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
16988043
label
Justice (3)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
16988043
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Justice (3)
citationUrl
collections
James M. Cannon Files (Ford Administration)
James Cannon's Issues Files
subjects
Civil rights
Correctional institutions
Crime
Law enforcement
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
16988043
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-12-31
month
12
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1975-09-01
month
9
year
1975
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
aec72bc0599896cd
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 20, folder "Justice (3)" of the James M. Cannon
Files 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. Gerald Ford 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States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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.
MEMORANDUM
Justice
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 12, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Ron Nessen
FROM:
Dick Parsons
D.
SUBJECT:
Planned Demonstration at White House
By Wives of Executive Protection
Service Officers
Wives and family members of Executive Protection Service
officers are planning to demonstrate in front of the White
House on Saturday, April 24, at 12:00 Noon. (See Tab A.)
The demonstration is to give greater visibility to the
demands of Executive Protection Service officers and, I
believe, to put the President on the spot.
The basic problem is that the EPS officers want to organize
for the purpose of collective bargaining and Treasury (Secret
Service) has informed the officers that they may not. A more
detailed memorandum concerning the dispute and other factors
underlying the demonstration is attached at Tab B.
Dave Macdonald has the ball for Treasury. He has informed me
that there is substantial media interest in this matter of
the, "Doesn't the President care about the well-being of the
people who protect him?" variety. Macdonald suggested that
we might wish to have a White House spokesman meet with the
leaders of the demonstration to show Presidential concern. I
informed him that I thought this was a bad idea for a number
of reasons but that I would pass his concerns along to you so
that you could be prepared to deal with whatever questions may
arise.
CC: Jim Cannon (w/attachments)
BERALD FORD LIBRARY
Digitized from Box 20 of the James M. Cannon Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
FORD
GERALD ?
LIBRARY
TO ALL E.P.S. NEN & FAMILIES
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
...
is your RIGHT.
We care enough to do something about it.
What can you do to ensure that your rights are protected in the future?
1.
Notify your wife, children, relatives and friends of the RALLY to be
held on SATURDAY, APRIL 24, 1976, at 11:00 /H in LAFAYETTE PARK,
across Pennsy lvania Avenue, N.W. from the White House. (The rally
will replace the previously scheduled April 10 planning meeting which
has been cancelled.)
2. Encourage your family and friends to join US in a peaceful and orderly
ASSEMBLY to be held at 12:00 NOON on APRIL 24, 1976 immediately follow-
ing the rally. Picket signs will be provided - please do not bring
your own.
3. Have your family and friends participate in the LETTER WRITING CAMPAIGN
to MRS. FORD. Have them explain to her in their own words just how
they feel about the unjust practices and unfair treatment E.P.S. men
have endured, and why we're having the assembly on April 24. Emphasis,
of course, should be placed upon E.P.S. men's need for and right to
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING. Either mail the letters to 1600 Pennsylvania
Avenue, H.W., Washington, D.C., 20006; or have them hand delivered to
Mrs. Ford's secretary (on the second floor, East wing of the White House
no later than APRIL 20, 1976.
HELP US TO HELP YOU!
For more information contact:
POLICE ASSOCIATION OF D. C.
1241 Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E.
FORD & LIBRARY 038ALD
Washington, D.C.
(202) 544-0011
LIBRARY
FORD
+
GERALD
OF
TREASURY
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20220
1789
March 31, 1976
MEMO TO: David R. Macdonald
Assistant Secretary (Enforcement, Operations,
and Tariff Affairs)
FROM:
William A. Hawthorne
#
Special Assistant to the Secretary
(Secret Service)
SUBJECT: Proposed Demonstration at White House by
Wives of EPS Officers
Reference is made to the attached UPI wire story
announcing the planned White House demonstration by wives
of EPS officers, concerning their husbands job complaints.
I now understand the demonstration is scheduled for
April 24, 1976.
With regard to your proposal- for a representative of
the White House staff to invite the demonstrating wives in-
to the White House for a discussion, I am furnishing the
assessments of the Secret Service. The Service continues
to feel the following points should be considered before any
liaison is made between the White House staff and the EPS
wives.
1. The D.C. Police Association seems to be the force behind
the planned demonstration. They are seeking a constituency.
EPS is one of their hopes.
2. The planned demonstration will include wives of the Metro-
politan Police Department and U.S. Park Police officers, in
addition to those of EPS.
3. Metropolitan Police officer's salaries are the apparent
basis of the planned White House demonstration -- not EPS
grievances. (Even though D.C. Police Association is not
presently the union of the Metropolitan Police, the Associa-
tion is fighting for the policemen's wages in hopes of be-
coming their union at the next union selection meeting.
Metropolitan Police officers' wage scales are the basis for
EPS and Park Police salaries.)
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
-2-
4. The Secret Service has management remedies in effect and
others planned to attempt a solution of EPS officer complaints.
5. This intended demonstration by wives of officers from
three different police agencies will very likely have a
union spokesman who will be pursuing non-EPS issues. If
permitted discussion with a White House staff member, this
contact will tie the President (indirectly) to local union
and government problems.
6. The Metropolitan Police officer's wage negotiations with
the Mayor and City Council is a major news story. If it
becomes the focal point of the "EPS wives" White House demon-
stration, the D.C. Police Association will have made a skill-
ful use of the media. The media will in turn may be asking,
"What does the President think?"
7. Recent meetings and demonstrations (at Capitol and District
Bldg.) held by the D.C. Police Association have spent little,
if any, time on specific EPS complaints. It seems unlikely
that it will be much different at the intended White House
demonstration.
8. It seems very possible that inviting the wives into the
White House will bring worse publicity than just letting
them demonstrate. Specifically, the media will have a union
spokesman to pit against a White House staff member, or what
the staff member allegedly said.
9. If this group of demonstrators is successful in using
such a medium to get White House attention on an agency and
union problem, their success may invite many similar demon-
strations.
Recommendation
Let the demonstration be held without inviting the wives
into the White House. When the media queries the White House
Press Office, they can very routinely refer reporters to the
managements of the respective law enforcement agencies that
employ the husbands of the demonstrating wives.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
UP-065
ORLLO
-
(WIVES)
CC
WASHINGTON (UPI) -- PRESIDENT FORD 500N MAY FIND HIMSELF PICKETE
SY THE WIVES OF THE WHITE HOUSE POLICEMEN WHO ARE ASSIGNED TO PROTE
HIM.
SOME 300 MEMBERS OF THE EXECUTIVE PROTECTIVE SERVICE VOTED LAST
NIGHT TO DRAMATIZE THEIR GRIEVANCES BY HAVING THEIR WIVES PICKET TH
WHITE HOUSE PERCEFULLY. THEY SET NO DATE FOR THE DEMONSTRATION.
AN RD HOC COMMITTEE REPRESENTING DISSIDENT MEMBERS HAS BEEN
SEEKING TO NEGOTIATE WITH EPS OFFICIALS OVER MANY MONTHS A RESOLUTI
OF SOME OF THEIR GRIEVANCES CONCERNING PROMOTIONS, PAY END HOURS
6 SPOKESMAN SAID THERE WOULD BE NO DISRUPTION OF THE PRESIDENT'S
SECURITY BY THOSE WHO MAN THE GATES AND MANY POSTS AT THE WHITE HOU
DURING THE PROTEST.
THE SPOKESMAN SAID THAT THE POLICE ARE SEEKING A PAY INCREASE OF
15.2 PER CENT AND FEDERAL COMPATIBILITY WITH OTHER GOVERNMENT PAY
SCALES.
HE SAID THAT BOTH WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS AND TREASURY SECRETARY
WILLIAM E. SIMON, WHO HAS OVERALL CHARGE OF THE PROTECTIVE SERVICE,
ARE AWARE OF THE GRIEVANCES.
1101 03-17 12:56 PES
can
FORD
078839
cc: Tissy
cc:
Card Daugh
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 15, 1976
file
ADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JIM CANNON
FROM:
JIM CONNOR JEC
SUBJECT:
Legislating an End to Unemployment
The attached newspaper clipping was returned in the President's outbox
with the following notation:
"Excellent arguments against Humphrey/Hawkins.
Might save for news briefing or veto message. 11
Please follow-up withappropriate action.
cc: Dick Cheney
Jim Shuman
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
Some items in this folder were not digitized because it contains copyrighted
materials. Please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library for access to
these materials.
THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 1976
STREET
Legislating an End to Unemployment
By HERBERT STEIN
problems. The bill identifies goals-some
will benefit not only the otherwise unem-
A number of Democratic presidential
specifically. some vaguely-but does not
ployed but will also benefit the rest of the
candiates, or near-candidates, have en-
recognize any difficulty in achieving any of
nation, and not only in the spiritual sense
dorsed the new version of the Humphrey
them. except lack of heart and will. What
of having done the right thing but in the
Hawkins bill. That indicates that they are
is needed is to assert the goals strongly.
more material sense of having more in-
too busy. running to think much about
Once that has been done the President can
come, more production. more revenue, etc.
what they would do if they were President.
fill in the details of the programs needed to
Whether this argument is valid depends on
On its surface the bill is a measure for
reach the goals.
how much the unemployed have to be paid
achieving all kinds of good things. Most
The bill has two main themes, as indi-
to work and how much their product is
specifically, it seems to be a measure not
cated by its title, "The Full Employment
worth to the rest of the nation.
only for getting everyone employed but
and Balanced Growth Act of 1976." The
This is not a fanciful consideration. The
also for getting them employed producing
Balanced Growth part of the bill is a spin-
fact that people are unemployed at least
the "right" things. But in fact it is a mea-
off from the Humphrey-Javits economic
raises the question whether their product
sure requiring the President to figure out
planning bill, which was called the Bal-
would be worth their wage. The fact that
how to achieve all these wonderful things
anced Economic Growth and Economic
there are lots of unmet needs in the country
at once, with not only the Congress but
Planning Act of 1975. Presumably the
sheds no light on this question. Every in-
also the governors, mayors and assorted
Humphrey-Javits bill will now be allowed
dividual, business, and government in the
citizens lined up to take a crack at him as
to wither away. It did not play well in Peo-
country has unmet needs that some of the
soon as he puts forward his program.
ria. Its main promise was to statisticians
unemployed might help to meet. Their
That is what makes the bill so attrac-
and bureaucrats-jobs for the former and
failure to hire the unemployed suggests
tive and gets it so many sponsors. The
power for the latter. No crowd of citizens
that potential employers think the cost
Humphrey-Hawkins bill is to unemploy-
marched upon the Capitol demanding the
of meeting those needs would be too great.
ment what the WIN button was to inflation.
Plan and the Humphrey-Javits bill as they
It will be said that the cost of hiring
It to a slow vous heart is in the right place
did recently demanding jobs and the Hum-
them is really less than it would seem to
THE JONATHAN RINEHART GROUP INC
Justice
Dich April 22, 1976
ph direuss we
Mr. James M. Cannon
Executive Director
Domestic Council
with
The White House
Washington, D. C. 20500
Jenn
Dear Jim:
I am pleased to enclose two copies of the 1975 Annual
Report for the National Center for State Courts. As you
will note in looking at page 2, we have led the Report with
a picture and a quote from the President, which is a small
way of thanking you and your employer for the good words
you have spoken on behalf of the courts.
As you know, the legislative battle on the LEAA renewal
legislation is hotting up and supposedly will be put in
place by May 15. I wish that we were confident that the
cause of the courts was going to be properly treated, but
that issue is still apparently in doubt. As always, the
judges would be most grateful for any interest you or the
administration feel able to take in seeing that the courts
finally get their fair share of LEAA assistance, As always,
my friends and I are ready to answer any questions or be of
any help on this matter.
We have now slept in the Guilford house a few nights.
I wish I could say it is a joy, but the colors in it make
Pastel Sulfur Wells in Athens look monocromatic. Every damn
wall takes three coats and my arm is falling off. I hope
you, Cherie and Jimmy are well.
With best personal regards,
the Jonathan Rinehart
Sincerely,
JR:jm
Suite 3000
Enclosures
500 Fifth Avenue
New York, N.Y. 10036
212-541-6884
212-869-1180
1120 Connecticut Avenue N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
202-785-0582
FORD is LIBRARY QERALD
Cable: JONRINEG NEWYORK
National
Center
for State
Courts
Annual
Report
1975
È i OFFICER
Officers
Board of Directors
Contents
3
President
Report from the Director
Lindsay G. Arthur
James A. Finch, Jr., Justice
Judge
7
Technology in the Courts
Supreme Court of Missouri
District Court, Juvenile Division
11
Projects and Professional Activities
Vice President
Minneapolis, Minnesota
17
Howell T. Heflin, Chief Justice
Sylvia Bacon
Financial Report
Supreme Court of Alabama
Associate Judge
22
Council of State Court
Secretary-Treasurer
Superior Court of the District of Columbia
Representatives
Alice L. O'Donnell, Federal Judicial Center
Louis H. Burke
23
Advisory Council
Washington, D.C.
Associate Justice (retired)
24
Business and Professional
Supreme Court of California
Friends Committee
Edward B. McConnell
James A. Finch, Jr.
Inside
Offices of the National Center for
Director
Justice
Supreme Court of Missouri
for
back cover
State Courts
Arne L. Schoeller
M. Michael Gordon
Deputy Director
Center
Judge
Municipal Court of Houston, Texas
State
Howell T. Heflin
Chief Justice
Supreme Court of Alabama
National
Courts
E. Leo Milonas
1971
Supervising Judge
Criminal Court of the City of New York
"The National Center for State Courts
Edward E. Pringle
was formed to advance and modernize
Chief Justice
the workings of justice at the state level.
Supreme Court of Colorado
It is now the principal resource to which
John T. Reardon
the states turn in their efforts to
Chief Judge
improve their courts, to learn of
Eighth Judicial Circuit of Illinois
advances in other jurisdictions and how
to apply them to their own needs, and
Paul C. Reardon
to make their voices heard in the
Associate Justice
national forums in which matters affect-
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
ing the courts are decided."
