Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
4525811
label
A Congressman Looks at County Government, Sheraton Hall, August 10. 1964
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4525811
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
A Congressman Looks at County Government, Sheraton Hall, August 10. 1964
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Speeches
subjects
Executive-Legislative relations
Local government
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4525811
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1964-08-31
month
8
year
1964
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1964-08-01
month
8
year
1964
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
75ca0a8cf9d7cbc3
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D16, folder "A Congressman Looks at County
Government, Sheraton Hall, August 10, 1964" of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press
Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. The Council donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box D16 of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
a Congression Into at Country Government
8/10/64 - Deloa Hamlin
Aberaton Hall.
Deb
Introduction - Two Improme
theat great man
What does a Congrensman All when he looks
at Crunty Government -
Variety - Big brands - Michigan
Small brands -
Some elected in one way,
some another
Some appointed in part (Mich)
Variation in certain states
Michap alternative now porides for
When one considers The divisity in
The problems paing Countries it is to important
to have different polytron to county govt.
Diversity - state to state
GERALD
within states
strughtjachet local govt -by Federal dectation N fiat.
Under no unaumstances should we
2
at the present time
Two developments in Washington that
are affecting, on may affect the might
1
of the County & its nich to make
decisions, on 2 to determine for itself The
kind of county good it will have.
people
not by The
state Count decision
Compress.
ordered litt
Baher vs Carr & others
at has new The
Houses That The states of Amp The must Rate prest more , district w in and to No p The state County even cut legislatures of across township City country govt. 1 lines. Michigan 4
My
b
each
to
4D
have
po
charge
your
action in this area
werry
with Chest of
N
right
is not academic
no one throught legeslature
action was concerable
but it happened
GERALD LISARY
If we are to have Home Rule in our
Country on in our States There must be alert
public Cruchen to The for meaching implications of the
support Court decisions
COUNTY SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA
October 10, 1963
Rep. Gerald R.
or Ford an speial in Country grot
Introduction: Although never County a Supervisor, I have:
A. a brother who is - his job is tougher than mine.
B. worked closely with supervisors in my two counties:
32 in Ottawa - population of 98,719 (1960)
70 in Kent - population of 363,187 (1960)
They, like you, are dedicated public servants who must
provide local services, build better communities, all within
the tight framework of local taxes and the spotlight of
hometown scrutiny.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
C. D. C. welfare investigation
2
Right fthe County 4 its
officials to make independent
decisions without didation from the spreacher
branch of The fuleral gmit.
To any objective student of American govemment since 1932 it should be crystal
clear there has been 8 distinct trend to increased power in the hands of non-elected
federal officials such through learning executive on decisions. a daily In laws recent in years, one way and n the another situation have is in oncounty impact
growing worse rather than better, there have been a multitude of executive orders
got
flowing out of administrative offices in the Nation's Capital. The output of such
self-serving power by non-elected officials in the federal government has reached such
proportions it is virtually impossible for members of Congress, state officials or local
authorities to keep abreast of what is being done in this vast bureaucracy that to a
dangerous degree controls the life and destiny of the American people.
Unfortunately few Americans realize the numerical strength of decision makers in
the federal government. Today Uncle Sam employs approximately 2,500,000 civilians and
this army of bureaucrats is supplemented by 2,800,000 men on active duty with the Armed
Forces. It must be conceded, although seldom realized except by those affected, that
the military decision makers in America area part of the Executive Branch and their
decisions, both locally and nationally, can be arbibrary and far-reaching to individuals,
to business, or to the local community.
The fundamental point, however, is that working for the federal government in the
Executive Branch of the national government there are about 5½ million employees who
are never really "called to account" by the voters. The President representing the
Executive Branch, it is true, puts his record on the line once every four years and the
voters in a broad sense pass judgment on an Administration whether it be Republican or
Democratic. On the other hand a vast, entrenched and potentially arbitrary bureaucracy
backed up by the power of $100 billion a year in federal funds never real ly puts its
récord to the test of the bal lot box.
On this point of federal Executive dictatorship I have read lately of numerous
serious conflicts between local authorities in California and arbitrary officials
practically Every state m The me hand federal
on the other
in Washington. Let me assure, you, however, that this federal octopus does not limit
itself to browbeating local authorities by self-serving interpretations of legislation
or Congressional intent. In the past few months, my 'tile State of Michigan has experienced
of other Mahm had
first-hand the disastrous effect of the a buse of power concentrated in Washington.
a classic Winston in Michym is The dispute between the Dept ? H.E.W. + our
Back in 1961, the Congress decided to extend the aid to dependent chi ldren act state anthoris
to include unemployed parents. And so we passed what is now known as ADCU.
GERALD
And when the bill was passed, it was to run for only one year because the Congress
case of a multitute Jother
This situation raises some tremendous issues. And the issues are threefoldd
The first is whether Federal officials can remodel the will of Congress to conform
with their own ideas of social necessity. And the issue simple- is invellect whether we are
going to allow laws written by our elected Congressmen to be rewritten by administrative
officials whose actions lie largely beyond the effective control of the peop The
issue involves this significant question: Is this a Government of law or is it a
Government of men?
country, a city or n
The second issue is whether a state is to have the advantage jof a program tailored
to meet its own needs.
or country
And the third is whether acceptance by a state of Federal aid is acceptance of
Federal dictation.
