:s une -;! -lut:.ings l'in 5.<:-< that the At!simiry Gomr:liesion 'A:. s a riding .tb.3ut1 G Ti-a:y use talk 1:1 -arir Repo:-! of St-lic finans.i;,1 im ru itrian a re: C r.tJd yo.: .:la'3':e:-.te on th:st si iil.le ? -> Ye s. T:n e is s..irne 1.hi:-:g ti:aL t:lt:arly -..lu.gly to he C:nne. 111 t|:e State -:t n Y...rt for 11:st;tr.t:e, i un:emlir r :.im:1.ad 1.0 ke:ir G.sver:a:4 R'au.e fellerar. rr:spomiing tu so:ce -.ele--ision iiirpsicies, pom C-.a !Mt :.h..State :sf New York er:Im to :1 city of at-w Y.;rk :a:ee M ut-lice, W' nailion pe:r .rtr.uni --7: Lantastic su:e o!~ 'ron:-y. I 1hi::k tbc beders;1 Grasy.rnnn:ni only contrioutes tr, M:-w Yrrk a.2:ne 9800 :r.ijlm:n So :ra: State of New York gives :nare -.han thri-.1.in s -13 inuch ad, de.-:.:rdi.ng te, Omse fig-.:res, o tlte City of New York as .r:.es tr..: Jederal Geserr'.ani. 5tsite inetropolit;m aul ough: !n be intraterl; het piin, ilm Stat-a n;t .0 the s;ane prubb:n. me rhe Eeder:al (hiver-mr-n1. has. I's.-y su -,Itt to in: the los:.;-,1 gott r:tmentre inore diari:!i :n, :n'y --.muliarity, and .e-;o :aLringt:r!l. QUitir .i ru-a, u!D re il ednh' t riiv rill. A-. al 1:w diirly-; tha: W.e Ferlersti G:;n rno:.n! rl:n:a wrong with 1--.: Sr:ltr Gover:r-r-etits. St.o Gr.ve rnor.:-.ts <10 u r:.my w ill City p:vermnt nis And tit-.-y tes.1. a r1: the pro:.t:ss .~ 1.rying t:-ii: rove tint relauu:-.silip. is Governor, taiSI.:.tr fi:autei:11 :.ir., 0-~ 03.:r-;.-, usj
PAGE 10
.-' I 1-.. .: ...1 -.. : 1: -, -1 --. .1.. --, : ; e. -|: -.-: --------I ; ... .e : I --. :.. -.. -.. .---.---.-.. ------i y e.-! -1sa r i" : C I ._ .-.-, --1 --..-' .1 --.1 .:. 1 -.1 : : -......--. --.--i i --.. -.--..i :-.. , ; .-...... ... --; 1.. --. ----