William S. Richardson
Chief Justice
Justice James A. Finch, Jr., President of
Supreme Court of Hawaii
the National Center for State Courts
Joseph R. Weisberger
Presiding Justice
Superior Court of Rhode Island
Officers and Directors listings
are effective March 10, 1976.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
2
Report from
3
the Director
"If we are to be at all effective in fighting crime, state and local court
systems, including prosecution and defense, must be expanded and
enhanced."
-President Gerald R. Ford, in a message to Congress, June 19, 1975.
"There can be no question but that the State and local courts, which handle
President Gerald R. Ford
some 95 percent of the Nation's rapidly expanding criminal case load, are
now in urgent need of help."
-Congressman Peter W. Rodino, Jr., Chairman, House Judiciary Committee,
introducing the State Courts Improvement Act (H.R.8967), July 28, 1975.
"The inefficiencies and delays that plague our court systems are very costly.
Not just in terms of dollars-which are real enough-but also in terms of
For those who serve the cause of court improvement, 1975 was a hearten-
indispensable public confidence in the courts. That's why I have joined with
ing year. Never before have so many national leaders expressed concern
other businessmen and lawyers to help rally support for court improvement."
for the urgent needs of the courts. Influential lawyers, legislators, busi-
Cong. Peter Rodino, Jr.
-George A. Stinson, Chairman, National Steel Corporation, at a luncheon
nessmen, journalists, even the President of the United States, have called
of legal, business and foundation leaders, Pittsburgh, July 22, 1975.
for modernization of the courts and the commitment of the resources
necessary to accomplish this vital task.
"BE IT RESOLVED, That Congress is urged to amend the LEAA Act so as
The millenium is not yet at hand, however. Some of those calling for an
to assure a reasonable and adequate portion of all LEAA funds
for
the
expanded effort have yet to match their words with action. Those who
improvement of the courts of the states under a procedure by which political
work with the courts on a daily basis may have reservations about the
pressures on the state judges are not invited and by which the independence
wisdom of some of the specific steps so far proposed. But public commit-
of state court systems and the separation of powers doctrine are
ment by opinion leaders is an essential precursor to court improvement on
guaranteed,
"
a major scale, and the past year has seen growing numbers of such
George A. Stinson
-Resolution of the American Bar Association, Philadelphia, February 16, 1976.
commitments.
As this is written, the Congress of the United States is debating ways in
"I have consistently stated in recent months that financial and technical aid
which the Federal Government can more effectively contribute to state
to State and local criminal courts is an essential prerequisite for a successful
court improvement within the constitutional framework of the separation
attack on crime. This bill provides the courts with such aid."
of powers and the federal system. These deliberations are proceeding in
-Senator Edward M. Kennedy, introducing the Law Enforcement Improve-
connection with renewal legislation for the Law Enforcement Assistance
ment Act of 1976 (S.3043), February 25, 1976.
Edward B. McConnell
Administration. It is to be hoped that one effect of the emerging legisla-
tion will be to ensure a greater share of federal funds for the courts, which
"The National Center, which is state controlled, state motivated and
have long received a share disproportionately small in relation to their
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy
Wide World Photos
designed to meet state needs on an individual basis, can be the means
critical role in guaranteeing justice for all. Certainly Senators and Con-
through which to achieve for each state a modern, effective administration of
gressmen have been made aware of the courts' needs from the unprece-
justice in the latter part of the twentieth century.'
dented outpouring of testimony, written and oral, that has emanated from
-Howell T. Heflin, Chief Justice of Alabama, speaking to the Virginia Bar
the judicial leadership of the several states. The potential of the National
Association, January 16, 1976.
Center for State Courts increases markedly in such a climate of concern.
"The National Center represents state judges of every level.
Now they
Never before have so many national
One of the most significant developments of the year was the organiza-
leaders expressed concern for
tion of the Business and Professional Friends Committee of the National
have the resources to study the problems and to develop new methods and
the urgent needs of the courts.
Center under the distinguished leadership of Mr. George A. Stinson,
new techniques.
I have seen the benefits of this kind of research and
Chairman of the National Steel Corporation. Composed of twenty-eight
Howell T. Heflin
development center.
In my judgment, the National Center for State
outstanding leaders of business and the bar (please see page 24), this
Chief Justice of Alabama
Courts is the most important single development for the state courts in the
group has offered to lend such key managerial and technical expertise as
administration of justice in this century.'
the National Center may request. Its members have already held several
-Chief Justice of the United States Warren E. Burger, speaking at
in a continuing series of meetings in cities from Boston to San Francisco
Williamsburg, Virginia, January 17, 1976.
to acquaint community leaders with court needs and progress toward
meeting them, including the work of the National Center.
"A critical obstacle to reform is lack of enough money to test and adopt
It was a rising ferment for court improvement among leaders of the
promising improvements.
The solution? Simply, enough people getting
bench and bar that led to the founding of the National Center for State
angry enough about the neglect of the courts to bring pressure to bear.'
Courts in the spring of 1971 in Williamsburg. The National Center's
-George A. W. Boehm, in The Reader's Digest, March, 1976.
mission was and is to meet the states' needs for a central national resource
Chief Justice Warren Burger
5
4
to aid in their courts' efforts to modernize themselves. Only through
computerized accounting and financial management system has been
modernization can the courts cope effectively with caseloads increasing
installed and attention is invited to the financial section beginning on
rapidly in both volume and complexity.
Major progress was made toward
page 17 of this report.
By 1974, the National Center was performing services in or rendering
the time, now scheduled for early 1978,
Major progress was made toward the time, now scheduled for early
when the National Center's headquarters
assistance to all fifty states. In 1975, it matched that record and equalled
1978, when the National Center's headquarters will move to Williams-
will move to Williamsburg.
the major-project output of its first three years combined. The scope of
burg, the place of its conception. In 1975 the Kresge Foundation of
activities ranged from diagnosing and prescribing for structural weak-
Michigan committed a $750,000 grant over three years for the head-
nesses in court systems, to consulting on the cost-effectiveness of video
quarters building's construction. Early this year LEAA announced a grant
technology in the courtroom; from extending the National Center's pio-
of $1 million for the same purpose. Funds also were received on earlier
neering work in appellate court reform to additional states, to working on
pledges, including $100,000 from the Beazley Foundation of Virginia,
During 1975, the National Center
the legislative and administrative implementation of new judicial articles.
$75,000 of a $225,000 pledge from the Daniel Foundation of South Caro-
was involved in a dozen national
During 1975, the National Center was involved in a dozen national
lina, $100,000 from the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad Co., $50,000 from
scope projects and worked on some
scope projects and worked on some sixty-two state ánd local projects. A
the Anheuser-Busch Charitable Trust, in addition to gifts from Virginia
sixty-two state and local projects.
significant number involved bringing modern technology into the courts,
groups and individuals. These, together with pledges from the Virginia
an area of high potential that is the subject of a more detailed report
Bar Association and Virginia business interests-secured under the leader-
following this letter. The activities of the National Center are capsulized
ship of former Virginia Governor Linwood Holton-put the National
beginning on page 11. Special mention should be made, however, of three
Center within prudent range of the amount needed for construction of
new areas into which the National Center moved in 1975.
and relocation to the new headquarters. Requests for construction bids
Funded by a $275,500 grant from the National Science Foundation, the
were issued this month with ground-breaking to be in the spring of this
National Center began a two-year project to research, evaluate and make
bicentennial year.
recommendations for restructuring and improving small claims courts,
The financial condition of the National Center is stronger than it has
one of the most common causes of citizen dissatisfaction with the judicial
ever been-although there is still concern about disproportionate reliance
system. With funding of $350,000 from LEAA, a Washington-based
The financial condition of the
on LEAA as a source of general operational support. As Chief Justice
National Center team began a major project to develop critically needed
National Center is stronger than
Warren E. Burger said to the American Bar Association in Philadelphia,
it has ever been.
in-house planning capability for state court systems. Pilot demonstration
"The next crucial step is for each state bar president to see to it that
projects that can later be used as models for other states will be a part of
his state legislature contributes its fair share toward the permanent
this effort. Regional workshops will be integral to a new National Center
funding of the Center. Equitably spread over all the states, the cost to
project to improve the workings of justice in the courts of rural and non-
each will be nominal."
metropolitan areas, an effort likewise funded by LEAA, with assistance also
A year ago a system of annual charges was announced under which
from the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation, which has helped the
states would contribute to the National Center's support on a population-
National Center significantly in the past. These three projects are of high
weighted basis. Forty-two states and two territories are now participating
potential.
in this program. In 1975 and through the date of this report, they contrib-
Noteworthy also is the ongoing "technical assistance" rendered the
uted some $200,000 to the National Center's support. It is anticipated that
states on request by the National Center's Denver headquarters and six
this amount will increase substantially in the years ahead. Through the
regional office staffs. Reporting on one aspect of such assistance, a team
leadership of George Stinson's Business and Professional Friends Com-
Last year the courts called on the
of objective contract evaluators wrote in 1975: "Clearinghouse users indi-
mittee, seventy-four corporations plus law firms and others contributed
National Center for information in
cate that there is no other source for them to get the quick and complete
approximately another $200,000 during the same period (see page 24).
a volume 30 percent greater than
response to their requests that they can depend upon from the National
Both the state charges and the efforts of the Business and Professional
in 1974.
Center." Last year the courts called on the National Center for informa-
Friends Committee are important ongoing funding sources, the machin-
tion in a volume 30 percent greater than in 1974, one measure of their
ery for which is now firmly established.
growing recognition of its value.
The National Center has continued to receive vital help from founda-
Rapid growth such as the National Center has undergone during its
tions. In 1975, the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation gave $45,000 to
brief existence often outstrips the capacity of internal administrative
Both the state charges and the efforts
help finance the Rural Justice Project and other work. The Boston Perma-
of the Business and Professional
machinery. In 1975, therefore, an important task was to examine and
nent Charity Fund gave $40,000 for important work in Massachusetts.
Friends Committee are important ongoing
improve such vital internal disciplines as long-range planning and admin-
The Charles E. Culpeper Foundation of New York gave $25,000 to
funding sources.
istrative and financial controls. The results of this process have been
finance a vital phase of a project to improve the trial and appellate
substantially implemented. In addition, the Mid-Atlantic Regional Office
process. And the Northwest Area Foundation of Minnesota gave $15,000
was relocated to Williamsburg and the South Central Regional Office to
for work in its area. The National Center is indebted to them all, as it is to
Norman, Oklahoma. The University of Oklahoma Law Center there and
FORD
LEAA and the National Science Foundation for the help earlier cited.
the Oklahoma Bar Association gave it a gratifying welcome, as well as
financial support. At the Denver headquarters, a substantially improved
LIBRARY
Private foundations are expected to be a continuing source of financial
help for the National Center, especially for support of vital local and
6
Technology
7
in the Courts
national projects for which governmental funding is not available.
No report on 1975 would be complete without a special word about the
staff of the National Center for State Courts. It is the largest, most profes-
sionally diversified and broadly experienced staff of any organization in
the court improvement field. And no staff could be more dedicated to the
cause and organization they serve. Working for and in the courts of the
states on a continuing basis, it reinvests the benefits of experience gained
in one state in the next. This staff represents the greatest single asset of
the National Center in the expanding effort to improve the courts.
At the Annual Meeting this spring, the National Center will lose the
This staff represents the greatest
wise leadership of Justice Louis H. Burke who recently retired from the
"Technology is, of course, only a long Greek name for a bag of tools
"
single asset of the National Center
California Supreme Court. A founder and distinguished two-time presi-
-Arnold Toynbee
in the expanding effort to improve
dent of the National Center, Justice Burke is retiring from our Board, as
the courts.
are Judge Lindsay G. Arthur of the District Court in Minneapolis and
On November 1, 1975, Gerald R. Ford sat down before two television
Chief Judge John T. Reardon of the Illinois Eighth Judicial Circuit. All
cameras in a small conference room on the third floor of the Executive
three will be missed, but the National Center is fortunate in the election
Office Building next door to the White House. Before Federal Judge
of their distinguished successors, Judge Roland J. Faricy of the Municipal
Thomas J. McBride and with two television cameras recording his words,
Court of St. Paul; Chief Justice C. William O'Neill of the Supreme Court
Mr. Ford recalled what had taken place in California the September
of Ohio; and Presiding Judge Robert A. Wenke of the Superior Court of
before and answered questions posed by counsel. The atmosphere was
Los Angeles.
described as "dry, businesslike and legal." Two weeks later, a twenty-min-
The caliber and dedication of the National Center's staff and the dis-
ute videotape of the deposition was shown on four color television screens
tinction of its governing bodies, together with rapidly rising public aware-
in a U.S. District Courtroom in Sacramento, where Lynette (Squeaky)
ness, strengthen confidence in the ability of the National Center to con-
Fromme was on trial for attempting to assassinate the President. For the
tribute increasingly to the cause of helping improve the delivery of justice
first time in history, an incumbent President of the United States had
to all Americans.
testified in a criminal trial.
The television affair was of minor historical moment, perhaps, but it
Sincerely,
did symbolize a quiet revolution that over the last decade has been taking
hold across the vast, compartmentalized, almost infinitely complex legal
Sdward Am 'Comel
system of the U.S. In fits and starts, its performance to date still dwarfed
by its potential, technology has been coming to the courts.
Microfilm is replacing the cartons of old court records that have tradi-
March 10, 1976
tionally clogged the vaults and corridors of overcrowded courthouses.
