|
REIVARKS
8Y
HONORABLE FARR IS BRYANT
D RECTOR
DFFIC- DF EMERGENCY PLANNING
AT THE
MISSISSIPPI GOVERNORS'
CONFERENCE
ON FEDERAL-STATE RELATIONS
JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI
FEBRUARY 17, 1967
level of novernoent to assure the rost effective public services...
"Another aspect of the problem of intergovernmental cooperation has beon the process of consultation with elected officials of State and local governments on matters concern in the develooment and adTin istration of Federal assistance programs. Governors and local chief executives are responsible for the management of their units of government. The Federal Government should take all practical stens to increase the role of these executives in the administration of federally aided
Proorams..."
We are herE today t, iplement
those idea,. Our bjetiv es aresimple
1. To estblish adrauate roemni cat ions. We wart to be sure that we are alt on the sae frequency, that our earphones are plugged in, and that everyone who should he heard has a working microphone.
2 To insure coordination in process and purpose. That means putting the Governor in the co-pilot's seat.
h hile the President and the
Governors are setting our course, rhe rest of us can keep the nhtrays clean, and tigers in our tanks.
11
We have with us today a distinguished group of Federal officials. They know their jobs. We hope this meeting, and the fallout from it, will enable them to achieve a broader nderstanding of State problems than can be secured from dealing exclusively with their special areas of concern.
[ recogn ize the competence of
,avernar Johnson's staff. With such a leader. it could not be otherwise. We 'ope that they will acquire a better insight into the underlying reasons for federal procedures.
If this chemistry works, we will develop administrative initiatives that will make possible the coordination we atI seek.
May I introduce members of the Federal team whc are here with me ti lend their assistance toward this
end:
(Intraduce Federal Team)
13
This is not our first effort in the field of Federal-State relations. We have over the past year:
1. Held a State legislative leaders' Conference in Washington -the first of its kind in history.
2. Arranged for President Johnson to meet with the Executive and Highway Safety Committees of the GSverrors' Conference and with Federal Officials to discuss traffic safety. rhe suggestions made by the Governors in these sessions were incorporated in the final legislation.
3. Through Regional Offices of the Cffice of Emergency Planning we have
14
main tained a two-wy d a ogus w ith the State,. OEF ado in is t5r for the President, fun d made ava Is to ta Ihe States in times of natural d isater and coordinates the activities of the entire Federal establishment when ma jor disasters are derlared, In F.Y. 166 Misnisniepi rece ived oer $1.5 million in Federal fund as a result of Hurricane Betsy
4. The Offiue of Emergency
Planning has several other activities which impact porn the Federal-State relationship. In the telo ns mun cations field we are svirg forward with planning to improve co-un icat ions systems among the var ious levels of Government. Since la enforcement,
15
education, water development, transcortat ion and air pollution are not found ry geographical areas an assault on the problems requires the most efficient and swiftest communicatiors 'acilities. In another OEP area, we ir- uin'g our cueputer facilities and expertise to develop a Data Comparability Study of direct interest to the States. n effect, this study looks to the ,implification of standards and nomenclatures used by the fifty states In countless instances, these defieitions are different and not translatable unless the criteria are thoroughly understood and programmed. We do not want uniform measuring rods,
16
but it would be extremely useful to know how one State'r iesrement cit be expressed in terms of reasurements used by other States. This is paricularly important as e move increasingly into regional comnacts.
5. Finally, I hove been privileged to represent the President at the National Governors' Conference and at
various regional conferences. These meetings, coupled with a steady correspondence between my office and the Governors, have helped to establish and maintain the line of communication which is the purpose of tis Conference.
I would end on This note. There was a time when Aerican- enjoyed parallel citizenshi under governrrents
17
which served different levels of need -Federal and State. Today we have parallel c itizenship under governments serving in the same areas of need. Fednr I grants have risen from $30 million annually in 1920 to nearly $15 billion today and they are estimated to reoCh $17.4 million in 1968. If we are to use these funds wisely and well, if we are to develop programs most
-espnrsive to the needs of the people, if wu -re to keep pace with an era of enor ous change, we must innovate and
-rele the institutional means to 'aster our age in freedom. In the final analysis, success will deend on the state' and the competent shown by them, s it always has.
