Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "7335696",
    "label": "Press Conference of Stanley M. Smoot, Commissioner, Davis County, Utah, and Ralph G. Caso, County Executive, Nassau County, New York, and Alfred B. Del Bello, County Executive, Westchester County, New York",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7335696"
}

{
    "id": "7335696",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7335696",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Press Conference of Stanley M. Smoot, Commissioner, Davis County, Utah, and Ralph G. Caso, County Executive, Nassau County, New York, and Alfred B. Del Bello, County Executive, Westchester County, New York",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7335696",
    "collections": [
        "White House Press Releases (Ford Administration)",
        "Press Releases"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/96/3356/7335696/content/library/document/0248/whpr19740815-012.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/96/3356/7335696/content/library/document/0248/whpr19740815-012.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/96/3356/7335696/content/library/document/0248/whpr19740815-012.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7335696",
    "naId": 7335696,
    "levelOfDescription": "item",
    "productionDates": [
        {
            "day": 15,
            "logicalDate": "1974-08-15",
            "month": 8,
            "year": 1974
        }
    ],
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/96/3356/7335696/content/library/document/0248/whpr19740815-012.pdf",
    "mediaId": "7136f024c26dd486",
    "ocrText": "Digitized from Box 1 of the White House Press Releases at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library\nFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE\nAUGUST 15, 1974\nOFFICE OF THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nPRESS CONFERENCE\nOF\nSTANLEY M. SMOOT\nCOMMISSIONER, DAVIS COUNTY, UTAH\nAND\nRALPH G. CASO\nCOUNTY EXECUTIVE, NASSAU COUNTY, NEW YORK\nAND\nALFRED B. DEL BELLO\nCOUNTY EXECUTIVE, WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK\nTHE BRIEFING ROOM\n12:15 P.M. EDT\nMR. ROBERTS: The President met with the leaders of\nthe National Association of County Officials for approximately\none hour this `morning, and three persons from that association\nare here to brief you on that meeting. In order, from right to\nleft, Commissioner Stanley Smoot of Davis County, Utah, who is\nPresident of the Association; County Executive Ralph Caso, of\nNassau County in New York; and Mr. Alfred Del Bello, Chairman\nof the Urban Affairs Committee of the National Association,\nand County Executive, Westchester County, New York.\nMr. Smoot, will you take over? I assume you will\ntake\nquestions.\nMR. SMOOT: Ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of 200\nmillion people that the counties of NACO represent, it is a\nreal privilege to be invited by the President to sit with him\nand discuss and hear his analogies and his concerns of those\nproblems out in those some 3,100 counties across the Nation.\nNeedless to say, we were impressed with the invitation\nbut we were more impressed with what he said in the answers\nthat he gave. He did not give us yes to all of the concerns;\nhe did not give us the panacea of all the county problems\nacross the Nation.\nWe talked about some specifics. County government,\ncity government and State government are concerned with. the\nextension of general revenue sharing. A national campaign to\nhelp our Congressmen has been launched by the National Associa-\ntion of Counties to help them understand really what general\nrevenue sharing is doing out in the counties of America. The\nPresident indicated his support of a continuation of general\nrevenue sharing.\nMORE\n- 2 -\nWe feel that it is the first time in the history\nof America that part of the Federal income tax has been\ngiven back to counties, cities and States for the caring\nof Government problems. We are, in most of our counties\nacross the Nation, on a property tax. It is a regressive\nkind of tax.\nThe only way we can cope with inflation in our\ncounties is to take a political act of raising property\ntax. It has no normal increase, as does sales tax and\nincome tax, but it takes a political act, and it is most\ndifficult to make those acts annually to try and cope\nwith the problem.\nWe are pleased with the President's position\nand his recommendations and his position concerning\ngeneral revenue sharing. We have been invited as the new\ncoalition. I am a member of that coalition. There will\nbe three Governors, three mayors and three county\ncommissioners and three legislators, and we will meet on\nthe 10th and 11th with the staff and with our officials\nhere to discuss the Federal budget before it is enacted.\nThe President has lent his support to this\nconcept because we say many of the laws that are passed,\nlocal governments are the creators of those laws, and we\nfeel that there would be better Federal legislation and\nState legislation if the officials who have to administer\nthe law were involved in the writing of the law, at least\nto give guidance to our policy in legislative bodies.\nThese other fine representatives of county\ngovernment will discuss, I am sure, other aspects of the\ndiscussion with the President, but in behalf of 200 million\npeople, representatives of those counties who belong to\nNACO, we think that the door has been opened for improved\nand increased communication between the Federal bodies and\nlocal officials.\nRemember that county government is the closest\ngovernment to all of the people for every citizen in America,\nwith the exception of one or two States, that listens and\nhas policy decisions made at a county level, and we are\nappreciative of this invitation to Washington and to be a\npart in formulating the new concepts of this Administration.