Many courts still operate on the model of one medium-sized midwestern
municipal court whose records occupy two whole floors renting for $7.00
a square foot. But rising space costs, if nothing else, are forcing the
modernization of an increasing number of records management functions,
reducing computer printouts to more manageable size and filing court
papers in a way that makes public access to them less than a lifetime's
work. The criminal courts in New York are even microfilming stenotyp-
ists' notes. To guide future development, the first major work on micro-
film applications for the courts will be published this year as one section
of the National Center for State Courts' compendium report on its Court
Equipment Analysis Project.
Some court clerks' offices whose routines were typified by "a filing
system built around a legal size document, twice folded, covered with blue
paper vertically filed in narrow wooden file drawers after being neatly
tied with a red ribbon," (in the words of one 1971 writer) today are
buying automatic typewriters and other word-processing equipment.
Computers are processing court personnel records and printing
payrolls. They are making possible sound jury management systems that,
for example, save some $250,000 per year in one Federal District Court in
eastern New York and reduce the weekly juror call from 800 to 150
8
9
citizens in one municipal court in New Orleans. They are beginning to
To many, the courts' employment of modern methods is long overdue.
provide the indexing, storage and retrieval capabilities that are essential
One of the leaders among an increasing breed of court managers is Larry
elements in the information systems the courts must have. Computers are
Polansky, Chief Deputy Court Administrator of the Common Pleas Court
even beginning to facilitate the first steps toward the effective scheduling
of Philadelphia. He puts it this way: "The state of the art in computers in
of court calendars-an extraordinarily difficult exercise in that so many
the courts is relatively that of the Stone Age.
Whereas science began
trial participants, from judges to witnesses, overloaded prosecutors to
its heavy use of computers in the 1950's, industry in the 1960's and the
delay-minded defense attorneys, all normally operate on totally indepen-
government, in general, in the mid-1960's, the courts have begun their
dent schedules. With the passage of the Federal Speedy Trial Act and its
Genesis in the early 1970's."
counterpart in many states, computers may supply a near-indispensable
The most obvious starting place for computers and other technological
"exception management" capability, calling attention to a criminal case in
advances was in making the existing systems work better. "Not until we've
which the time limit for prosecution is close to lapsing.
improved the system in place as much as we can," says one veteran court
Audio recording techniques are proving to be especially valuable
administrator, "will we be able to make a truly compelling case for more
record-keepers in courts of limited jurisdiction, obviating de novo appeals
revolutionary reform, for the fundamental changes in the process itself
that were bogging down the courts. Video recording greatly facilitates
that technology makes possible."
taking depositions from witnesses of limited availability, whether because
To the more imaginative, then, the bag of tools also holds a bag of
they are tightly scheduled experts or otherwise incapacitated. In a Denver
dreams. The conferences of court-improvers, the growing numbers of
criminal case, a witness paralyzed from the neck down by a gunshot and
symposia, the slim pamphlets that peer into the future sketch exciting
unable to be moved from the hospital could testify only by video; his
possibilities. One example is automated case and statute research under
evidence led to the defendant's conviction.
which lawyers and judges trigger access to the vast memory and sorting
The applications of technology in the courts are the most dramatic and,
capabilities of computers with key words and topics. The first of these are
to laymen, the most conceptually comprehensible aspect of the broader
now in use. Of greater potential for the courts themselves, though its
movement to modernize the courts. Americans of the 1970's find it easier
fruition is likely ten years away, is LEAA'S Standard Judicial Information
to grasp the convenience of videotaped depositions-without which the
System project. With pilots now operating in eleven states, S.J.I.S. is a truly
President almost certainly would not have testified in the Fromme trial-
major effort to develop the basic information systems needed for court
than they do the needs and niceties of unifying a state court system.
management at the state level. Changing technology in the form of the
Pioneering studies, begun in 1972 by the National Center and now under-
minicomputer makes possible the development of similar decentralized
going major evaluation in the courts for operational feasibility and cost-
but compatible systems even in small courts. And with the pioneering
effectiveness, indicate the computer transcribes trial records perhaps ten
work done by Judge James L. McCrystal in Erie County, Ohio, the poten-
times as fast as a court stenographer. The advantages of having nonjudges
tial of video has been tapped by having all proceedings except the impan-
screen cases in the appellate process are much harder to measure.
eling of the jury and opening and closing arguments recorded and edited
But there are more compelling reasons why technology is at the cutting
in advance, only then presenting the video tape to the jury for delibera-
edge of court improvement efforts. They can be simply summed up in the
tion and decision.
word volume, the root cause of congestion and delay in the courts.
Exciting as such prospects are, many of them are still too costly to be of
It is not just that the general population is growing. There are also
immediate or broad utility. Others present major technical challenges. Yet
many more lawyers per capita than in earlier, less litigious times. It is not
others, such as the videotaped trial, are too radical to be accepted readily.
simply that the crime rate has risen so. Heightened concern for the rights
But as one National Center expert puts it, "We must judge a technological
of the accused has resulted in more free legal service provided by expand-
step not simply on what it is now, but on what future options it presents."
ed public defender staffs and Legal Aid systems. Thus the ratio of appeals
The new always presents acceptance problems, but in an area as essen-
to trials has also risen sharply, even quadrupling in many areas over the
tially and properly conservative as the law, resistance to change has been
last decade. And, as the other two branches of government have failed to
especially frustrating. Some time ago, one wry court administrator pre-
solve urgent social problems, a new generation of activists has turned to
dicted there would not be any machines replacing people in his court
the courts for resolution of fundamental issues in civil rights, education,
"until they make one that can vote and keep company with the judge."
the environment and consumer protection. Even such an apparently sim-
The real fact is that the education and professional training of judges does
ple development as the institution of the point system for moving vehicle
little to prepare them to truly manage court sytems, and court administra-
infractions has had a major effect on the courts. Though no one seems to
tors did not come on the scene in any numbers until the late 1960's.
have anticipated it, giving traffic offenses a cumulative effect has meant
Although receptivity to change has been growing rapidly, many of the
more contested cases and more appeals as drivers fight to keep from
real problems remain people problems. In the early days there was simply
losing their licenses. Each appeal requires a new trial or a record, and
so little experience with technology in the courts that misapplication and
each record further burdens badly overtaxed court-reporting capacity.
FORD
misuse abounded. One court clerk set up his new microfilm unit in the
Under such pressures caseload volume has soared. No one can even
count how much. Nineteenth-century court procedures have all but col-
GERALD
basement under some waterpipes; they leaked, of course, or the story
would not be remembered. Some courts simply superimposed microfilm
lapsed under the load.
use on their old system, storing both the microfilm and the original files.
10
Projects and
11
Professional Activities
Some courts ordered up computer capability far beyond their needs;
Completed in 1975
Maine Court Clerks Manuals. The in-
others tried to save money by installing systems that were cheaper
office operations manual written for dis-
because they were already out of date.
Alabama Judicial Article Implementation.
trict court clerks by the Northeastern
Vendors of the new equipment have even less familiarity with court
Executed by the Southeastern Regional
Regional Office provided a step-by-step
needs than the courts have with the vendors' wares, and the courts market
Office, this project assisted the Alabama
description of procedures for processing
has been too small to justify special modifications or even vendor train-
judicial leadership in both the drafting
court documents and maintaining court
and explanation of legislation to imple-
records. All district courts in Maine now
ing. Technology experts at the National Center have concluded that one
ment Alabama's new judicial system.
use the manuals for daily reference and
of their most essential new functions is as "gatekeepers" between courts
That legislation was enacted and the
training new clerical personnel. The
seeking the help of new tools and vendors trying to provide them.
project successfully completed.
superior court clerk's manual contains
As all this implies, patience and an understanding of psychology are
procedures most frequently used by the
California Consolidated Court Services
imperative virtues in court-improvement work. In one eastern state, an
clerks including: civil and criminal case
During 1975, the National Center's work
Project. This study by the Western
processing, appellate review, divorce,
administrator frustrated by the courts' professed inability to prepare
ranged from national or multi-state proj-
Regional Office involved a two-
habeas corpus and administrative pro-
usable audio transcripts solved the problem by scheduling Saturday
ects to programs for individual local
year analysis of all nonjudicial functions
cedures. The National Center held a
morning training sessions. Few sessions were required before performance
courts, from a vigorous publications pro-
and operations of the superior and
statewide clerks conference to review
gram designed for many readers to spe-
municipal courts in Ventura County,
picked up remarkably. More systematic approaches are also proving
the manual.
California. Final conclusions and
invaluable in laying the groundwork for future improvement. LEAA'S
cific research performed in response to
recommendations were submitted to the
Hawaii Guidebook for Videotaping. The
National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals
requests from individual courts. Some
projects and activities were completed
California Judicial Council regarding
National Center compiled an extensive
and the American Bar's Commission on Standards of Judicial Adminis-
consolidation of these functions with
relatively quickly in response to urgent,
summary of Hawaii's state laws affect-
tration have published standards on court improvement that include
identified needs; others, generally of
emphasis upon court reporting services,
ing usage of video technology in the
guidelines for the effective use of technology in areas from management
broader scope, are accomplished over sev-
jury operations, witnesses, interpreters,
courts. In addition, the project report
of the jury system to caseflow management. The National Center will
eral years; still others are planned in one
appointed counsel, records systems and
outlined what other states are doing and
fiscal year and executed in another. In
branch court operations. The project
suggested standards. A pilot video
soon be issuing a series of manuals as part of its Court Equipment Analy-
the following columns, projects and activ-
furnishes a prototype management
deposition center was also set up, and
sis Project. And pioneering work done in some jurisdictions-such as the
design for other counties considering
court personnel were instructed in the
ities completed, initiated or in progress
National Center's 1974 work on Video Support in the Criminal Courts,
during 1975 are briefly described.
the consolidation of nonjudicial func-
use of the video system.
based on studies in eight states-leads to the same experts being called
tions of trial courts.
Administration of the Massachusetts
into an increasing number of other jurisdictions.
Not included are a substantial number of
Court Financing and Budgetary Pro-
Courts. The Northeastern Regional
1976 national scope, state and local proj-
To ensure the desired results from technological change, there is
ects. Some are still awaiting funding; on
cesses. Professor Carl Baar, Brock Uni-
Office made a detailed analysis and
increasing reliance in the courts on the kind of "systems" approach that
others, grants and contracts have been
versity, St. Catharines, Ontario, a
report to the Supreme Judicial Court of
has come to characterize American business's use of technology. "When
awarded and work begun.
former staff member, conducted for the
the present structure and administrative
National Center a three-year, in-depth
powers (rule-making, appointment of
the courts have gone wrong," says Dr. J. Michael Greenwood of the
analysis of trends in state court financ-
personnel, financial authority, internal
National Center, "it is usually because some essential step has been
ing and of the correlation between
and external superintendence and
skipped. Technology's applications must be brought on line only after a
financing methods used and the levels
power of assignment) in each level of
real and specific need has been established and the solution properly
of financial support achieved by state
the state courts.
customized. The focus has to be on the task, then on the tools."
court systems. The results of this study
North Dakota Judicial Information System.
Even so there are limits. Some of the most significant uses of microfilm-
were published in the book, Separate
The North Central Regional Office con-
But Subservient: Court Budgeting in the
and computer-based information systems are in a handful of counties in
ducted a major study of the North
American States, D. C. Heath & Com-
one western state. Unfortunately, these systems are incompatible with
Dakota judicial system, including a
pany, 1975, the most definitive work to
each other, and communication between the jurisdictions-an inherent
comprehensive analysis of its informa-
date on the subject.
tion needs. The project team designed
potential-is impossible. A like situation prevails between the two largest
Study of the Connecticut Judicial
and helped to implement a case report-
cities in an improvement-minded industrial state in the East. And the
Department's Computer Options. The
ing system for all general jurisdiction
counties in most states might just as well be in separate foreign countries.
Northeastern Regional Office analyzed
trial courts. It also outlined an informa-
Thus, the most compelling lesson of the technological revolution in the
the computer options available to the
tion system master plan for the rest of
courts so far is the need for more fundamental improvements in less
Connecticut Judicial Department, which
the judicial system. In addition, a Child
technical areas-for example, a reasonable level of court unification to
experienced a rise in computer costs
Support Payments Procedures Manual
from less than $100,000 in 1969 to
for district court clerks was developed.
reduce self-defeating compartmentalization; adequate planning capability
$1,540,000 in 1974. Cost-benefit analy-
for state court systems so that the historic failure to adapt to changing
sis as well as other management tech-
demands will not be repeated. Happily, few are more conscious of these
niques were used to recommend a
needs than the National Center and other leaders of today's technological
number of computer options. In addi-
progress in the courts.
tion, the report recommended that Con-
FORD
necticut adopt a planning, program-
ming, budgeting system approach in
planning future computer systems.
GERALD
LIBRARY
12
13
Appellate Justice Project. Following
California Judicial Statistics System.
Virginia Case Docketing and Reporting.
Puerto Rico Court Reporting. The
first pilot state (Georgia) and provided
Tennessee Judicial Information System.
completion of the two-year National
A study of California's extensive system
Virginia's courts of limited jurisdiction
National Center staff surveyed Puerto
technical assistance to 15 states. Project
This ongoing project by the Southeast-
Appellate Justice Project, reports were
for gathering statewide judicial statistics
were unified into a statewide system in
Rico's court reporting system and made
staff also began development of a mono-
ern Regional Office will develop a new
published describing second-year results
resulted in recommendations by the
1973. The Mid-Atlantic Regional Office
a number of recommendations regard-
graph describing the current state of the
judicial statistical reporting system, a
in the use of central legal staffs to expe-
Western Regional Office to the Judicial
was asked to provide the Virginia Com-
ing audio recording, forms and manu-
art in court planning, which will be
new annual report format for the judi-
dite case processing in the Virginia
Council regarding the quality, retention
mittee on District Courts with a new
als, personnel procedures, rules, stan-
published this spring. While the initial
cial branch and an information system
Supreme Court, the Nebraska Supreme
and addition of information developed
docketing system for all 178 district
dards of performance, and transcripts.