We are here todav in Mis iHr ppi to begin that process.
t'u happy to be in Mississippi. it iV fitting that we hold this meeting on Federal-State relations in Jackson. Your distinguished Governor, Paul B. Johnsan, ha teen foremost among the Governors in r singing about improved understanding of the Federal-State rela ionship, and in exercising a cons'ructive influence on that relationship. He iH a force for stability and progress for Mississippi and the Nation. He is a member of the Committee on State and Local Revenue of the National Governors' Conference and he remains an active and articulate participant in tIn del iherations of the Southern Govenors' Conference.
He in also a very good and valued friend of mine.
And he is in the thck of nationwide efforts to simplify and streamline our Federal-State relationships.
The problems themselves are dramatically demonstrated in the statistics of those relations. More than 400 authorities exist for grant programs. At least 160 have been added since 1960. More than 1,000 new Federal development districts, areas and regions have been funded. Last december, one of our Governors reported to the Governors' Conference that "there are 170 separate Federal aid programs being admin istered by 21 Federal departments and agencies making grants to more thar 200
3
agencies and subdivisions" in his State alone. (Losernor Bryant -- Governor RobertE.McNair of South Carolina made this statement.)
lere in Mississippi, Governor Johnson and his administrative family must live and work with separate Federal grant programs providing more than 200 million dollars, and affecting every city and county in the State.
At1 these figures underscore a eric ius question of centralization which could weaken our Federal system if the States do not exercise affirmative and aggressive initiatives in the management of these funds on the State level. Let me make abundantly
clear my conviction that the State tost continue to play a vigorous and vital role in our Federal system. It cannot forfeit that respocsiility despite the increase in rederol grants.
The fact is that State and local expenditures in these areas currently exceed $75 billion each year, five times the amount contr ibuted by the Federal Government. Aid those State and local expend iturec are expected to reach 1142 b million by 1975.
Clearly, it is tie States playing their trad itional role in the partnership which will detainne the success of these efforts. There are two separate problems:
One -- the obvious problem -- is budgetary.
The other -- less obvious, and 'sore impor tan t and difficult -- is the dmisetrative problem.
Nei there ef these problems is politei ca l," for they are common for Republic ns sed n emorats.
Neither of these problems is
"deliberate," for they are the un intended results of many separate acoties by the Congress in the pursuit of d iverse but good goals.
Ne ither of these problems finds a natural or obvious solution within the framework of our established institutions and practices.
One thing is clear: If we are to find a solut ion, a methodology must be formulated to insure the coordination of diverse claims, programs and administrations with related activities, shared concerns and similar responsibilities within the State. It follows "as the night the day" that this cannot be done except through the office and person of the Governor.
Essential to their solutions is adequate "communications." The President, in addressing the Federal Department heads or November 11, 1966, and in his State of the Union Message January 1, placed great emphasis upon that idea. He said, in part
"The 88th and 89th Congresses enacted more social and economic legislation than any two Congresses in our history. But all of this legislation will core to noth ing unless it reaches the pestle.
"Federal energy is essential. But it is not enough. Only a total working partnership among Federal, State and local governments can succeed. The test of that partnership will be the concern of each public Jrganization, each private institution, and each responsible citizen...
"We intend to work with the Staten and localities to do exactly toat."