\nMR. CASO: Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to\njust underscore what the President of the National Asso-\nciation of County Officials has said. We were very pleased\nwith the reaction that we received from President Ford,\nhis recognition of county government, where he indicated\nthat they are an extremely important element in the structure\nof government, and that the counties have a vital role to\nplay.\nMORE\n- 3 -\nHe indicated that there would be an open door\npolicy relative to counties working through Ken Cole of\nthe Domestic Council, and I recall that he said if Ken\nCole is not responsive, then you can see me, and this\nis the President speaking.\nHe did indicate his support for revenue sharing.\nHe said it was landmark legislation. We are halfway\nthrough the program, but he did stress that there was a\nmovement underway to scuttle Federal revenue sharing as we\nknow it today, and he indicated that we ought to get our\ntroops in order and not wait until the last minute because\nwe believe that we must have a continuation of the\ngeneral revenue sharing program, which has been literally,\nin most instances, the survival of local county government.\nI was particularly interested, being from New\nYork, about a mass transit bill which is presently, as\nyou know, being considered by the House, andI asked the\nPresident what he foresaw as its chances of passage and\nwhat would happen to it when it gets to the Senate side,\nand what might happen to a bill when it lands on his desk.\nI think he said without hesitation that the present\nplan for a $20 billion allocation of money under a mass\ntransit bill which would provide for operating subsidies\nwould be vetoed by him if it passed both Houses and got to\nhis desk in that form.\nHe feels it is much too much money. He indicated\nthat he feels the problemsof inflation are such that this\nwould be contra to trying to hold the line on inflation\nif such a bill were to pass both Houses. He indicated\nthat we should lobby on the Hill for a compromise, which\ncertainly is what I would intend to do, and hope that we\ncan make some accommodation relative to the amount of\nmoney that would be made available.\nI would stress again that we in New York are in\nextremist when it comes to a question of money for mass\ntransit. I know Mayor Beamehas addressed himself to this\nproblem, when he was with the President yesterday, and I am\njust as vitally concerned with it because in Nassau\nCounty we have the Long Island Railroad, we have a bus\nsystem which I have taken over, and the Government is\nnow operating through MTA and a subsidiary of MTA, and we simply\nmust have money for operating subsidies if the mass transit\nsystem is to grow and develop in Nassau County together\nwith the buses and the subways that make up the whole\nnetwork of mass transit in the region which I represent.\nThere are no easy answers relative to this, and we\nrecognize that we will have to try to make our case as\nbest we can on the Hill, and I would certainly hope that\nwhatever the House does today with it that the Senate would\nmove with dispatch in order that we might hopefully get a\nbill through the Congress by the end of this year and\ncertainly before that, if it is at all physically and feasibly\npossible.\nMORE\n- 4 -\nSo, I think those were the points that were\nstressed, as I recall them. I made a few notes. He\nindicated that the Better Communities Act, which is\nsomething that the Congress is considering now, would be\na giant step forward and would give flexibility to\nmunicipalities, which is so important because under the\nterms of the Better Communities Act, New York, which has\ndiffering needs from Utah, let us say -- using the\nexample of the President of the association, who is from\nSalt Lake City, and myself and Mr. DelBello, who are from\nNew York -- that this would be a very important breakthrough\nin getting everything into a single pot where flexibility\nwould prevail as to how you could decide to use the money\nthat would be made available under the Better\nCommunities Act.\nOther than that, I think we had a very\nproductive, very fine session with the President, and I\nam pleased with the open evidence of his support for county\ngovernment, which I think bodes well for the future\nbecause the future of our country, I believe, lies in the\ncounty government which, as you have heard already stated,\nis very close to the people of this State, of New York\nand other States and across the Nation.\nWe will be glad to answer any questions you\nmay have later.\nMORE\n- 5 -\nMR. DEL BELLO: My colleagues have covered most of\nthe subjects which were discussed, so I will be brief. I\nthink we were all extremely pleased to find the President is\nan extremely good listener, but more importantly, he is very\nunderstandable of the problems of the local governments.\nIn fact, in his opening remarks, he touched just\nabout every major subject that we had thought of bringing to\nhis attention and he did it with a great deal of sensitivity\nand knowledge. We were concerned, obviously, with the inflation,\nas he was, and he called the inflation \"Enemy Number One\" and\nasked for the cooperation of local government in our fight\nagainst inflationary spiral.\nHe has obviously dug his heels in on this issue and\nhopes that we will do the same. My interest being in the\nurban affairs, in the urban counties of this country, I was\ncurious as to whether the President understood the role that\nwe could play as the regional government closest to the people\nin providing efficiency in the delivery of service on many\nFederal programs, and I find that the President is extremely\nsensitive to that, and recognizes the roles that counties have\nplayed in the past and can play in the future in the deliverance\nof many of the Federal programming in a fair and broad-based\nfashion.