LEAA grant is for one year, it is antici-
master plan. Presently collected statis-
Court and the intermediate appellate
by this system.
courts and a weighted caseload reporting
In 1976 the National Center will assist
pated that the project will be extended
tics will be analyzed for accuracy and
courts of Illinois and New Jersey. A
Nebraska Court Reporting. The North
system for both judges and clerical staff.
Puerto Rico in implementing those rec-
for a total of three years.
usefulness to policymakers.
supplement to Professor Daniel J. Mea-
dor's book, Appellate Courts: Staff and
Central Regional Office made a com-
Tennessee Court Reporters Manual.
ommendations that the courts adopt.
New Hampshire Standards and Goals.
Maryland Court Reporting Study. A
Process in the Crisis of Volume, West
prehensive study of court reporting in
The Southeastern Regional Office
King County, Washington, District
The Northeastern Regional Office staff
court rule gives the Chief Judge of the
Publishing Company, 1974, was pub-
Nebraska. Staff interviewed judges and
developed a manual for official report-
Court. The Western Regional Office
is assisting the New Hampshire Judicial
Maryland Court of Appeals authority to
court reporters throughout the state and
ers in the Tennessee criminal courts,
lished updating results of the demon-
made a comprehensive examination of
Department in the development of stan-
establish rules for court reporting serv-
stration project.
collected statistical data on the produc-
covering administration, operating pro-
the district courts in King County (Seat-
dards and goals for the courts. Topic
ices. The Mid-Atlantic Regional Office
tion of transcripts in appealed cases.
cedures and a revised standardized for-
tle) and made recommendations con-
areas have been developed through
is studying the present court reporting
Court Filing Fees. The National Center
The final report addressed the status,
mat for transcript preparation.
cerning district boundaries, role of the
meetings with regional and statewide
system and will recommend what rules
headquarters staff undertook a study on
duties and responsibilities of the report-
New Mexico Administrative Office. The
court administrator, standards for deter-
groups with wide citizen participation.
and procedures should be adopted pur-
court fees for the Missouri State Court
er, the content and production time of
South Central Regional Office complet-
mining needs for judicial and nonjudi-
Specific standards will be based upon
suant to the court rule.
Administrator's Office. Comparative
the transcript, and alternative court
data on federal and representative state
ed an in-depth study, with recommen-
cial personnel, calendaring and financing.
the needs as expressed by these groups
New Mexico Limited Jurisdiction
reporting techniques.
dations, of the New Mexico Administra-
Massachusetts Court Facilities. As part
and the analysis of standards developed
Courts. The South Central Regional
systems is included.
Effectiveness of Pretrial Release Pro-
tive Office of the Courts.
of its comprehensive study of the Mas-
by national organizations. A planning
Office interviewed judges, attorneys and
Personnel Study for Massachusetts
grams. Under a National Science Foun-
sachusetts courts, the National Center's
process developed by the Center for
private citizens who have used these
Appellate Courts. The Northeastern
dation grant, Denver-based staff ana-
Comprehensive Study of the Rhode
Constructive Change in Durham, N. H.,
Island Family Court. This project pro-
office in Boston surveyed court facilities
courts in New Mexico to determine the
Regional Office prepared job descrip-
lyzed research on the operation of
will be used throughout. The resulting
tions and a uniform compensation
pretrial release systems in the United
vided an evaluation of the operational
throughout the Commonwealth. Indi-
efficiency of the limited jurisdiction
product will include guidelines for
effectiveness of the Rhode Island Fami-
vidual reports were made on each court,
courts. Recommendations designed to
schedule for clerical personnel of the
States, including money bail. The proj-
organization and procedures in the
compilations were prepared by counties
effect structural and organizational
Supreme Judicial Court and the
ect report provides policymakers and
ly Court since its inception in 1961. It
courts and a method for development
Appeals Court.
identified problem areas and recom-
or regions, and a summary analysis and
researchers in the criminal justice field
by the Judicial Department of addition-
changes will be made.
mended specific improvements.
recommendation volume was prepared.
al standards.
National Fiduciary Accounting Stan-
with an overview of policy considera-
Washington Appellate Courts. The
The study team recommended that
dards. The National Center is staffing
tions, a review and assessment of the
Maine Juvenile Court Services. The
Western Regional Office performed an
Massachusetts adopt design and main-
Alaska Systems Evaluation. A joint
and participating in a joint project to
research literature, a summary of cur-
Northeast Regional Office recommend-
analysis of the caseflow, screening pro-
tenance standards, a replacement time-
effort is being mounted by members of
develop in the states uniform fiduciary
rent knowledge in the field, an outline
ed to York County the institution of an
table for outdated facilities, and a uni-
the Western Regional Office staff and
cedures and functions of professional
of the elements of a model data-collec-
accounting standards, procedures and
and administrative personnel in both
experimental counselling and social
form costing method for maintaining
personnel of the Alaska court system to
simplified forms with a goal of provid-
tion system, and an evaluation design
the Washington Supreme Court and
investigating unit under the supervision
facilities and ascertaining operating
develop improvements and alterations
ing greater protection to beneficiaries.
for pretrial release programs.
of the District Court. The unit was
Court of Appeal. A comprehensive
expenses.
in the system by which judicial and
Other organizations cooperating in the
Administration and Appellate Process in
installed, monitored and evaluated.
report recommended improvements in
nonjudicial functions are performed.
project are: the American Bar Associa-
Delaware State Courts. The Northeast-
Initiated in 1975
Included is a review, consolidation, and
each area, most of which are now being
Regional Court Improvement Confer-
tion, Real Property, Probate and Trust
implemented.
ern Regional Office performed an anal-
ences. A court planning and training
simplification of judicial records and
Law Section; the American Bankers
Second National Conference on Pretrial
ysis of the administration of the Dela-
seminar for eastern judges and court
State Court Planning Capabilities
forms in use throughout the state.
Association, Trust Section; the Ameri-
ware state courts and a study of the
executives was sponsored by the North-
Project. In July, 1975, the National
Evaluation of Small Claims Courts. A
can Institute of Certified Public
Release and Diversion. The National
appellate process in the state. The
Center prepared materials and reports
eastern Regional Office in April, 1975.
Center began this project with a
two-year study of small claims courts
Accountants; the American College of
for and staffed a nationwide conference
appellate study offers the Supreme
A western regional conference held in
$350,000 grant from the Law Enforce-
was begun in 1975, under a research
Probate Counsel; and the National Col-
Court of Delaware several alternatives
ment Assistance Administration. The
of the National Association of Pretrial
May, 1975, considered new develop-
grant of $275,500 from the National
lege of Probate Judges.
from which to choose a means of deal-
ments in state court financing and
project is an integral component of a
Science Foundation. Project staff will
Services Agencies held in April, 1975.
major LEAA initiative to enhance the
Maine Superior Court Benchbook. This
ing effectively with its increased
improvements in the appellate process.
conduct an intensive analysis of small
Nearly 300 agency administrators and
planning capabilities of state court sys-
project is to produce a ready reference
caseload.
Wisconsin Appellate Study. The West-
claims courts and interview plaintiffs
others concerned with pretrial release
tems throughout the country. Efforts
resource volume regarding trial proce-
and defendants who use these courts.
and diversion met and considered prob-
Louisiana Court Clerks Record Man-
ern and North Central Regional Offices
will be undertaken in cooperation with
dures for the judges of Maine's superior
lems of program planning, manage-
agement Study. A manual for court
Courts in at least 12 states are being
studied the operation of the Wisconsin
a small number of "pilot states" to learn
courts, which have general trial jurisdic-
clerks was designed by the South Cen-
studied to determine which procedural
ment, funding and evaluation, and legal
Supreme Court. Working with a com-
more about how planning can be useful
tion of civil and criminal matters, and
tral Regional Office for use in the par-
mittee of Wisconsin lawyers and judges,
and staffing arrangements enable small
issues in program administration. The
to state court systems. This knowledge
review determinations of the district
National Center also developed training
ishes of Louisiana. The manual is
claims courts to best serve the public.
the project team interviewed partici-
will be made available to all state courts
courts, probate courts and administra-
designed to make more uniform the
The project has been designed both to
materials for use by pretrial services
pants and analyzed data on the internal
through a technical assistance program
tive agencies.
agencies nationwide.
operating procedures in the various
pinpoint problems in the use of these
procedures of the Court and the clerk's
which will include conferences, semi-
clerks' offices.
office. A series of recommendations
special courts and to suggest changes to
nars, publications and on-site visits.
were made with the assistance of a dis-
enable the courts to be more responsive
During 1975, the project, which is
to the needs of individual litigants.
tinguished group of national experts.
operated from the Washington, D.C.,
office and involves personnel of all the
regional offices, began working in the
14
15
New Hampshire Probate Manual. The
Study of Unpublished Opinions of Cali-
South Dakota Seventh Circuit Caseflow
Tennessee Consulting Services. This
Missouri Court Cost Analysis. The
Training of Court Personnel. During
New Hampshire probate courts have
fornia Courts of Appeal. California
Management Project. The North Cen-
project provides the Supreme Court of
South Central Regional Office is near-
1975, the National Center continued to
requested the preparation of a probate
court rules provide for nonpublication
tral Regional Office is studying the cal-
Tennessee and its Executive Secretary
ing completion of phase one of the Mis-
coordinate and monitor the expenditure
court manual to document existing pro-
of opinions of the intermediate appel-
endaring and caseflow procedures of
with direct access to resources of the
souri Court Cost Analysis Project, which
of over a million dollars in LEAA funds,
cedures and to use in probate case
late courts. A review of the opinions to
the Seventh Circuit of South Dakota.
National Center and the Southeastern
will result in a model for use in project-
supporting six major national organiza-
processing. The project will go far towards
which those rules have been applied
Regional Office for solution of prob-
ing the cost of court operations. The
tions engaged in the education and
Management of Court Reporting Serv-
standardizing forms and procedures in
with an analysis of the rules themselves
lems as they are identified in a rapidly
model will include all civil and criminal
training of judges and other court per-
these courts.
ices. Under a grant from the Charles E.
has been prepared by the Western
changing state system. Hands-on work
dispositions by whatever means. It will
sonnel: the National College of the
Culpeper Foundation, a monograph is
Regional Office. When published, it will
is proceeding in areas of judicial case-
be tested in several courts in Missouri
State Judiciary, the National Council of
Utah Courts of Limited Jurisdiction.
An analysis is being made by the West-
be of assistance, not only to the Califor-
being prepared and will be widely dis-
load and assignment, audio equipment
during the subsequent phase.
Juvenile Court Judges, the Institute of
ern Regional Office of the structure,
nia courts, but also to appeals courts of
seminated analyzing problems and
specification preparation and vendor
Judicial Administration, the American
issues in the court reporting field. There
Secretariat Services to National Court
other states considering the adoption of
evaluation, analysis of court reporting
Academy of Judicial Education, Loui-
jurisdiction, staffing and financing of
such rules.
will be an extensive presentation of
Organizations. The National Center
services and clerk operations, review of
the city and justice of the peace courts
alternative management and technolog-
serves as Secretariat to court-related
siana State University Appellate Judges
a video pilot project, and state court
Seminars and the Institute for Court
in Utah.
Wyoming District Court Benchbook.
ical strategies for modernizing and mak-
administrative office expansion and
organizations as a means of furthering
Washington District Court Benchbook.
The North Central Regional Office has
ing more efficient the operation of court
the coordination and assisting the
Management.
reorganization.
Follow-on work on the National
This project of the Western Regional
researched, designed and compiled a
reporting services.
efforts of other groups in the field of
benchbook of criminal law and trial
Trial Delay in Notorious Cases. A
judicial administration. Among the
Center's "Guidelines for Development
Office involves development of a
procedures for the use of the general
In Progress During 1975
National Center-sponsored study by
of Computer Training Curricula for
services offered are meeting arrange-
benchbook for use by Washington trial
jurisdiction trial judges of Wyoming.
Professor John M. Poulos of the Univer-
Court Personnel" began last year. These
ments, development of programs, prep-
judges in the processing of felony cases
sity of California Law School at Davis,
guidelines, developed and published in
with emphasis upon pretrial
Courts' Equipment Analysis. The
aration of newsletters, budgeting, bill-
Massachusetts Court Budget Study. As
to be completed in 1976, examines the
ing, accounting. tax services and
1974, were used as a basis for prepara-
proceedings.
part of its comprehensive study of the
Courts' Equipment Analysis Project is
designed to provide state courts nation-
causes of delay in notorious criminal
membership maintenance. Such services
tion of training materials for court per-
Massachusetts courts, the Northeastern
sonnel. These materials will now be test-
Rural Justice Project. In late 1975, the
wide with comprehensive information
cases. Suggestions will be made for con-
are currently being provided to the
National Center received funding for a
Regional Office evaluated budgeting
ed, revised and disseminated to the
in nontechnical form on court-related
tingency plans by state trial courts for
National Conference of Appellate Court
techniques in use in the courts.
states.
project aimed at identifying and design-
equipment in four areas: electronic data
future use in such high-visibility cases.
Clerks, the National Association of
ing strategies for solving key problems
Although the Commonwealth requires
Trial Court Administrators and the
Work also began on an expanded and
that standard accounts be used when
processing, microfilm, audio/visual and
Hawaii Grand Juries. The Western
affecting the administration of justice in
business equipment. Through user's
National Association for Court Admin-
updated revision of the "State Judicial
submitting budgets, every court has its
Regional Office made an analysis of the
rural areas of the United States. During
istration.