And just a few weeks ago, President Johnson reaffirmed these sentiments in his Budget Message to the Congress. He said, in part:
"Our agenda must give high priority
to a stronger and more effective
federal system of government in
the United Stte, Ito meet
urgent and grong needs, the
Federal Government is providing
a wide range of programs to assist State and 'oca coerroents. Now the chief task is to manage these
programs e4firien'ty at every
PAGE 1
REIVARKS 8Y HONORABLE FARR IS BRYANT D RECTOR DFFICDF EMERGENCY PLANNING AT THE MISSISSIPPI GOVERNORS' CONFERENCE ON FEDERAL-STATE RELATIONS JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI FEBRUARY 17, 1967
PAGE 2
level of novernoent to assure the rost effective public services... "Another aspect of the problem of intergovernmental cooperation has beon the process of consultation with elected officials of State and local governments on matters concern in the develooment and adTin istration of Federal assistance programs. Governors and local chief executives are responsible for the management of their units of government. The Federal Government should take all practical stens to increase the role of these executives in the administration of federally aided Proorams..."
PAGE 3
We are herE today t, iplement those idea,. Our bjetiv es aresimple 1. To estblish adrauate roemni cat ions. We wart to be sure that we are alt on the sae frequency, that our earphones are plugged in, and that everyone who should he heard has a working microphone. 2 To insure coordination in process and purpose. That means putting the Governor in the co-pilot's seat. h hile the President and the Governors are setting our course, rhe rest of us can keep the nhtrays clean, and tigers in our tanks.
PAGE 4
11 We have with us today a distinguished group of Federal officials. They know their jobs. We hope this meeting, and the fallout from it, will enable them to achieve a broader nderstanding of State problems than can be secured from dealing exclusively with their special areas of concern. [ recogn ize the competence of ,avernar Johnson's staff. With such a leader. it could not be otherwise. We 'ope that they will acquire a better insight into the underlying reasons for federal procedures. If this chemistry works, we will develop administrative initiatives that will make possible the coordination we atI seek.
PAGE 5
May I introduce members of the Federal team whc are here with me ti lend their assistance toward this end: (Intraduce Federal Team)
PAGE 6
13 This is not our first effort in the field of Federal-State relations. We have over the past year: 1. Held a State legislative leaders' Conference in Washington -the first of its kind in history. 2. Arranged for President Johnson to meet with the Executive and Highway Safety Committees of the GSverrors' Conference and with Federal Officials to discuss traffic safety. rhe suggestions made by the Governors in these sessions were incorporated in the final legislation. 3. Through Regional Offices of the Cffice of Emergency Planning we have
PAGE 7
14 main tained a two-wy d a ogus w ith the State,. OEF ado in is t5r for the President, fun d made ava Is to ta Ihe States in times of natural d isater and coordinates the activities of the entire Federal establishment when ma jor disasters are derlared, In F.Y. 166 Misnisniepi rece ived oer $1.5 million in Federal fund as a result of Hurricane Betsy 4. The Offiue of Emergency Planning has several other activities which impact porn the Federal-State relationship. In the telo ns mun cations field we are svirg forward with planning to improve co-un icat ions systems among the var ious levels of Government. Since la enforcement,
PAGE 8
15 education, water development, transcortat ion and air pollution are not found ry geographical areas an assault on the problems requires the most efficient and swiftest communicatiors 'acilities. In another OEP area, we iruin'g our cueputer facilities and expertise to develop a Data Comparability Study of direct interest to the States. n effect, this study looks to the ,implification of standards and nomenclatures used by the fifty states In countless instances, these defieitions are different and not translatable unless the criteria are thoroughly understood and programmed. We do not want uniform measuring rods,
PAGE 9
16 but it would be extremely useful to know how one State'r iesrement cit be expressed in terms of reasurements used by other States. This is paricularly important as e move increasingly into regional comnacts. 5. Finally, I hove been privileged to represent the President at the National Governors' Conference and at various regional conferences. These meetings, coupled with a steady correspondence between my office and the Governors, have helped to establish and maintain the line of communication which is the purpose of tis Conference. I would end on This note. There was a time when Aericanenjoyed parallel citizenshi under governrrents
PAGE 10
17 which served different levels of need -Federal and State. Today we have parallel c itizenship under governments serving in the same areas of need. Fednr I grants have risen from $30 million annually in 1920 to nearly $15 billion today and they are estimated to reoCh $17.4 million in 1968. If we are to use these funds wisely and well, if we are to develop programs most -espnrsive to the needs of the people, if wu -re to keep pace with an era of enor ous change, we must innovate and -rele the institutional means to 'aster our age in freedom. In the final analysis, success will deend on the state' and the competent shown by them, s it always has.