You and I know what the answers should be. The clearly-expressed will of the
elected representatives of the people must be followed. While men govern, it is the law
which must rule. And the strength of our federal system lies in the conformity of
purpose and action on national issues with a diversity of policy and methods on state
and local affairs. But when we get to the third issue, I fear that we can seeethe
hand-writing on the wall: the more extensive the federal aid the more likely and the
more serious the federal dictation.
Centralism will be checked only when national leaders refuse to encourage the
"easy way" of federal assistance, and state and local leaders assume the msponsibility
and privilege of local action and control. The answer is not a call to easy living but
an opportunity for strength through struggle.
The big issue 100 years ago was whether the excess sovereignty of the states was
going to destroy the Union and the Constitution. The big issue today is whether the
excess concentration of Federal power and sovereignty is going to destroy state, local
and individual freedom and responsibility.
You with all local officials throughout the country, have the answer. When in
concert, local and state leadeńs proclsim loudly and clearly "we will do the job
GERAL FORD LIBRARY
-8-
the first step will be taken.
But one more thing is essential. You and I, all of us who are concerned must
continue to show our citizens, the voters, the significance of this issue and
For that nearly
200 years america has grown stomp of progred Ly release on lead participation
those political candidates who the most from Wash ington are not the most
of deserving action of We our must support. nit let This butwork of strength and to
impotence in the from 8 federal handonts of federal diatation
III. THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH : CORNERSTONE OF DEMOCRACY
There is another
The third major topic which I want to consider with you for just a nfew minutes
is to me equally as serious as the one we have just been discussing.
I am deeply concerned with the expressed and implied criticism of the Congress,
yes, to all elected officials, which seems to be a popular pastime today. Many
newspaper and magazine articles have been written with such titles as "Congress Must
Reform;" "Old-Fashioned Congress Refuses to Face Reality." A recent long article in
an outstanding magazine was entitled "Is Congress Doing Its Job?" an article in
a magazine widely read was about "Our Costly Congress.
First of all let me point out that I do not contend that the Congress is perfeet
or that certain revisions in procedure would not be beneficial. Of course its organiza-
tion and methods can be improved. But I detect in all of this criticism and especially
that levied by those in the Executive branch, whether it be controlled by Democrats or
Republicans, a determined effort to downgrade the Congress and all elected legislative
bodies. There is an overwhelming tendency in this accelerated world to justify the
elimination of that which is old merely because it is old rather than ecause it may
no longer serve a useful purpose. I think that any close observer has noted in the
last 3 or 4 decades a concerted effort to weaken or discard our traditional system of
checks and balances. The common argument, as put forward by Professor James M. Byrnes, is
that "our government was set up to be a divided government with internal checks at a
time when we did not need a strong national government." This of course assumes that
we have reached the stage in our national development where we do need a strong national
at The expanse ? load government
government The next assumption is that a strong national government means a strong
executive government and that anything which impedes the will of the executive is
wil
anschronistic and detrimental. From these assumptions have arisen the efforts to reduce
substantially the effective power of Congress or any other legislative body elected
by the people.
These assumptions lead to action in three general categories. First the increase
of power through executive decisions which I have described. Second, public statements
by officials, news commentators, political scientists, and others downgrading the
Congress. And third, the general attitude expressed by certain political leaders that
they know more about what is good for the people than the people know themselves
-9-
Rather than to appear partisan in discussing this important issue at this meeting,
I will give no specific illustrations to prove the point which we are making. You are
all familiar with the anti-Congress statements emanating from various sources. By
discrediting the Congress in the eyes of the public those who make these statements
hope automatically to win support for programs opposed by a majority of the Congress.
There is some kind of strange theory gaining prominence today which holds that simply
because the Executive branch requests legislation it is good for the country and those
in the Legislative must approve it. What this really means is that the Legislative
should become a rubber stamp for the Executive Branch. You who are legislators must
agree that none of us who are elected by our constituents can justly abdicate our
responsibilities to another. Those who are so critical of the Congress completely
overlook, and certainly not unknowingly, that the House of Representatives probably has
the closest kinship with the lectorate of any segment of the federal government.
Every one of the 435 members of the House must put his record on the line and obtain
the approval of his constituents every two years. I do not mean to imply that the
Congress should not be criticized or that members of any legislative body always reflect
fully the views of their constituents. On the other hand, it is the House of Representa-
tives and those of us who are el ected periodical ly who do go directly to the people for
a mandate and the authority to continue in power. We are on the firing line and expect
to receive our share of the sniping. It is not the crticism that troubles me but the
aura of distrust generated by it; the feeling that Congeress a negative body,
on any other is
obstructing progress, and failing to fulfill its role and, therefore, should relinquish
some of the authority to the Executive.
I contend that in many intances Congress and any legislative body takes the most
effective action when it takes no action at all. It will be an evil day indeed when
it is wrong to say "NO."
From the viewpoint of a person who craves power the Constitution is negative. It
stresses the limitation to be placed upon the government and not upon the governed.
Its foundation is laid on the basic belief that a government not controlled by the
people will control the people.
Affirmatively, this means that there is a basic faith in the electorate and in
elected representatives. We who fill elective offices must assume and hold as a
sacred trust that authority and responsibility which temporarily rests with us. The
broader vision, the unselfish endeavor, the sincere purpose, and the genuine devotion
to duty on our part will preserve and strengthen that way of life which we all cherish.