Training Profile" to provide informa-
own method of processing budgets
guidebooks and reference guides, the
operations and problems of the petit
tion gathered from all the states on
1976, three workshops will be held for
judges, clerks, court administrators,
which makes comparisons difficult. The
project will aid court managers in
and grand jury systems. During 1976,
Evaluation of Pretrial Release Pro-
agencies and personnel involved in
staff recommended standardizing the
understanding basic technology; identi-
recommendations will be developed for
grams. A follow-up to the National
court-related education and training,
prosecutors, defense attorneys and
sheriffs in Colorado, Montana, North
information gathering for budget prepa-
fying problems of current manual
changes in the system necessary to cor-
Center's earlier survey and analysis of
programs offered, administrative struc-
ration, and manuals are being prepared
operations and determining where auto-
rect problems previously identified.
the research in the pretrial release field,
tures, court training budgets, funding
Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyo-
to accomplish this purpose.
mation and other technological
advances can be justifiably substituted;
Computer Preparation of Court Tran-
this project is assessing the current
sources, educational materials and pub-
ming. The Institute for Court Manage-
scripts. The first phase of this project
effectiveness of pretrial release pro-
lications available, and evaluation pro-
ment will assist in planning and con-
Monitoring Development of Alaska's
selecting and implementing proper sys-
determined that computer-aided tran-
grams, identifying knowledge gaps and
cedures.
ducting the workshops.
Judicial Information System. A team
tems; effectively utilizing existing
scription (CAT) is technically feasible
developing designs for improvements in
Oklahoma Standards and Goals. The
from several National Center offices is
equipment; and adopting appropriate
Interorganizational Coordinating Meet-
the field. In addition to updating the
South Central Regional Office is com-
assisting the Administrative Director
court equipment standards. The Tech-
for courts. In the second phase, current-
ings. The National Center prepares and
ly in progress, the National Center is
earlier analysis of the research litera-
and other Alaska court officials in the
paring the operations of the Oklahoma
nology Committee of the American Bar
conducts twice-yearly meetings of staff
design and implementation of an auto-
Association's Judicial Administration
providing advisory assistance to courts
ture, the project staff has undertaken a
directors of national, nonprofit court-
state courts with the standards and
Division is providing judicial input in
initiating CAT and is sponsoring a large
questionnaire survey of 109 pretrial
mated judicial information system for
improvement and training organiza-
goals recommended by the National
court-operated system in the Philadel-
release programs nationwide and has
statewide use.
tions. Through these meetings and close
Advisory Commission on Criminal Jus-
an advisory role.
made site visits to more than a dozen
phia Court of Common Pleas. The Phil-
interorganizational contact, it has been
tice Standards and Goals.
Providing Legal Counsel to Indigent
National Conference on Appellate Jus-
adelphia CAT project has become fully
jurisdictions. This project is funded by a
possible to develop a coordinated
Alabama Court Administration.
Criminal Defendants in New Hampshire.
tice. Subsequent to the Center-staffed
operational with 15 court reporters and
grant from LEAA'S National Institute of
The National Center office in Boston is
The Southeastern Regional Office is
National Conference for Appellate Jus-
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice.
approach to many problems of court
a projected annual production of
improvement, to avoid duplication of
assisting in developing court rules, a
making an evaluation of the present
tice in January, 1975, the Advisory
150,000 pages. Emphasis in phase two is
Diversion of Civil Litigation. This study
effort, and to develop cooperative pro-
personnel administration system, and in
method of providing legal counsel to
Council for Appellate Justice completed
on determining the economic feasibility
is sponsored by the National Center,
grams utilizing the specialized talents of
designing administrative procedures to
indigent criminal defendants in New
its activities, and the Center published
of CAT for courts and on developing
funded by LEAA and directed by Profes-
organizations and of staff professionals.
Hampshire for the Administrative Com-
implement the constitutional amend-
Volume V of Appellate Justice 1975. It
procedural standards for this new tech-
sor Earl Johnson, Jr., of the University
ment and statutes which have estab-
mittee of the District and Municipal
describes the proceedings and conclu-
nology. A booklet, "Evaluation Guide-
of Southern California Law Center. It
Courts. The aim of the study is to ana-
sions of the Conference and includes
lished Alabama's new judicial system.
book to CAT," was published in 1975.
will inform court and criminal justice
lyze and integrate all existing services in
the Council's final recommendations for
order both to design a long-range plan
improvement of appellate practices.
Arizona Appellate Experiment. The
planners of the relative effectiveness of
Under the National Appellate Imple-
Western Regional Office is continuing
programs to divert civil matters from
and to provide an interim program for
delivery of defense services.
mentation Plan developed following the
its monitoring and evaluation of an
the formal adjudicative process, so that
FORD
courts can devote more of their limited
Conference, National Center regional
experiment with new methods in expe-
and headquarters staff are completing a
diting appellate hearings and decisions.
manpower and resources to more serious
criminal and civil cases.
nationwide survey of the status and
GERALD
LIBRARY
condition of state appellate courts.
16
Financial Report
17
Information and Technical
Examples of technical assistance
Publications
Assistance
requested and provided in 1975 include:
Preparation of an analysis of the
National scope projects of the National
Information and Library Services. The
makeup, powers, activities, and staff
Center result in publication of one or
National Center in 1975 substantially
and budget support of selected eastern
more reports which are disseminated
advanced its capability as a major
state judicial councils for a jurisdiction
among the courts nationwide and to
resource for providing timely data and
wishing to improve its own council.
interested court, research and law-relat-
research to state court systems. Some
Development of a plan for regional
ed institutions. Results of selected state
400 formal requests for information
law libraries for a rural state.
and local projects of interest outside the
were researched by headquarters staff.
Consultation with county commis-
immediate jurisdiction affected are also
Inquiries came from 48 states and three
sioners, judges and architects in several
published and disseminated. Executive
territories, from national and local
western states and recommendations for
summaries of significant project reports
courts, from the news media, the bar,
space utilization in connection with
often receive wider distribution than
The year 1975 was especially important financially for the National
legislators, LEAA and state planning
local courthouse building or moderniza-
the full reports.
Center for State Courts. While support continued from the Law Enforce-
agencies, from law schools, and from the
tion programs.
National Center's own regional offices.
Development of a basic courts statis-
In addition to national publications,
ment Assistance Administration, important nonfederal funding mecha-
Assistance provided extended from
tics handbook with examples of sound
each regional office produces appro-
nisms also began functioning systematically and administrative controls
furnishing statistics to researching and
practice for use by court clerks in sever-
priate materials and reports on each of
were significantly improved. At the close of 1975, the National Center was
al eastern states.
its projects, primarily for use of the
answering complex questions on court
unification. While no single topic of
court, legislature or other body which
much stronger financially and its management systems more effective.
Preparation for a small state of a
compendium of juvenile services
contracted for the project.
To support the work of national scope projects, the National Center
inquiry dominated, particular interest
received $2,167,032 in federal grant funds in 1975. Most such projects
was shown in court financing, jury man-
resources available to the courts, includ-
A bibliography of National Center pub-
agement, grand juries and subjects per-
ing diagnostic services, diversion serv-
lications and reports may be obtained
were operated and administered from the Denver headquarters, with
taining to nonlawyer judges. The major
ices and residential and nonresidential
from the Director of Publications at the
assistance as appropriate from regional office staff. The regional offices
source of data is the National Center's
treatment alternatives.
Headquarters Office in Denver. Publi-
received $899,522 for state and local projects. The National Center also
Denver library. It houses a unique col-
Recommendations on the operation
cations may be obtained there, and in
received $491,411 in grants and contributions from other sources to sup-
lection of some 5,000 texts, studies, trea-
of a juvenile court and detention facility.
most cases from the regional offices, and
plement project funds from the Federal Government and state and local
tises and current court reports from all
Recommendations for a new paper
at various libraries and research centers
court systems. Of this latter amount, $163,700 was received in calendar
states and represents input from public
flow and filing system for a state court
which subscribe to National Center
and private agencies, universities, foun-
administrator's office.
publications. Many publications and
1975 through the efforts of the Business and Professional Friends Com-
dations, legal and judicial organizations,
Program arrangements for a five-
reports are in short supply but are avail-
mittee; $186,829 was received in the form of state charges from thirty-
and individual experts and consultants
state meeting of state court administra-
able on a one-month loan basis from
nine states and two territories. Other income totaling $140,882 for current
concerned with court systems.
tors and their top staff assistants.
the Director of Publications in Denver.
operations came from private foundations, earned interest on the invest-
A related effort carried on primarily
Development of specifications for
in the National Center's regional offices
audio equipment needs for the district
The National Center also publishes the
ment of unrestricted funds and the sale of publications.
is the development of unique "profiles"
courts of a border state.
following periodicals:
The financial system of the National Center is based on the principles
on each state's judicial system describ-
Drafting of proposed legislation to
National Center for State Courts Report-
and concepts of Fund Accounting. The Balance Sheet of the National
ing the structure, jurisdiction and rules,
effect project recommendations and tes-
published monthly and distributed to
Center is in fact an aggregation of four balance sheets representing unre-
and containing budget and personnel
timony before state legislative committees.
nearly 6000 judicial and government
stricted or corporate funds, project funds restricted by the donor or spon-
information. Each of these profiles is
Development of forms for use in
officials and interested private citizens.
soring agency, building funds, and asset values of the equipment and
being prepared in a uniform format so
cases of children in need of supervision.
as to facilitate comparative research.
Recommendations for increased use
Judicial Salary Survey-published quar-
furnishings acquired over time. The Statement of Revenues, Expenses and
of restitution as an alternative to tradi-
terly covering salaries of judges of all
Changes in Fund Balances summarizes revenues and expenses to each of
Technical Assistance. In addition to the
types of projects described in these
tional dispositions in certain types of
state appellate and trial courts and of
these Funds and the effects of 1975 operations on the Fund Balances. The
state court administrators.
cases in a New England state.
summary entitled Statement of Functional Expenses indicates the pattern
pages, the National Center provides a
An analysis of proposed legislation
Master Calendar-published monthly
of utilization of those funds in carrying out the work of the organization,
wide range of other assistance to state
and local courts. Many of these efforts
to create a countywide municipal court.
providing comprehensive information
for which the largest categorical outlay is for the personnel of the organi-
Presentations to state and local bar
involve short-term, on-the-spot techni-
on meetings, conferences and training
zation. The accompanying notes clarify key figures on the various state-
associations on legal and technical
cal assistance on a particular problem.
seminars of interest to court personnel.
ments. A letter from the National Center's external auditors, Haskins and
When appropriate, the National Center
aspects of new video and court-report-
ing technologies.
Washington Memo-a newsletter on
Sells, states their opinion as to the fairness of presentation of the Center's
also assembles a team of specialists who
An evaluation of a southern state's
Congressional and other Washington
financial position, results of operations and changes in fund balances.
visit a jurisdiction, provide consultation,
developments which affect state courts
and then follow up with a letter and
master plan for information systems
A complete new accounting and financial management system was
program development.
mailed periodically to a limited list of
recommendations. Demonstrations of
state court leaders.
designed, developed and implemented during 1975. This system, now
new technology, evaluation services,
Training of court clerks in records
fully operational, enables detailed monitoring of actual project revenues
and extensive professional staff partici-
management and computer applications.
against budgeted revenues, actual project expenses against budgeted
pation on advisory committees and in
Monitoring the progress of imple-
mentation of trial court information
expenses and the cash positions of all projects of the Center on a month-
local and state training conferences are
systems.
ly basis. The system was designed to be a model adaptable to the needs of
other forms of assistance the National
other not-for-profit organizations, including court systems.
Center is providing in growing volume.
Balance Sheet
18
Statement of Revenues, Expenses
19
December 31, 1975
and Changes in Fund Balance
For the Year ended December 31, 1975
Current Fund
Building
Equipment
Current Fund
Building
Equipment
Unrestricted
Restricted
Fund
Fund
Total
Unrestricted
Restricted
Fund
Fund
Total
Assets:
Revenues (Note 1):
Cash
$251,826
$ 90,598
$339,522
$ 681,946
Federal grants
$2,167,032
$2,167,032
Accounts receivable
3,715
3,715
State and local grants and contracts
899,522
899,522
Grants and contracts receivable
130,276
165,320
295,596
Other grants and contracts.
$
1,857
26,955
28,812
Gifts and donations receivable
5,000
152,650
157,650
Private contributions
287,160
24,390
$ 1,000
312,550
Advances to subcontractors (Note 1)
164,823
164,823
State charges
186,829
186,829
Prepaid expenses
22,009
22,009
Subcontractors:
Office equipment, furniture and fixtures,
Federal grants
1,023,554
1,023,554
and leasehold improvements-
Nonfederal funds
892,174
892,174
at cost (less accumulated depreciation
Interest and other
15,565
3,755
15,749
35,069
and amortization of $55,644) (Note 1).
$146,057
146,057
Total
491,411
5,037,382
16,749
5,545,542
Construction in progress
126,740
126,740
Total
$412,826
$420,741
$618,912
$146,057
$1,598,536
Expenses:
National scope projects:
National Center
16,638
794,433
811,071
Subcontractor.
2,052,509
2,052,509
Total national scope projects
16,638
2,846,942
2,863,580
State and local projects:
Western Regional Office
5,802
210,210
216,012
North Central Regional Office
3,158
107,179
110,337
Northeastern Regional Office
81,664
224,204
305,868
Mid-Atlantic Regional Office
87,166
87,166
Southeastern Regional Office
3,397
77,022
80,419
South Central Regional Office
10,663
102,823
113,486
Total state and local projects
104,684
808,604
913,288
Management and general:
Headquarters general administration
and program services
240,866
1,259,827
1,500,693
Liabilities:
Depreciation and amortization
$ 26,667
26,667
Accounts payable.