\nThe Better Communities Act, the one that we are\ninterested in, he commented on and called it a giant step\nforward, so along with revenue sharing and the communities\nbill, we see ourselves in local government moving aggressively\nforward with President Ford even though there will be some\nvery tight restrictions on the level of funds that are spent\nthis year.\nHe indicated to us that he had to stay within the\n$305 billion. We still think that there will be sufficient\nflexibility and mobility to provide the kind of support locally\nthat is needed to upgrade the service in our towns, villages,\ncities and counties.\nQ\nMr. Caso, did the President suggest a compromise\nfigure on the mass transit that he would support?\nMR. CASO: He didn't give an exact figure but I would\nhave interpreted it as meaning somewhere between the $10 billion\nwhich is the Administration figure, and the $20 billion which is\nbeing considered by the House now. That is not to say you just\nchop it in half and say $15 billion. I really don't know. But\nI would think that there could be an accommodation somewhere\nwithin that range relative to the House bill that is being\ndebated today and will then go to the Senate.\nQ\nDid he state a position on the operating fund\nissue?\nMORE\n- 6 -\nMR. CASO: My recollection is that he said there\nshould be an option and that if a State or municipality wants\nto use money that is available through a mass transit bill\nfor operating subsidy that they should have a right to do\nso, using their option and their discretion relative to the\nbill.\nQ\nDid he talk about tapping the highway trust fund?\nMR. CASO: No, we didn't get into the highway trust\nfund at all.\nQ\nWho is trying to cut revenue sharing?\nMR. CASO: There were no specific names mentioned. I\nthink that indications are that those Congressmen who voted\nagainst it when it was first presented are still against it,\nand they may very well be the ones who are now leading the\nopposition, but no one was pinpointed on it other than the\nindications are that there may be difficulty with the continuation\nof Federal revenue sharing as we know it. In that sense it is so\nvital and important to us as counties that we ought to marshal\nour forces and work now in anticipation of that to prevent that\nfrom happening.\nQ Was there no mention of OMB in that regard?\nMR. CASO: No.\nQ\nWhat about OEO, sir? Did any of you speak for it\nor did the President mention it?\nMR. CASO: The question of OEO did not come up.\nQ Was there any discussion of a new Vice President\nat all?\nMR. CASO: No.\nQ\nWas there a discussion of the problem caused to\nyou and the economy by high interest rates and any indication\nthat the President would make an effort in that direction?\nMR. CASO: I think the President made reference, and\nof course my colleagues here are free to comment on this as\nwell--I don't mean to monopolize this conference-but he did\nsay that he has been reading very lengthy and heavy documents\nrelative to the economy from economists who, as he put it, as\nI recall it, don't agree with each other what should be done, but\nhe feels that inflation is something that must be attacked head on\nand that the way to do it primarily is to stay within the budget\nof $305 billion which has already been referred to and to start\nnow to cut back on programs thatmay jeopardize that figure, and\nMORE\n- 7 -\nhe talked specifically about vetoing a couple of bills.\nWhile he indicated -- I think he said it was peanuts -- he felt\nhe had to use these as examples of holding the line where he\nvetoed a couple of bills; I think the marshals' bill which\nwas a pittance when it comes to what it would have done rela-\ntive to salary increases for marshals and another bill which was\nin the Department of Agriculture for some $23 million which\nhe vetoed as well.\nBut I think his thinking is that relative to\ninflation there is going to have to be a hold-the-line attitude\nand that you may not be able to do everything that you want\nto do at this particular time. But it was not discussed\nspecifically other than to be included in the overall handling\nof the problem of inflation.\nQ\nWhat other bills did he indicate he might veto?\nMR. CASO: I don't recall any other bills being\nmentioned other than the one specifically I was interested in,\nand that was the mass transit bill.\nQ\nWas there any discussion of prior consultation\nbefore budget cuts were instituted such as he promised the\nmayors yesterday?\nMR. CASO: Yes, I would say that was inherent in what\nhe said, that this new coalition, particularly which President\nSmoot has referred to, would be working with OMB relative to\nhow these items will be handled in the future and there will\nbe an input from counties which is important to us and we are\nvery pleased that we are being recognized now to be a part of\nthis coalition.\nQ\nIs it envisioned that this coalition is going\nto be able to comment on the entire budget or just the domestic\npart?\nMR. CASO: I don't know the answer. I would think\nspecifically on the domestic part of it, but if it does impact\ncounty government, I think they would have a wide range within\nwhich they could comment.\nQ\nCould I ask each of you to give us your personal\npreference for Vice President? Who is your choice or favorite?\nWho would be the best man?\nMR. CASO: My preference for Vice President would be\nNelson Rockefeller.\nQ\nAnd the gentleman from Utah?\nMR. SMOOT: I don't know a lot of this applicants as\nMORE\n- 8 -\nwell as some of these gentlemen back east, but I favor Elliot\nRichardson.\nMR. DEL BELLO: I don't think I have taken a\nposition on that. They haven't mentioned the Democrats yet\nthat I would be favoring. I would rather not comment on it\nat this time.\nTHE PRESS: Thank you, gentlemen.\n(END at 12:36 P.M. EDT)"
}