PAGE 11
We are here todav in Mis iHr ppi to begin that process.
PAGE 12
t'u happy to be in Mississippi. it iV fitting that we hold this meeting on Federal-State relations in Jackson. Your distinguished Governor, Paul B. Johnsan, ha teen foremost among the Governors in r singing about improved understanding of the Federal-State rela ionship, and in exercising a cons'ructive influence on that relationship. He iH a force for stability and progress for Mississippi and the Nation. He is a member of the Committee on State and Local Revenue of the National Governors' Conference and he remains an active and articulate participant in tIn del iherations of the Southern Govenors' Conference. He in also a very good and valued friend of mine.
PAGE 13
And he is in the thck of nationwide efforts to simplify and streamline our Federal-State relationships. The problems themselves are dramatically demonstrated in the statistics of those relations. More than 400 authorities exist for grant programs. At least 160 have been added since 1960. More than 1,000 new Federal development districts, areas and regions have been funded. Last december, one of our Governors reported to the Governors' Conference that "there are 170 separate Federal aid programs being admin istered by 21 Federal departments and agencies making grants to more thar 200
PAGE 14
3 agencies and subdivisions" in his State alone. (Losernor Bryant -Governor RobertE.McNair of South Carolina made this statement.) lere in Mississippi, Governor Johnson and his administrative family must live and work with separate Federal grant programs providing more than 200 million dollars, and affecting every city and county in the State. At1 these figures underscore a eric ius question of centralization which could weaken our Federal system if the States do not exercise affirmative and aggressive initiatives in the management of these funds on the State level. Let me make abundantly
PAGE 15
clear my conviction that the State tost continue to play a vigorous and vital role in our Federal system. It cannot forfeit that respocsiility despite the increase in rederol grants. The fact is that State and local expenditures in these areas currently exceed $75 billion each year, five times the amount contr ibuted by the Federal Government. Aid those State and local expend iturec are expected to reach 1142 b million by 1975. Clearly, it is tie States playing their trad itional role in the partnership which will detainne the success of these efforts. There are two separate problems:
PAGE 16
One -the obvious problem -is budgetary. The other -less obvious, and 'sore impor tan t and difficult -is the dmisetrative problem. Nei there ef these problems is politei ca l," for they are common for Republic ns sed n emorats. Neither of these problems is "deliberate," for they are the un intended results of many separate acoties by the Congress in the pursuit of d iverse but good goals. Ne ither of these problems finds a natural or obvious solution within the framework of our established institutions and practices.
PAGE 17
One thing is clear: If we are to find a solut ion, a methodology must be formulated to insure the coordination of diverse claims, programs and administrations with related activities, shared concerns and similar responsibilities within the State. It follows "as the night the day" that this cannot be done except through the office and person of the Governor. Essential to their solutions is adequate "communications." The President, in addressing the Federal Department heads or November 11, 1966, and in his State of the Union Message January 1, placed great emphasis upon that idea. He said, in part
PAGE 18
"The 88th and 89th Congresses enacted more social and economic legislation than any two Congresses in our history. But all of this legislation will core to noth ing unless it reaches the pestle. "Federal energy is essential. But it is not enough. Only a total working partnership among Federal, State and local governments can succeed. The test of that partnership will be the concern of each public Jrganization, each private institution, and each responsible citizen...
PAGE 19
"We intend to work with the Staten and localities to do exactly toat." And just a few weeks ago, President Johnson reaffirmed these sentiments in his Budget Message to the Congress. He said, in part: "Our agenda must give high priority to a stronger and more effective federal system of government in the United Stte, Ito meet urgent and grong needs, the Federal Government is providing a wide range of programs to assist State and 'oca coerroents. Now the chief task is to manage these programs e4firien'ty at every
|