$ 54,560
$ 30,528
$ 28,800
$ 113,888
Total management and general
240,866
1,259,827
26,667
1,527,360
Due to subcontractors
16,146
16,146
Total
362,188
4,915,373
26,667
5,304,228
Due to federal grantors
82,080
82,080
Revenues over (under) Expenses
129,223
122,009
16,749
(26,667)
241,314
Vacation liability
85,075
85,075
Sick leave liability
84,007
84,007
Other Changes in Fund Balance:
Reserve for project losses (Note 1)
10,000
10,000
Transfer to unrestricted fund
58,730
(58,730)
Other
7,434
7,434
Equipment acquisitions (Note 1)
(63,652)
63,652
Total liabilities
339,302
30,528
28,800
398,630
Fund Balance, January 1 (Note 2).
(114,429)
390,586
573,363
109,072
958,592
Fund Balance
73,524
390,213
590,112
$146,057
1,199,906
Total
$412,826
$420,741
$618,912
$146,057
$1,598,536
Fund Balance, December 31
$ 73,524
$ 390,213
$590,112
$146,057
$1,199,906
See Notes to Financial Statements.
See Notes to Financial Statements.
Schedule of Functional Expenses
20-
21
For the Year ended December 31, 1975
State and Local Projects
North
North-
Mid-
South-
South
and equipment acquired by subcontrac-
In connection with the construction of
ten percent (10%) of allowable program
Regional Offices
Western
Central
eastern
Atlantic
eastern
Central
tors under the terms of the multi-pro-
the permanent headquarters building
expenditures. During 1975 cash match
gram grants are recorded as subcontrac-
on the campus of the College of Wil-
applied to these grants totaled approxi-
Personnel
$148,445
$ 73,072
$237,565
$32,102
$61,350
$ 84,058
tor expenses.
liam and Mary in Williamsburg, Virgin-
mately $143,000. During 1976 this obli-
Professional
1,780
1,551
9,555
30,569
4
3,400
ia, the Center has entered into a lease
Reserve for Project Losses. Upon
gation will be approximately $200,000.
Travel
28,661
22,595
24,410
16,927
12,780
21,337
review of all operating projects which
agreement for approximately ten acres
This obligation is expected to be met
Communication
155
1,745
4,658
3,446
1,523
1,065
were not completed at December 31,
of ground at an annual rental of $1.00
from the fund-raising campaign initia-
Rent
769
442
1975, provision was made for operating
beginning September 1, 1974 and
ted by management and from the state
Operating and supplies
36,971
10,605
29,680
4,122
4,762
3,184
expenses anticipated in excess of project
extending for an original term of fifty
charge program.
Total
$216,012
$110,337
$305,868
$87,166
$80,419
$113,486
revenues in the amount of $10,000.
years.
During 1975 the Center experienced
Expenditures charged to grants and
4. Tax-Exempt Status
State and Local
National Scope Projects
project overruns totaling $121,322 of
contracts are generally subject to audit
Management
Headquarters and Regional Offices
Projects Summary
National Center
Subcontractor
which $16,638 was attributable to
and final acceptance by the grantor or
The Center has received notice from the
and General
Total
national scope projects and $104,684
contracting agency. The Center's man-
Internal Revenue Service of exemption
agement believes that disallowed
from federal income tax under section
was attributable to state and local proj-
Expenses reported by subcontractors
$2,052,509
$2,052,509
ects conducted in the regional offices.
expenses, if any, arising from such
501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code
Personnel
$636,592
$464,693
$ 909,358
2,010,643
audits would not be substantial.
and that the Center is an organization
Professional
46,859
74,085
68,739
189,683
Pension Plan. The Center has a quali-
Under the terms of several grants
of the type described in section
Travel
126,710
146,788
89,123
362,621
fied noncontributory pension plan
which are financed with discretionary
170(b)1(A)vi of the Code. Accordingly,
Communication
12,592
10,222
83,593
106,407
which covers all regular full-time staff
funds from the Law Enforcement Assis-
the Center is not subject to income
Rent
1,211
12,754
108,172
122,137
members. The plan is a money-
tance Administration, the Center must
taxes, and contributions to the Center
Operating and supplies
89,324
102,529
214,804
406,657
purchase, defined contribution plan
provide cash match for approximately
are deductible by the donor.
Depreciation and amortization
26,667
26,667
under which contributions are held in
Fund raising
26,904
26,904
individual accounts for each participant
Total
$913,288
$811,071
$2,052,509
$1,527,360
$5,304,228
and, accordingly, there are no unfund-
ed, vested benefits. Forfeitures of pen-
sion rights due to termination prior to
HASKINS & SELLS
Notes to Financial Statements
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
vesting are applied to reduce pension
633 SEVENTEENTH STREET
expense in the year in which forfeitures
DENVER, COLORADO 80202
1. Summary of Significant Accounting
Revenues. Revenues from grants and
related to the headquarters building
occur. Pension expense for the year
Policies
contracts are recorded at the time funds
project (Note 2).
ended December 31, 1975 was $73,500.
are received or accrued to the extent of
The Equipment Fund-for office
AUDITORS' OPINION
Purpose. The National Center for State
expenses, not exceeding authorized
equipment, furniture and fixtures,
2. Building Fund
Courts (the "Center") is a nonprofit
maximum amounts. Funds forwarded
and leasehold improvement
organization created to improve judicial
by the Center to subcontractors are
acquisitions.
Board of Directors,
Since 1973 the Center has been receiv-
administration in the state courts of the
recorded as advances to subcontractors
National Center for State Courts:
The Restricted Fund balance represents
ing contributions to be used in plan-
nation. Programs and projects are
until such time as expenses are reported
funds advanced to the Center for proj-
We have examined the balance sheet of the National
ning, constructing and equipping a new
undertaken in areas of research, educa-
against the advances. At that time, fed-
ects in process, in excess of expenses
Center for State Courts as of December 31, 1975 and the
headquarters building in Williamsburg,
tion and training, and other activities
eral grant revenue of subcontractors is
incurred on the projects. At the close of
Virginia. Prior to 1975 architectural and
related statement of revenues, expenses, and changes in
for such courts which are intended to
recorded to the extent of reported
a project in the Restricted Fund, the
engineering fees of $67,631 were record-
fund balance, and schedule of functional expenses for the
assist, supplement and coordinate, but
expenses. Subcontractor revenue from
balance (or deficit) is transferred to the
ed as expenses with corresponding
year then ended. Our examination was made in accordance
not to supplant, the activities of organi-
nonfederal funds is recorded at the time
Unrestricted Fund unless the project
decreases in the fund balance. Recog-
with generally accepted auditing standards and, accordingly,
zations functioning in the field of judi-
of reporting by subcontractors. Contri-
was financed by a grant agreement
nizing the capital nature of such trans-
included such tests of the accounting records and such
cial administration.
butions by private donors and state
which stipulates that the unused funds
actions, this amount has been restated
other auditing procedures as we considered necessary in
Subcontractors (other parties partici-
charges are recorded at the time of
are to be returned to the grantor.
the circumstances.
as construction in progress and an
pating in rendering program services
receipt. Revenue from pledges by pri-
under grants) also receive funding
vate donors is recorded when written
Depreciation and Amortization. Depre-
increase in the beginning fund balance.
In our opinion, the accompanying financial statements
ciation and amortization on office
and schedule present fairly the financial position of the
under the terms of multi-program
commitments are received.
equipment, furniture and fixtures, and
3. Commitments and Contingencies
National Center for State Courts as of December 31, 1975
grants channeled through the Center.
Fund Balance. The Center's financial
leasehold improvements is provided on
and the results of its operations and changes in its fund
Under the terms of these package
grants, funds are received by the Center
reporting and accounting system em-
the straight-line basis primarily over
The Center currently leases office space
balance for the year then ended, in conformity with gen-
and forwarded to these institutions as
bodies four funds covering all activities
seven years assuming a salvage value of
for headquarters and regional offices
erally accepted accounting principles applied on a consistent
of the organization:
ten percent (10%) of cost. Acquisition
under various noncancellable lease
basis.
needed on the basis of program plans
The Unrestricted Fund-for revenues
agreements. The annual office space
and budgets approved by the Law
costs of such items are reported as
Enforcement Assistance Administration
not restricted in use by the donor
expenses to the various grants and con-
rentals under existing noncancellable
Haskins $ Pells
(LEAA). The Center has monitoring
and expenditures not chargeable to
tracts under which the property is pur-
lease agreements are as follows:
a grant or contract.
chased and then transferred from the
responsibilities for revenues and
1976
$138,000
March 8, 1976
i
FORD
The Restricted Fund-for grants, con-
Restricted Fund to the Equipment
1977
expenses of subcontractors under these
118,000
tracts and other revenues restricted
Fund. The disposition of items acquired
1978
programs.
88,000
by the sponsoring agency.
with federal grant funds is subject to
1979
LIBRARY
66,000
The Building Fund-for transactions
LEAA regulations. Furniture, fixtures
1980
3,000
Council of State Court
22
Advisory Council
23
Representatives
Temporary Chairman:
Rhode Island: Walter J. Kane
Conference of State Court Administrators
Maryland: William H. Adkins II
Director
Court Administrator
Richard E. Klein
Honorable John W. King
Administrative Office of the Courts
Rhode Island Supreme Court
State Court Administrator
Alabama: Honorable Howell T. Heflin
Minnesota Supreme Court
Chief Justice, Alabama Supreme Court
Massachusetts:
South Carolina:
Honorable J. Woodrow Lewis
Institute for Court Management
Alaska: Honorable Robert Boochever
Honorable Walter H. McLaughlin
Chief Justice
John J. Corson
Chief Justice
Chief Justice, Alaska Supreme Court
Superior Court of Massachusetts
South Carolina Supreme Court
Institute of Judicial Administration
Arizona:
Honorable Fred C. Struckmeyer, Jr.
Michigan: To be selected
South Dakota:
Lyman Tondel, Jr., Esquire
Honorable Fred R. Winans
National Association for Court
Vice Chief Justice
Minnesota: Richard E. Klein
Associate Justice
Administration
Arizona Supreme Court
State Court Administrator
South Dakota Supreme Court
John Petersen
The Council of State Court Representa-
Arkansas: C. R. Huie
Minnesota Supreme Court
The Advisory Council of the National
Tennessee:
tives elects the Board of Directors of the
Executive Secretary, Judicial Department
Mississippi: Honorable R. P. Sugg
Center for State Courts is composed of
Executive Secretary
Honorable Brooks McLemore, Jr.
National Center for State Courts, acts as
Associate Justice
representatives of the boards of directors
National Association of Trial Court
Arkansas Supreme Court
Acting Executive Secretary
of the 20 major judicial and judicially
Administrators
a national forum for the state judiciary,
California: Honorable Donald R. Wright
Mississippi Supreme Court
Tennessee Supreme Court
and facilitates liaison between the state
related institutions cooperating with
Lewis P. Stephenson, Jr.
Chief Justice, California Supreme Court
judicial systems and the National Center.
Missouri: Honorable J. P. Morgan
Texas: Honorable Thomas M. Reavley
the National Center in court improve-
Superior Court Administrator
It is composed of one member from each
Colorado: Harry O. Lawson
Judge, Missouri Supreme Court
Justice, Texas Supreme Court
ment efforts. Close liaison between the
King County, Washington
state as well as from the District of
Court Administrator
Montana: Honorable Wesley Castles
Advisory Council and the National
Utah: Allan E. Mecham
National College of Probate Judges
Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico and the
Judicial Department
Justice, Montana Supreme Court
Administrator and Clerk
Center minimizes duplication of effort
Honorable William W. Treat
Virgin Islands. The members of the
and facilitates optimal use of the scarce
Connecticut: Honorable John P. Cotter
Nebraska: Honorable Paul W. White
Utah Supreme Court
resources available to improve the courts.
Judge, Probate Court
Council are chosen by the supreme court
Justice, Chief Court Administrator
Chief Justice, Nebraska Supreme Court
or other judicial entity with statewide
Vermont: Lawrence J. Turgeon
The Advisory Council's chairman regu-
Hampton, New Hampshire
Connecticut Supreme Court
Court Administrator
rule-making authority within individual
Nevada: Honorable Howard W. Babcock
larly attends meetings of the National
National College of the State Judiciary
states. Thus, through the Council, ulti-
Delaware:
Judge of the District Court, Las Vegas
Vermont Supreme Court
Center's Board of Directors.
C. A. Carson III, Esquire
mate control of the National Center
Honorable Daniel L. Herrmann
Virginia:
National Conference of Metropolitan
Chief Justice, Delaware Supreme Court
New Hampshire:
resides in the state court systems it is
Honorable Albertis S. Harrison, Jr.
Courts
Honorable John W. King
designed to serve.
Chairman: Professor Maurice Rosenberg
Justice, Superior Court of New Hampshire
Justice, Virginia Supreme Court
Honorable Lewis Dickson
Florida: To be selected
Vice Chairman: John S. Clark, Esquire
Judge, 125th District Court
Georgia: Honorable Julian Webb
New Jersey:
Washington:
American Academy of Judicial Education
Houston, Texas
Honorable Orris L. Hamilton
Judge, Georgia Court of Appeals
Honorable Richard J. Hughes
Honorable Albert W. Barney, Jr.
Justice, Washington Supreme Court
National Conference of
Hawaii: Tom T. Okuda
Chief Justice, New Jersey Supreme Court
Chief Justice, Vermont Supreme Court
Special Court Judges
Director, Administrative Services
New Mexico:
West Virginia: To be selected
American Bar Association
Honorable Robert Beresford
of the District Courts
Honorable John B. McManus, Jr.
Wisconsin:
Honorable William H. Erickson
Judge of the Municipal Court
Chief Justice
Honorable Horace W. Wilkie
Associate Justice
San Jose, California
Idaho: Honorable Charles R. Donaldson
Justice, Idaho Supreme Court
New Mexico Supreme Court
Chief Justice, Wisconsin Supreme Court
Colorado Supreme Court
National Conference of State Trial Judges
New York: Honorable Richard J. Bartlett
Wyoming:
American Bar Association-
Illinois:
Honorable Charles G. Douglas III
State Administrative Judge
Honorable Rodney M. Guthrie
Division of Judicial Administration
Honorable Joseph H. Goldenhersh
Judge, Superior Court of New Hampshire
Justice, Illinois Supreme Court
North Carolina: Bert M. Montague
Chief Justice, Wyoming Supreme Court
Honorable William A. Grimes
Concord, New Hampshire
Director
District of Columbia:
Justice, New Hampshire Supreme Court
National Council of Juvenile Court Judges
Indiana: Honorable Richard M. Givan
Administrative Office of the Courts
Chief Justice, Indiana Supreme Court
Honorable Gerard D. Reilly
American Judges Association
Honorable Edward V. Healey, Jr.
North Dakota:
Chief Judge
Honorable David L. Golden (retired)
Associate Justice
Iowa: Honorable W. W. Reynoldson
Honorable William L. Paulson
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Family Court of Rhode Island
American Judicature Society
Justice, Iowa Supreme Court
Providence, Rhode Island
Associate Justice
Guam: Honorable Joaquin C. Perez
John S. Clark, Esquire
Kansas: Honorable David Prager
North Dakota Supreme Court
Chief Judge, Island Court of Guam
National Council on Crime and
Justice, Kansas Supreme Court
Appellate Judges' Conference
Puerto Rico:
Delinquency
Ohio: Honorable C. William O'Neill
Honorable T. John Lesinski
Honorable Orman W. Ketcham
Kentucky: Honorable James S. Chenault
Chief Justice, Ohio Supreme Court
Honorable Jose Trias Monge
Chief Judge, Michigan Court of Appeals
Judge, 25th Judicial District, Richmond
Chief Justice
Judge, Superior Court of
Oklahoma: Honorable William A. Berry
Association of American Law Schools
the District of Columbia
Louisiana:
Puerto Rico Supreme Court
Justice, Oklahoma Supreme Court
Professor Maurice Rosenberg
Honorable Walter F. Marcus, Jr.
Virgin Islands: Honorable Cyril Michael
School of Law, Columbia University
Associate Justice
Oregon: Loren D. Hicks
Presiding Judge
Council of State Court Representatives
State Court Administrator
Conference of Chief Justices
Louisiana Supreme Court
Oregon Supreme Court
Municipal Court of the Virgin Islands
Honorable Lawrence W. l'Anson
and Advisory Council listings are
effective March 10, 1976.
Maine: Elizabeth D. Belshaw
Pennsylvania:
Chief Justice, Virginia Supreme Court
State Court Administrator
Honorable Samuel J. Roberts
Maine Supreme Judicial Court
Justice, Pennsylvania Supreme Court
Business and
24
Offices of the
Professional Friends
Committee Members
Major Contributors
National Center for
Committee
Chairman: George A. Stinson
Alcoa Foundation
State Courts
Headquarters Office
Northeastern Regional Office, serving:
National Steel Corporation
Allied Chemical Foundation
Suite 200
Connecticut, Delaware, Maine,
American-Standard
1660 Lincoln Street
Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
Benjamin F. Biaggini
Southern Pacific Company
American Telephone & Telegraph Co.
Denver, Colorado 80203
New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania,
Amoco Foundation, Inc.
(303) 892-1261
Rhode Island, Vermont.
James H. Binger
Bethlehem Steel Corporation
401 Commonwealth Avenue
Honeywell Inc.
Burroughs Corporation
Director:
Boston, Massachusetts 02215
Cities Service Company
Edward B. McConnell
(617) 247-2102
Roger M. Blough, Esq., New York
Continental Can Company
Director: Samuel D. Conti
Deputy Director:
Harllee Branch, Jr.
Continental Oil Company
Arne L. Schoeller
Mid-Atlantic Regional Office, serving:
The Southern Company
Dayton Hudson Foundation
Associate Director for Administration:
District of Columbia, Maryland,
Formally organized in 1975, the Business
Donald C. Burnham
Deere & Company
Deering Milliken Foundation
The Headquarters Office of the National
William J. Conner
Puerto Rico, Virginia, Virgin Islands.
and Professional Friends Committee of
Westinghouse Electric Corporation
P.O.Box FG
E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company
Center, scheduled to move from Denver,
the National Center is dedicated to devel-
August A. Busch III
Colorado, to Williamsburg, Virginia,
Associate Director for Programs:
Williamsburg, Virginia 23815
oping greater leadership awareness of
Eaton Charitable Fund
Barry Mahoney
(804) 229-7193
state court problems and progress and to
Anheuser-Busch, Inc.
Exxon Corporation
conducts studies and demonstrations of
Director: Alexander B. Aikman
Federated Department Stores, Inc.
nationwide significance or which are multi-
Controller:
serving as a means for rendering advisory
Warren M. Christopher, Esq., Los Angeles
First Bank System. Inc.
state in nature. It also administers the
Keith L. Bumsted
Southeastern Regional Office, serving:
services and financial support to the
cause of judicial improvement. As a result
John D. deButts
Ford Motor Company Fund
National Center and supports the field
Director of Publications:
Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky,
of the efforts of the twenty-eight leading
American Telephone & Telegraph Co.
General Electric Company
work of the regional offices, providing a
Robert H. Weber
Mississippi, North Carolina,
General Mills Foundation
pool of skilled professionals upon which
South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia.
businessmen and lawyers who now make
Roswell L. Gilpatric, Esq., New York
General Motors Corporation
the regional offices can draw to supple-
Director of Information Services:
1600 Tullie Circle, N.E., Suite 119
up the Committee, a total of nearly
William T. Gossett, Esq., Troy, Michigan
General Tel. & Electronics Foundation
ment their own staff resources. The six
Winifred L. Hepperle
Atlanta, Georgia 30329
$200,000 in general support funds for the
National Center was contributed to the
Gulf Oil Foundation of Delaware
regional offices, further strengthened in
(404) 634-3366
John D. Harper
The Hanna Mining Company
1975, are readily available to the courts in
Director: Charles D. Cole
date of this report by more than ninety
Aluminum Company of America
Hercules, Inc.
their areas. During the year, the Mid-
donors, the greatest number of which are
North Central Regional Office, serving:
corporations.
A. Linwood Holton, Jr., Esq., Washington
Hoerner Waldorf Corporation
Atlantic Regional Office moved from
Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan,
Honeywell Fund
Washington, D.C., to Williamsburg, Vir-
Gilbert W. Humphrey
Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska,
Household Finance Corporation
ginia, and the South Central Regional Of-
The Hanna Mining Company
North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota,
IBM
fice, which had been temporarily located in
Wisconsin, Wyoming.
Donald J. Hurley, Esq., Boston
Kimberly-Clark Foundation, Inc.
Denver, moved to new quarters in the Uni-
Kraftco Corporation
versity of Oklahoma Law Center in Nor-
Metro Square Building, Suite 201
Seventh and Robert Streets
Albert E. Jenner, Jr., Esq., Chicago
The LTV Corporation
man. The Washington Liaison Office
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Reginald H. Jones
Leon Falk Family Trust
maintains contact with the Congress, fed-
(612) 222-6331
General Electric Company
Lucky Stores. Inc.
eral agencies and other appropriate
Acting Director: Mark Geddes
Lukens Steel Foundation
groups.
Ralph Lazarus
Cyril Magnin
South Central Regional Office, serving:
Federated Department Stores, Inc.
Manufacturers Hanover Trust Company
Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana,
Louis W. Menk
Material Service Foundation
Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas.
Burlington Northern, Inc.
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
University of Oklahoma Law Center
Monsanto Fund
630 Parrington Oval
Buck Mickel
National Bank of Detroit
Norman, Oklahoma 73069
Daniel International Corporation
National Steel Corporation
(405) 364-8975
G. William Miller
Director: Grant Davis
Northwest Bancorporation
Textron Inc.
PPG Industries Foundation
Western Regional Office, serving:
Thomas A. Murphy
Pepsico Foundation Inc.
Alaska, American Samoa, Arizona,
General Motors Corporation
Phillips Petroleum Foundation, Inc.
California, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho,
Procter & Gamble Fund
Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington.
David W. Peck, Esq., New York
Sears. Roebuck and Co.
235 Montgomery Street, Suite 1550
Irving S. Shapiro
Southern Pacific Company
San Francisco, California 94104
E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Company
Standard Oil of California
(415) 557-1515
Stauffer Chemical Company
Edward D. Smith
Director: Larry L. Sipes
TRW Foundation
First National Bank of Atlanta
Textron Inc.
Washington Liaison Office
1150 17th Street, N.W., Suite 701
John A. Sutro, Esq., San Francisco
Union Carbide Corporation
Utah International Inc.
Washington, D.C. 20036
Charles C. Tillinghast, Jr.
West Publishing Company
Trans World Airlines, Inc.
Westinghouse Electric Corporation
SECRET 100%
(202) 833-3270
Deputy Director of the National Center:
Arne L. Schoeller
Arthur M. Wood
Weyerhaeuser Company Foundation
Whirlpool Foundation
Washington Liaison: Harry W. Swegle
Sears, Roebuck and Co.
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 10, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR: Jim Cannon
FROM:
Dick Parsons D.
SUBJECT:
Philip W. Buchen Memo of 5-10-76
re: Public and Congressional Reaction
to the Federal Election Campaign
Act Amendments of 1976
You requested my comments on the subject memorandum.
I have no problem with the memorandum, per se. I have reviewed
the draft signing statement and have made some suggestions for
shortening it substantially.
I have reviewed the draft veto statement but have made no
editorial comments since that statement is, according to
Phil's memorandum, being revised.
P.S. I have already recommended approval Sthe D. bill.
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
THE WHITE HOUSE
ACTION MEMORANDUM
WASHINGTON
LOG NO.:
Date:
May 10, 1976
Time:
FOR ACTION:
CC (for information):
Jim Cannon
Tim Austin
Max Friedersdorf
Mike duVal
Jim Lynn
Dave Gergen
Jack Marsh
Jerry Jones
FROM THE STAFF SECRETARY
Bob Hartmann
DUE: Date:
Monday, May 10, 1976
Time: COB
SUBJECT:
Philip W. Buchen memo 5/10/76 re
Public and Congressional Reaction
to the Federal Election Campaign Act
Amendments of 1976
ACTION REQUESTED:
X
For Necessary Action
For Your Recommendations
Prepare Agenda and Brief
Draft Reply
X For Your Comments
Draft Remarks
REMARKS:
Your comments are needed by close of business today
as this package will be sent into the President
tomorrow
Thank
June Common Recomerd morning. The you Renicler trign
the I bill.
Jun Camon
PLEASE ATTACH THIS COPY TO MATERIAL SUBMITTED.
If you have any questions or if you anticipate
Jim Connor
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
delay in submitting the required material, plea:
For the President
telephone the Staff Secretary immediately.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 10, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
PHILIP W. BUCHEN
A.
SUBJECT:
Public and Congressional Reaction
to the Federal Election Campaign
Act Amendments of 1976.
A solicitation was made by the U. S. Chamber of Commerce to
its members which urged them to oppose your signing the
above bill and to register their opposition by communicating
with you. The solicitation was impassioned and, in my opinion,
it misrepresented or overstated the effects on business of the
Amendments enacted by Congress.
Attached at Tab A is a summary of the business firms which
have registered opposition to your signing of the bill. I have
my doubts that people who sent communications in opposition to
the bill fully understand all aspects of the legislation or appreciate
the consequences of your attempting to get better legislation out
of Congress at this time.
Because of the campaign by the U. S. Chamber of Commerce to
arouse opposition, it is not surprising that we lack communication
in support of your signing. However, Jack Mills called to indicate
that he and his trade association think you should sign the bill.
The same is true of Bob Clark of Sante Fe Railroad, John Tope of
Republic Steel and Rod Markley of Ford Motor Company.
Attached at Tab B is a summary of opinions expressed by Members
of Congress who wrote to you in regard to the bill.
Attached at Tab C is a draft signing statement. Attached at Tab D
is a draft veto statement which is now being revised.
Attachments
is
FORD
GERALD
2817
TAB A
BUSINESS REACTION
VETO
Joseph B. McGrath
Forest Product Political Committee
J. W. Heiney
Indiana Gas Company Inc.
David E. Brown
Kemper Insurance and Financial Co.
Ian Macgregor
Amax Inc.
Richard Peake
Government & Public Affairs
PPG Industries, Inc.
E. F. Andrews
Allegheny Ludlum Industries, Inc.
Lyle Littlefield
Gerber Products Company
John Harper
Alcoa
Michael D. Dingman
Wheelabrator-Frye Incorporated
David Packard
Hewlett-Packard Company
Paul E. Thornbrugh
MAPCO, Inc.
Robert A. Roland
National Paint & Coatings Assoc.
John L. Spafford
Associated Credit Bureaus
William R. Roesch
Kaiser Steel Corporation
FORD & LIBRAR GERALD
- 2 -
VETO - Continued
James Maclaggan
Ampact
C. Boyd Stockmeyer
The Detroit Bank and
Trust Company
O. H. Delchamps
Delchamps, Inc.
E. J. Schaefer
Franklin Electric Co, Inc.
Russell H. Perry
Republic Financial Services, Inc.
Charles S. Mack
CPC International, Inc.
Vestal Lemmon
NAII
Samuel J. Damiano
Chamber of Commerce
Donald M. Kendall
PEPSICO
Robert F. Magill
General Motors Corporation
James A. Brooks
The Budd Company
Robert Ellis
Chamber of Commerce
Richard L. Lesher
Chamber of Commerce
Roger J. Stroh
United Fresh Fruit and Vegetable
Assn.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
- 3 -
VETO - Continued
James W. McLamore
National Restaurant Association
C. David Gordon
Association of Washington
Business
Raymond R. Becker
Interlake, Inc.
Bernard J. Burns
National Agents Political
Action Committee
Rodney W. Rood
Atlantic Richfield Company
Arthur F. Blum
Independent Insurance Agents-
of America
John Pannullo
National Utility Contractors Assn.
Harry Roberts
True Drilling Co.
Michael R. Moore
Texas Retail Federation
Moody Covey
Skelly Political Action Committee
J. Kevin Murphy
Purolator Services, Inc.
Harold J. Steele
First Security Bank of Utah
Edwin J. Spiegel, Jr.
Alton Box Board Company
Frank K. Woolley
Association of American
Physicians and Surgeons
FORD
Jack W. Belshaw
is
Wellman Industries Good
Government Fund
GERALD
4
VETO - Continued
Robert P. Nixon
Franklin Electric
Arch L. Madsen
Bonneville International Corp.
Ellwood F. Curtis
Deere and Company
William E. Hardman
National Tool, Die and Precision
Machining Assn.
J. D. Stewart
DEPAC
Carl F. Hawver
National Consumer Finance Assoc.
Thomas P. Mason
Comsumer Bankers Assoc.
R. R. Frost
Piggly Wiggly Southern, Inc.
Paul J. Kelley
U-HAUL
Neil W. Plath
Sierra Pacific Power Company
Michael R. Moore
Texas Retail Federation
Malcolm E. Harris
Distilled Spirits Council of the U.S.
Lawrence L. Burian
National Air Transportation
Associations
Walter D. Thomas
FMC Corporation
Gerald W. Vaughan
Union Camp Corporation
GERALD R. FORD
- 5 -
James A. Gray
National Machine Tool
Builders Association
Donald V. Seibert
J. C. Penney Company, Inc.
Cosmo F. Guido
National Lumber and Building
Material Dealers Assoc.
R. W. Strauss
Stewart-Warner Corporation
Robert S. Boynton
National LIme Association
FORD
&
217
GERALD
TAB B
CONGRESSIONAL
SIGN
VETO
Speaker Carl Albert
Congressman Jake Garn
Congressman Bill Frenzel
Congressman Walter Mondale
Senator Robert Taft
FORD
&
BERALD
May 10, 1976
DRAFT SIGNING STATEMENT
On October 15, 1974, I signed into law the Federal
Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974 which made far-
reaching changes in the laws affecting federal elections
and election campaign practices. This law created a
Federal Election Commission to administer and enforce a
comprehensive regulatory scheme for federal campaigns.
On January 30, 1976, the United States Supreme Court
ruled that certain features of the 1974 law were
unconstitufional and, in particular, declared that the
FEC could not constitutionally exercise enforcement and
other executive- powers unless the manner of appointing
the Members of the Commission was changed.
Today, I am signing into law the Federal Election
Campaign Act Amendments of 1976. These Amendments will
duly reconstitute the Commission SO that the President shall
appoint all six of its Members, by and with the advice
and consent of the Senate.
The failure of the Congress to reconstitute the
Commission earlier and the resulting deprivation of
essential Federal matching fund monies has so substantially
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
- 2 -
impacted on seven of the candidates seeking nomination
for the Presidency by their respective parties that
they felt impelled to seek relief on two occasions from
the Supreme Court. The Court determined that it was
not in a position to provide that relief.
Further delay in reconstituting the Commission
would have an even more egregious and unconscionable
impact on these candidates and on the conduct of
their campaigns. As President, I cannot allow the
outcome of the primary elections to be influenced
by the failure of candidates to have the benefits
and protections of laws enacted before the campaigns and
on which they have relied in seeking their respective
nominations.
Also, further delay would undermine the fairness
of elections this year to the U. S. Senate and the
House of Representatives, as well as to the Office of
President, because effective regulation of campaign
practices depends on having a Commission with valid
rulemaking and enforcement powers. It is most
important to maintain the integrity of our election
process for all Federal offices SO that all candidates
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
- 3 -
and their respective supporters and contributors are
made to feel bound by enforceable laws and regulations
which are designed to overcome questionable and unfair
campaign practices
The amendments have received bi-partisan support
in both Houses of Congress and by the Chairpersons of
both the Republican National Committee and the
Democratic National Committee. This support provides
assurance that persons strongly interested in the
future of both major political parties find the law
favors neither party over the other.
Accordingly, in addition to approving this legisla-
tion, I am submitting to the Senate for its advice and
consent, the nominations of the six current members
of the Commission as members of the new Commission.
I trust that the Senate will act with dispatch to
confirm these appointees, all of whom were previously
approved by the Senate, as well as the House, under
the law as it previously existed.
Notwithstanding my readiness to take these steps,
I do have serious reservations about certain aspects
of the present amendments. Instead of acting promptly
to adopt the provisions which I urged -- simply to
FORD LIBRARY & ERALD
- 4 -
reconstitute the Commission in a constitutional
manner -- the Congress has proceeded to amend previous
campaign laws in a confusing variety of ways.
The result is that the Commission must take
additional time to consider the effects of the present
amendments on its previously issued opinions and
regulations. The amendments lack clarity in many
respects and thus may lead to further litigation.
Those provisions which purport to restrict communications
and solicitations for campaign.purposes by unions,
corporations, trade associations and their respective
political action communities are of doubtful consti-
tutionality and will surely give rise to litigation.
Also, the Election Campaign Act, as amended, seriously
limits the independence of the Federal Election
Commission from Congressional influence and control.
I
In one important respect, the present limitations
depart substantially from the accepted goal of making
the new Commission, which will have considerable
discretionary authority over the interpretation and
application. of Federal election campaign laws,
independent from the control of incumbents in the
FORD & LIBRAN PERALD
- 5 -
exercise of that discretion. Specifically, it would
permit either House of Congress to veto regulations.
which the Commission issues.
On numerous occasions, Presidents have stated
that provisions of this sort, allowing the Congress
to veto regulations of an executive agency, are an
unconstitutional violation of the doctrine of
separation of powers. I have discussed this matter
with the Attorney General, and it is our hope that
clear judicial resolution of the constitutional point
can soon be obtained. In the meantime, I hope and
expect that the Commission will exercise its discre-
tion with the degree of independence which the
original proponents of this legislation and, I believe,
the public expect and desire.
I look to the Commission, as soon as it is
reappointed, to do an effective job of administering
the campaign laws equitably but forcefully and in a
manner that minimizes the confusion which is caused
by their added complexity. In this regard, the Commission
will be aided by a newly provided comprehensive and
flexible civil enforcement mechanism designed to
facilitate voluntary compliance through conciliation
agreements and to penalize non-compliance through
GERALD FORD
- 6 -
means of civil fines.
In addition, the new legislation refines the
provisions intended to control the size of contributions
from a single source by avoiding proliferation of politi-
cal action committees which are under common control,
and it strengthens provisions for reporting money spent
on campaigns by requiring disclosure of previously
unreported costs of partisan communications intended to
affect the outcome of Federal elections.
I would have much preferred postponing consideration
of needed improvements to the Federal Election Campaign
laws until after the experience of the 1976 elections
could be studied. I still plan to recommend to the
Congress in 1977 passage of legislation that will
correct problems created by the present laws and will
make additional needed reforms in the election process.
IN the interim, however, I look to the
Commission to do an effective job I
administering the campaigne laws equitably
but forcefully.
FORD LIBRAR &
DRAFT VETO
Statement By the President
Almost three months ago, the United States
Supreme Court ruled that certain provisions of the
Federal Election Campaign Laws were unconstitutional,
and, in particular, declared that the FEC could not
constitutionally exercise enforcement and other
executive powers unless the manner of appointing
the Members of the Commission were changed. At the
same time, the Court made it clear that the Congress
could remedy this problem by simply reconstituting
the Commission and providing for Presidential
appointment of the Members of the Federal Election
Commission.
Although I fully recognized that other aspects
of the Court's decision, as well as the original
election law itself, mandate a critical and
comprehensive review of the campaign laws, I
realized that there would not be sufficient time
for such a review to be completed during the time
allotted by the Court which would result in any
meaningful reform. Moreover, I recognized the
obvious danger that various opponents of campaign
reform and other interests -- both political and
otherwise :- would exploit the pressures of an
election year to seek a number of piecemeal, ad hos
FORD LIBRARY &
and hastily considered changes in the election laws.
In accordance with the Court's decision, I submitted
remedial legislation to Congress for immodiate action
which would simply and inmediately have reconstituted
the Commission for this election, while at the same
time, ensuring full scale review and reform of the
election law next year with the added benefit of the
experience to be gained by this election. The actions
of the Congress in ignoring my repeated requests for
immediate action and instead enacting a bill which
would fundamentally destroy the independence of the
Commission, have confirmed my worst fears.
The most important aspect of any revision of
the election laws is to insure the independence of
the Federal Election Commission. This bill provides
for a one-house, section-by-section veto of
Commission regulations - - a requirement that is
unconstitutional as applied to regulations to be
proposed and enforced by an independent regulatory agency.
Such a permanent restriction would have a crippling
influence on the freedom of action of the Commission
and would only invite further litigation.
FORD WIBRARY is GERALD
Moreover, the bill would also introduce
certain new provisions into the election law which
may be of doubtful constitutional validity, would
inadvertently affect other federal legislation, and
would at the same time change many of the rules
applicable to the current election campaigns of all
federal candidates. In the meantime, campaigns
which were started in reliance on the funding and
regulatory provisions of the existing law all are
suffering from lack of funds and lack of certainty
over the rules to be followed this year. The
complex and extensive changes of this bill will
only create additional confusion and litigation
and inhibit further meaningful reform. Even those
changes which I would consider desirable and an
improvement over existing law would be best
considered from the perspective of a non-election
year with full and adequate hearings on the merits
and impact of these revisions.
Accordingly, I am returning Senate bill 3065
to the Congress without my approval and again ask
the Congress to pass the simple extension of the life
of the Commission. Tbe American people want an
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
independent and effective Commission. All candidates
must have certainty in the election Law and all
Presidential candidates need the federal natching
funds which have been unduly held up by those who
would exploit the Court's decision for their OWN
self-interest. At this late stage in the 1976
elections, it is critical that the candidates be
allowed to campaign under the current law with the
supervision of the Commission in a fair and equitable
manner absent the disruptive influence of hastily
enacted changes.
FORDO & LIBRARY GERALD
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 20, 1976
MEMORANDUM BY PHONE TO: JIM CANNON
FROM:
JIM FIELD
SUBJECT:
Chairmanship for Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission
Ersa Poston. Republican from New York; 55; member of
New York State Civil Service Commission presently
in her second term; formerly servied as President
of that body to Governor Rockfeller; former director
of New York State Office of Economic Opportunity;
served as trustee of Urban League and has a Board
member of NAACP. Organized labor, black organiza-
tions and women's groups would react positively to
her nomination. Vice President strongly endorses
her.
2. Samuel C. Jackson. Republican from D.C.; 47 years
old; member of D.C. law firm of Stroock, Stroock
& Lavan; formerly served as General Assistant Secre-
tary of HUD with responsibilities for development
and implementation of Department policies relating
to housing programs. Before joining HUD, he was
Vice President of the American Arbitration Association
and Director of its National Center for Dispute Settle-
ment. He was one of five original commissioners on
EEOC appointed by President Johnson in 1965. He
served in legal positions in NAACP. He would receive
strong endorsement from black organizations and other
EEOC related constituencies.
3. Howard Jenkins, Jr. Republican from D.C.; 61 years
old; has served as member of National Labor Relations
Board since 1963. He has written extensively on
labor law and was a major force in implementation of
management tracking systems at the NLRB which has
been successful in eliminating case back logs. His
reputation and Hill support would probably assure an
easy confirmation.
2787
PLEASE RESPOND TO JIM FIELD AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TODAY - 2821
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 16, 1976
TO:
PHIL BUCHEN
FROM:
JIM CANNON
For handling.
GERALD R FORD LIBRARY
BELLA S.PABZUG, N.Y., CHAIRWOMAN
SAM STEIGER, ARIZ.
LEO J. RYAN, CALIF.
CLARENCE J. BROWN, OHIO
JOHN CONYERS, JR., MICH.
PAUL N. MCCLOSKEY, JR., CALIF.
TORBERT H. MACDONALD, MASS.
NINETY-FOURTH CONGRESS
JOHN E. MOSS, CALIF.
225-3741
MICHAEL HARRINGTON, MASS.
ANDREW MAGUIRE, N.J.
ANTHONY MOFFETT, CONN.
Congress of the United States
house of Representatives
GOVERNMENT INFORMATION AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
SUBCOMMITTEE
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING, ROOM B-349-B-C
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
June 10, 1976
Mr. James M. Cannon
Director, Domestic Council
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Northwest
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Mr. Cannon:
This Subcommittee has oversight and legislative jurisdiction of
records maintenance policies of federal agencies. In this connection,
we are writing to inquire into the policies of your department or agency
concerning records disposal, particularly methods and procedures for
transferring files and records to the National Archives. We would
appreciate it if you would supply the subcommittee with a copy of your
latest agreement with the National Archives regarding transfer of papers
and a schedule of the content of the most recent transfer. Please also
supply the date of the most recent transfer.
We also would like to know your policy on the removal of papers by
the Secretary, agency head or other Presidential appointees upon expira-
tion of their terms. If your policy allows for the removal of "personal"
papers, please set forth the method, if any, whereby, a determination is
made between "personal" and official papers.
Also, what restrictions, if any, are imposed on the removal by an
agency official of copies of government documents or other information
generated by that official? Are distinctions made between removal of
such papers by Presidential appointees as opposed to agency civil servants?
In the last ten years, have there been any instances of administra-
tive penalties imposed or prosecutions brought against any agency employee
or official, or former employee or official, for the unauthorized taking
or destruction of government records? If so, please supply details.
We would appreciate your early reply to this inquiry.
Chairwoman
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD