Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
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.

Source Description

This file contains material relating to the Domestic Council Review Group on Regulatory Reform and President Ford's meetings with regulatory commissioners.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
16988399
label
Regulatory Reform (14)
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
16988399
contentType
document
title
Regulatory Reform (14)
description
This file contains material relating to the Domestic Council Review Group on Regulatory Reform and President Ford's meetings with regulatory commissioners.
collections
James M. Cannon Files (Ford Administration)
James Cannon's Issues Files
subjects
Aeronautics, Commercial
Antitrust law
Government regulation
Independent regulatory commissions
Intergovernmental relations
Legislation
Regulatory reform
Trucking
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
16988399
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-12-31
month
12
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1975-06-01
month
6
year
1975
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
42464cbbb0fde3bd
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 29, folder "Regulatory Reform (14)" 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 Gerald Ford donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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. 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. Digitized from Box 29 of the James M. Cannon Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library THE WHITE HOUSE t WASHINGTON pu Hold May 28, 1976 MEMORANDUM FOR: JIM CANNON FROM: STEVE McCONAHEY 80M Attached is an advanced transcript of the remarks given by the Vice President at the National Conference on Regulatory Reform last Wednesday. You will note that he prefaced his prepared remarks with a brief discussion of government-to-government regulations, which is a subject he termed "close to my heart. 11 As an initial step in launching our program, I believe it would be useful for us to have a session with the Vice President, to outline our program and get his thoughts and reaction. I am attaching a copy of our memorandum for the President, which you may wish to forward to the Vice President, along with the suggestion that we meet with him. Attachments THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON May 27, 1976 MEMORANDUM FOR: THE PRESIDENT FROM: JAMES M. CANNON JAMES T. LYNN SUBJECT: Government-to-Government Regulations Reform Program Attached to this memorandum is a plan of action and related materials establishing a program to relieve state and local governments of excessive Federal regulations. This proposal is in response to your request of May 7, 1976. The proposed program includes the following key elements: Immediate attention focused on selected priority problem areas, with initial re- form results by September 1. Consultation with and participation by representative state, county and local officials in the program, including the final identification of program targets. Initial focus on the three existing block grant programs, which are experienc- ing gradual "recategorization" through regulations. Primary responsibility for program results assigned to the department and agency heads, who will be tasked with drafting and imple- menting individual agency action plans. Joint Domestic Council/OMB oversight. - 2 - The specifics of the program are outlined and discussed in Tab A. The program will be under the general direction of Steve McConahey, your Special Assistant for Intergovernmental Affairs, with day- to-day management of the program directed by Ray Hanzlik, who ran the Domestic Council public hearings last fall. Tab B is a memorandum to the Cabinet outlining their role and responsibilities in the program. Tab C is a suggested list of Presidential actions in support of the program. We recommend a briefing and discussion of this effort occur at the next Cabinet meeting. APPROVE DISAPPROVE COMMENT: Attachments ATTACHMENT A QERALD R. FORD LIBRARY GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS REFORM PROGRAM This proposal sets forth a plan of action in response to the President's request of May 7, 1976, to initiate a program that will relieve state and local govern- ments of excessive Federal administration regulations. THE SITUATION Two major themes of this Administration have been the reduction of big government, and the return of more authority to state and local governments. A number of Presidential actions has given substance to these themes, with the block grant proposals and support for the re-enactment of general revenue sharing being prime examples. Moreover, this commitment to rebalance the relationship between the Federal government and state and local governments has gained strong bi-partisan support. Unfortunately, the President's initiatives and reforms in Federal assistance to state and local governments are seriously undermined by the administrative regula- tions and procedures imposed on state and local officials by Federal agencies. This problem is most acute in cate- gorical grant programs, which represent eighty-percent ($48 of $60 billion) of the Federal aid that goes to states and localities. However, evidence is also available to suggest that the existing block grant programs are becoming increasingly regulated by administrative actions. Although some of these pro- gram regulations reflect a Congressional mandate, a substantial number are administratively initiated. The administrative and management burden imposed on state and local governments by these regulations has reached the point where it is now the primary inter- governmental issue for governors, mayors and county officials. - 2 - Evidence of the seriousness and urgency of this problem has come from many sources. Testimony on the subject by state and local officials was heard at each of the Domestic Council Public Forums held last fall. Federal over-regulation and program management were priority subjects discussed at the February meeting of the National Governors Conference. Secretary Simon, in his meetings with governors over the past year, has collected extensive data supporting this Federal imposition on state and local administra- tions. The Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, the National Commission on Productivity, the Federal Paperwork Commission, the National Science Foundation, and Brookings have studied this question and urge remedial action. And, along with the profes- sional literature, the media are giving this subject increased attention. The message from state and local officials can be summarized essentially as follows: Many Federal ad- ministrative regulations promulgated by the departments and agencies are inconsistent, unnecessarily restrictive, overlapping, inflexible, insensitive to local needs, and/or unnecessary. Their impact increases program costs, compromises program benefits, complicates pro- gram administration, expands state and local bureau- cracies, steals responsibility and decision-making authority from state and local officials, and adds to the beneficiaries' frustration and disillusionment with government. As one Governor has stated: "The best thing the Federal Government could do to help state and local government would be to get some of the regula- tions out of our hair and let us do the job." Although the Administration is addressing the Federal regulatory problem, the efforts to date have not focused on government-to-government regulations. The focus of the Agenda for Government Reform Act program, announced on May 13, 1976, and the EPB task force effort to review specific Federal program regulations in FEA and OSHA is on the private sector and the general economy. Moreover, the recent OMB proposal on management initiatives, though including some aspects of regulatory reform, concentrates on the control and oversight of the Washington bureaucracy. - 3 - As a result, a major gap exists in the overall regulatory reform effort. To fill this gap, a Presidentially directed and White House coordinated effort is required to attack the burdensome problem of government-to-government regulations, thereby committing action and resources to the President's policy of restoring to state and local governments their lost authority. The time is ideal for Presidential action on this pro- blem. The President's long-standing position against unnecessary Federal requirements on state and local governments is fully consistent with the sentiments of the people and their local officials. The current situation provides a ready-made opportunity to take the initiative on this big government issue -- an issue that impacts on the lives of most Americans and has con- tributed to the "anti-Washington" mood. Given the supportive attitude that most governors, mayors and county officials have for the President's intergovern- mental policies, this opportunity affords a useful tool to mobilize strong bi-partisan support from these state and local leaders. PROPOSED ACTION In response to this situation, a joint White House-OMB program is proposed to focus needed Presidential atten- tion on the problems of Federal government-to-government regulations. This program is designed to produce visible, near-term substantive results, while simultaneously in- stituting procedures to maintain a longer-term, compre- hensive reform effort. Specifically, this effort is aimed to accomplish threeobjectives: 1. Implementation of reform measures for a select number of regulatory problem areas, identified as the most onerous for state and local governments, and adaptable to prompt administrative reform. - 4 - 2. Establishment of uniform guidelines within the Executive Branch for con- sultation, review and comment by state and local officials concerning proposed new regulations, and Secre- tarial review and analysis prior to promulgation. 3. Initiation of an on-going reform program to emcompass additional Federal assistance programs impact- ing on state and local governments. The timing of this program and the availability of resources, along with the uniqueness of the problem and the constituency affected, dictate that the proposed program incorporate several essential elements: Primary responsibility for the program should be placed within the agencies building upon existing reform activities and stimulating new efforts where none exist; in both cases, agency resources and administrative mechanisms will be utilized. The creation of a new, ad hoc program structure should be avoided. White House leadership (jointly by the Domestic Council and OMB) and coordination throughout the program are required, es- pecially to coordinate inter-agency efforts. The program should complement and not duplicate the other Administration regula- tory reform efforts in progress: the task force program under Paul MacAvoy's direc- tion; the management improvement effort initiated by Jim Lynn; the Agenda for Government Reform program headed by Ed Schmults. Final identification and selection of program targets must include inputs from state and local officials, who could also perform an on-going advisory role. Con- sultations with members of Congress may also be advisable at the appropriate time. - 5 - PROGRAM END-PRODUCTS As planned, this effort will aim at achieving specific improvements in Federal government-to-government regula- tions, including: Reduction of grant application paperwork and processing. Simplification and elimination of inconsistencies in planning require- ments and documentation. Elimination of unnecessary and/or redundant reporting requirements. Elimination of unnecessary mandates; e.g., structural, service or organi- zation requirements, not relating to program performance. Identification of legislative changes necessary to achieve administrative simplification. PROGRAM TARGETS The final selection of specific targets will in part be determined through consultation with agency officials and state and local government representatives. However, at a minimum, four general target areas have been identi- fied for initial attention: 1. The Block Grant Programs. There is growing evidence that existing block grants, designed to provide state and local governments maximum flexibility in the use of Federal funds, are being en- cumbered by administrative rules and procedures. One frequently cited example is the reporting on Affirmative Action/EEO compliance required by the CETA and LEAA block grant programs; another is inconsistent rulings by different agency regional offices through the ten Federal regions. These programs are currently under study by several organizations, including OMB, ACIR, Brookings and the National Academy of Sciences, as well as the program agencies. Results from these efforts will help determine what changes in regulations and procedures are necessary. - 6 - Three existing block grants to be studied under this effort are: Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, administered by the LEAA, Department of Justice. Comprehensive Employment and Training Act of 1973 (CETA), administered by the Employment and Training Administration, Department of Labor. Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2. Categorical Grant Programs. The Federal categorical assistance programs for state and local governments present a very broad target for regulations reform, and the attention here will be selective and limited in the initial program phase. The breadth of this target, however, is partly offset by the large percentage of programs administered by one agency, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Fortunately, HEW has recently initiated an ambitious and comprehensive in-house regulatory reform program aimed at programs considered most burdensome to the states and localities. In this case, the White House program is designed to further energize the HEW effort, perhaps giving added focus to one or two key problem areas, and to activate similar programs in the other Federal agencies. Within this target area, specific elements of categorical programs may be selected for ini- tial attention, such as planning requirements and plan utilization, reporting requirements, and audit procedures. And, some attention will be given to the simplification of categorical programs where block grant legislation has been proposed but not enacted (e.g., health, social services, education.) - 7 - 3. Cross-Cutting Regulatory Problems. Judging from comments and data available, one of the regulatory problems most troublesome to the states and localities is the inconsistencies and overlap among regulations issued by different Federal agencies. Several examples illustrate this issue: Guidelines differ across agencies on the nature of public participa- tion required in the development of state plans necessary for Federal funding. Requirements imposed by Federal agencies on a single jurisdiction are in some cases duplicative, uncoordinated and at times contra- dictory. OMB and GSA Circulars establish uniform standards for Federal management prac- tices, vis-a-vis state and local juris- dictions. Yet in practice, Federal rules, procedures and practices for each program tend to evolve independently and often at variance with the established standards. Agencies differ in their implementation of the Uniform Relocation Assistance Act, resulting in different assistance for similar situations. The effort in this area will focus on specific cross- cutting regulatory problems in order to correct the most serious duplications and inconsistencies. 4. New Regulations Procedures. The regulations problem area that arouses the most criticism from state, county and local officials is the lack of opportunity to comment on proposed Federal regula- tions and the lack of lead time to implement them. More- over, some regulations do not receive a thorough Secretarial- level review prior to issuance. The practices for - 8 - consulting and review of new regulations vary widely, both among and within agencies. There is near-unanimous opinion that the established comment procedures for pro- posed new regulations are unevenly enforced, narrow in jurisdiction (permits comment only by the major public interest groups), and inefficiently administered by the agencies. Specific improvements will be sought through consistent guidelines for Secretarial review and state and local government consultation. PROGRAM ORGANIZATION The White House Although the major responsibility for achieving the objectives of this program will rest with the agencies, visible and active White House leadership is essential to: Give the effort a clear Presidential mandate. Signal this mandate to the departments and agencies. Demonstrate to state and local officials the priority and seriousness of the pro- gram. Insure that the objectives are achieved in a timely manner. Provide coordination among the departments and agencies. White House oversight will be a joint Jim Lynn/Jim Cannon responsibility, with general direction of the effort as- signed to Special Assistant to the President for Inter- governmental Affairs, Steve McConahey and daily program management provided by Ray Hanzlik of the Domestic Council. Limited staff support will be detailed from the partici- pating agencies, as needed, and a budget of $10-25,000 from Domestic Council funds will be available for any meeting, travel, consultant or related administrative expenses. - 9 - Management of the effort will involve monitoring of progress, coordinating inter-agency efforts, bridging specific ideas with state, county and local experience. Specific corrective action will be reviewed by the normal channels of the Domestic Council, OMB, and other selected staff. Office of Management and Budget Program implementation is dependent on OMB program co-sponsorship and assistance, particularly from the management side of the organization. OMB will provide several essential elements of this program: Program expertise and analytical capabilities needed to insure quality control in program results. Linkage, where necessary, with the Federal intergovernmental field network, including the Federal Regional Councils and the Under Secretaries Group. Jurisdiction and supervision of the A-85 Circular program, which is currently under OMB review, and which will be an integral part of the regulations comment procedures established by this program. Coordination with the new management initia- tives program, which includes some regulatory reform elements. Reinforcement of the Presidential mandate given this program, which would be viewed skeptically by the Federal agencies and by state and local officials without OMB involvement. A close, day-to-day working relationship between White House program personnel and appropriate OMB staff will be maintained throughout the reform effort. - 10 - Federal Departments and Agencies The heads of the departments and independent agencies will be tasked with the responsibility of drafting and implementing individual plans for agency regulations reform, and with supporting the elements of the over- all program involving cross-agency efforts. Each department and agency head will be requested to appoint a high-level subordinate, with direct access to the Secretary or Administrator and with full authority to direct and manage the agency program. These agency program directors will collectively form a program "working group" that will meet regularly with White House and OMB program personnel to monitor and guide the progress of the overall effort. Advisory Resources To insure an effective link between this effort and (a) state, county and local officials, as well as (b) White House policy, two advisory groups will be utilized: A. The New Coalition Key to the acceptance and success of this program is direct involvement by state, county and local offi- cials. The New Coalition, a group of representative governors, mayors, county executives and state legis- lators (formed to provide coordinated response to intergovernmental and programmatic issues) provides an important source of ideas and advice for this effort. (Governor Bob Ray of Iowa is its current Chairman.) This group can assist in the identification of priority problem areas and suggest workable reforms. It will be called upon periodically to help select targets and provide reactions to possible improvements. B. White House/OMB Advisory Group An ad hoc advisory group within the White House, formed to provide policy guidance for the program, and to act as a coordinative group vis-a-vis related projects and efforts, will be convened periodically. Members of the group will consist of representatives from the Domestic Council, OMB, and other selected White House staff units. - 11 - On occasion, the Advisory Commission on Intergovern- mental Affairs, the Productivity Commission, and other outside resources may be of advisory assistance. TIMETABLE FOR ACTION The program will be implemented in three phases. Phase I is the period between now and June 30, during which: The Cabinet will be briefed, agency resources assigned to the program, and individual agency plans of action drafted and reviewed. Specific program targets will be identified and selected; initial con- sultation with the New Coalition and other advisory groups will also occur during this period. Working plans will be drafted for updating procedures for regulation comment and review. Inter-agency groups will be organized as needed to attack high-priority cross- agency regulations. Phase II begins with the implementation of the individual agency reform plans and will run through the remainder of the year. Initial results of this phase should begin ap- pearing by September 1. Phase III, which will begin sometime during Phase II, will focus on expanding this effort to other programs and instituting the improved procedures for the review of new program regulations prior to their issuance. B ATTACHMENT B GERALD FORD LIBRARY MEMORANDUM FOR: THE HONORABLE Secretary of FROM: JAMES T. CONNOR SUBJECT: Government-to-Government Regulations Reform Program The President has directed the implementation of a program aimed at relieving state and local governments of the growing burden of excessive Federal public assis- tance program regulations. This effort is an important and integral part of the President's overall regulatory reform program. It is designed to support and build upon the individual departmental and agency reform pro- grams already underway, providing central coordination and integration of the overall effort. The program has three stated objectives: 1. Implementation of reform measures for a select number of regulatory problem areas, identified as the most onerous for state and local governments, and adaptable to prompt administrative re- form. 2. Establishment of uniform guidelines within the Executive Branch for con- sultation, review and comment by state and local officials concerning proposed new regulations, and Secre- tarial review and analysis prior to promulgation. 3. Initiation of an on-going reform program to encompass additional Federal assistance programs impacting on state and local governments. - 2 - Attached as Tab A is the plan outlining this effort, which includes the following key elements: Primary responsibility for program results to rest with the department and agency heads, who are tasked with drafting and implementing individual agency plans. Immediate attention to focus on selected priority problem areas, with initial reform results by September 1. Program targets to include regulations and procedures for the existing block grants, selected categorical programs, and procedures for comment and review of new regulations. Consultation with and participation by representative state, county and local government officials in the program. Joint Domestic Council/OMB program management and oversight. The President has requested full support and participation by members of the Cabinet and heads of the independent agencies in this effort, and specifically requests the following actions be taken: 1. Appointment of a high-level subordinate with direct access to the department heads, to act as the departmental con- tact with the White House management group and as the in-house program director. 2. Preparation of a departmental plan of action based on the guidelines outlined in the attached plan and provided by the White House management group in a meeting scheduled for . Plans should be ready for review by . - 3 - 3. Commitment of sufficient personnel and resources to insure substantive reforms in the selected target areas, with initial results evident by September 1, 1976. The President recognizes the differences in program administration and regulatory practices among the various departments and agencies, and thus is giving maximum responsibility to agency heads to design and implement efforts tailored to individual agency re- quirements. White House oversight will provide necessary program coordination, inter-agency coopera- tion and policy guidance. White House oversight will be a joint Jim Lynn/Jim Cannon responsibility, with general direction of the effort assigned to Special Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs, Steve McConahey, and daily program management provided by Ray Hanzlik of the Domestic Council. ATTACHMENT C BERALD R. FORD LIBRAST PRESIDENTIAL ACTIVITIES Presidential Media Date Event/Location Action Reason Activity Cabinet Meeting Briefing on Kick-off Possible Press (Cabinet Room) Regulatory Reform effort briefing Program Mid-to-late Major Speaking Speech on Publicize Full Coverage June Forum (Before Big Government Regulatory State Legisla- Reform effort ture or similar body) June Meeting of New Discussion Signal priority Press Conference Coalition session with of effort to by New Coalition (White House) group state and local governments ELITE 1. 2. 3. 4 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (May 26, 1976 5. 6_ Office of the Vice President 7. (Washingtoh, D. C.) 8 9. REMARKS OF THE VICE PRESIDENT 10. 11. AT THE 12 NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON REGULATORY REFORM 13 GRAND BALLROOM, L' ENFANT PLAZA HOTEL 14. WASHINGTON, D. C. 15. 16. AT 9:35 P.M. EST 17. 18 19. THE VICE PRESIDENT: I am no longer governor, so you 20. don't have to get up. 21. 22. (Laughter) 23 24 Thank you very much, Mr. Naisbitt, Ms. Shannon, 25. 26 Mr. Smith and ladies and gentlemen. I am honored and delighted 27 to be here. I want to apologize for having held you up, but 28. there was a group of eager members of the media who were 29. interested in last night's developments. So we had a little 30 discussion on the subject. 31. - - 32. These are exciting days, depending on where you 33. stand. But this is the thrill of living in a free country, 34. 35. and we are very fortunate. All I can say is let's keep it 36. that way. 37. 38. Now, I would like to say how delighted I am to 39. welcome you to the National Conference on Regulatory Reform. 40. This subject is dealing with the crucial growth and strength 41. of our economy and, thus, the Nation itself. 42_ 43. 44 Regulatory reform is an area of special concern 45. and interest to me. I think that any of us who have a 46. belief in our system and this Nation cannot help but have a 47. deep concern. 48 49. I would like to say that, while we are discussing 50. 51 here largely the business aspect, productivity in business, 52. as one who served for a number of years in local government, 53. -- that is, the State of New York--- regulatory reform is 54__ equally important relating to State and local government. 55.- 56. While it is not in my text and not in your concern, 57. there are 1,007 categorical grants that the Federal Govern- 58. ment gives to State and local government, local agencies, 59. 60__ each one of which has Congressional legislative restrictions 61. and then Administrative restrictions, and they are constantly 62. changed, and each one of which says that the State must 63. enrich and improve its program in order to get the funds from 64 the Federal Government. So if you feel you are set upon 65. in business, just remember that governors and mayors and 66_ county executives and local legislators also are suffering 67 the same fate. 68. 69. 70. I was talking to a head of a Latin American state 71 and I said, "We are increasingly beginning to feel we 72_ represent foreign governments at the State level in the 73. United States." So we sympathize with you and your problem. 74. 6 75. That is not part of ⁵my discussion this morning, 76. 77. but this is such a sympathetic audience, I couldn't help 78_ mentioning a subject that is člose to my heart. 79 MORE 80. 81 MIMEO TOP EDGE PARER GUIDE READ INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE TYPING TOP EDGE PAPER GUIDE 0 310 210 110 PICA 110 10 20 210 30 40 50 310 FELL 1119 60 111170 24 48 6011111 316 214 1/2 72 ELITE 181111 12 24 316 1. 1 2. 122 3. .3 4. Page 2 4 5. 5 6 As many of you may kinow, I have the pleasure of 6 7. serving as Chairman of the National Center for Productivity .7 8. and the Quality of Working Life, which is the new name the 8 9. Congress has given it. They have given it a new life, a 19 10. new name, but as yet have not appropriated any money, which 10 11. 11 12_ is sort of standard procedure these days. But you know 12 13. how life is. 13 14. 14 15. (Laughter) 15 16. 16 17. Excuse my side comments. 17 18_ 1218 19. 19 20. (Laughter) 20 21. 10.21 22. In carrying out its |legislative mandate to help 22 23. increase this Nation's productivity, the Center has chosen .23 24_ regulatory refarm as an area for major concentration of its _24 25. efforts. 25 26. 26 27. 27 28. Industry by industry, the Center is organizing 15.28 29. task forces made up of management, labor, government regula- .29 30_ tors and economic and other experts involved in a particular _30 31. industry. These. task forces will attempt to 'identify the 31 32. objectives for the area. 32 33. .33 34. I happen to feel very strongly myself that this 34 35. 36_ is an important factor, that SO many of our regulatory 35 _36 37. agencies have been in existence for 100 years or more with- 37 38. out reviewing the objectives for which they were created, 38 39. sort of a natural evolution of growth without taking a fresh .39 40. look. 40 41. 41 42_ If you take the aviation industry, for instance, _42 43. one could ask, should our objective be to have an Air Canada 43 44. in the United States or do we want to preserve private 44 45. 45 46. enterprise in the field? If so, what does it take to do it? 46 47. Then you start from there and then you start to work back- 47 48_ wards. _48 49. 49 50. So if we are going to review regulatory activities, .50 51. 52. we have got to know what is the objective of the regulation, 51 what is our national interest, and how do we achieve it. 52 53. And then you work back from that and come to the second -- 53 54_ _64 55. that is, identify the industry's major problems stemming 55 56. from regulation; third, document the impact of regulation .56 57. on the industry; and fourth, make recommendations for 57 58. regulatory reform to improve productivity in that industry 58 59. with an eye to maximizing natìonal objectives in the area. .59 60_ 2 _60 61. Now, this seems so simple that one wonders why .61 62. 63. one hasn't approached it on this basis before. But let's .62 _63 64. face it, if you have got an ongoing program of regulation _64 65. in one area or another or an ongoing program in most any .65 66_ area, those involved don't automatically by themselves _66 67. tend to step away and take a fresh look at what they are .67 68. trying to do and where they are and then reexamine what .68 69 70. they are doing in the light of that. .69 70 71. .71 72 I think we have got the momentum to dolit, and I 72 73. think the American people, whether it is in government or 73 74. whether it is in business, private enterprise, or whether _74 75. it is even -- it is very interesting. held hearings .75 76. for the President around the country last fall and winter .76 77 77 78 78 30 20 110 PICA 10 20 30 110 1111 40 210 50 310 60 24 36 7,0 316 112 ELITE 1/2 214 3811111 316 1. .1 2. 2 3. 4. Page 3 .3 4 5. I .5 6 in connection with his domestic programs and policies through _6 7. the Domestic Council. We found that universally people were .7 8. worried about the complexities of bureaucrati'c red tape in .8 9. Washington. And that went for governors, heads of corpora- _9 10. tions, heads of labor unions right to welfare recipients, .10 11. who were equally indignant about the indignities they .11 12 _12 13. suffered and the uncertainties. 13 14. .14 15. So I think this is s'omething that has the total .15 16. attention of the American people, and they are looking to .16 17. all of us to see how do we deal with this problem intel- _17 18_ ligently in the best national interests and do it efficiently. 18 19 20 This country is known for efficiency, and I don't see why 19 .20 21. we shouldn't apply it in this area. .21 22. .22 23. I am optimistic that this is the psychological .23 24 moment to approach this. And I think the Productivity _24 25. Center is one of the vehicles which can be very helpful _25 26. and useful in this. .26 27. .27 28. 29. Now, because these task forces will be made up .28 _29 30_ of the people directly dealing with government regulation, _30 31. the people on the regulatory front line in a particular 31 32. industry, I have great confidence in the realism and the _32 33. relevance of the recommendations they are going to make. .33 34. .34 35. I might say parenthetically that I had the .35 36 privilege of being Chairman of a commission created by the 36 37. .37 38. Congress to review the 1972 Water Quality Regulations, .38 39. which had five Senators, five (Congressmen and five citizens .39 40. on the commission. We worked Ifor three years, spent 40 41. $15 million of your taxpayers' money and found some very 41 42_ interesting things about the impact of the 1977 standards, 42 43. the 1983 standards and the 1985 goal of no pollutants in .43 44. 44 45. navigable waters by that period. 45 46. 46 47. This same could have applied to air quality 47 48 standards. I don't have to mention that when the air 48 49. quality standards on smokestadk emission were applied to 49 50. the foundries of the Nation, that 50 percent of the found- .50 51. ries went into bankruptcy. We found in the electroplating 51 52. 53. industry, if they applied the 1977 standards and the 1983 52 53 54_ standards that are now on the books, 35,000 or the 70,000 54 55. American companies in the elegtroplating business would go 55 56. into bankruptcy, because they 6can't afford to fulfill their 56 57. obligations as set out by the Administration. 57 58. 58 59. So we are dealing in very real terms with the .59 60 _ heart of American life. Many ²Americans, including many in _60 61. 62. government -- particularly in Congress -- don't realize the 61 .62 63. implications of the laws they have passed, administrative .63 64. procedures and particularly the constant change in adminis- .64 65. trative procedures. -65 66_ 66 67. I remember one governor, Governor Dan Evans of 67 68. Washington, told a story when he was testifying before our .68 69. 70. committee, that they had prepared a program -- outstanding 69 .70 71. governor, too. I won't say what party. 71 72_ 72 73. (Laughter) 7 73 74 6 74 75. He had prepared a program asking for a $7 million 75 76. appropriation under some Federal grant in aid program. 76 77. 77 78_ MORE 78 79. 79 80 80 TOP EDGE PAPER GUIDE READ INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE TYPING TOP EDGE PAPER GUIDE 30 210 110 PICA 110 10 20 210 30 40 50 310 1111 60 11120 316 12 4811111 ELITE 12 214 316 1. 1 2. .2 3. 3 4. Page 4 2.4 5. .5 6_ They worked for months. and prepared all the details, sent it _6 7. to Washington and thought theyl had covered every angle. 7 8. They got word, "Sorry; we changed the regulations since you 8 9. prepared your program, so you will have to redo it." That's _9 10. one side of the coin. 10 11. 11 12_ 12 13. He told another side of the story and told how 13 14. they worked out a way to save $1 million. They sent that 14 15. in for approval and they said,| "Sorry; there is no provision 15 16. in the regulations that call for savings." 16 17. 17 18_ (Laughter) 18 19. .19 20. 20 21. So we, really in our zeal to accomplish objectives .21 22. have got ourselves a little bijt tied up, if we can put it .22 23. that way. We have lost a little bit of our flexibility .23 24_ which has been our strength and creativity and freedom of _24 25. America. 25 26. _26 27. 28. Today I would like to approach this whole issue .27 .28 29. of regulatory reform in terms of an historical perspective .29 30_ -- in terms of the forces which have shaped America's growth. _30 31. This is a good year, our 200th birthday. Two hundred years 31 32. ago brave men signed a landmark manifesto not only for _32 33. civil liberty but also for economic freedom. I think this .33 34. is too often overlooked. .34 35. .35 36_ _36 37. Important as it is to commemorate the Declaration .37 38_ of Independence as a landmark for civil rights, it is _38 39. equally important to recognize it as a charter for economic _39 40. freedom and opportunity. .40 41. .41 42_ The Founding Fathers recognized that individual _42 43. liberty required economic freedom, that these two were _43 44. wholly interrelated, and that one could not exist truly _44 45. .45 46. without the other. They knew that human dignity is destroyed 46 47. not alone by suppression of civil rights but also by economic 47 48_ bondage. Our forefathers struggled against a system which _48 49. sought to regulate their industry and commerce to a design .49 50. set in London for the benefit of the British -- no disrespect 50 51. to the British. .51 52. .52 53. 53 54_ (Laughter) _54 55. 7 .55 56. They fought efforts to subject the vast American .56 57. domain and its people to plans that subordinated America's .57 58. growth and American aspirations to the service of an .58 59. oligarchy in a far-off land, England. 59 60_ 2 _60 61. The American Declaration of Independence, and the .61 62. .62 63. American Constitution that followed 13 years later, were not .63 64. only historic milestones of a political revolution. They _64 65. signified a major economic revolution as well, one that .65 66_ challenged government domination of trade, that broke the _66 67. bonds of British mercantilism, that wiped out the remnants _67 68. of feudal land laws imposed upon this country, and set .68 69 loose the forces that ended indentured labor services and .69 70. .70 71. ultimately ended human slavery. 71 72_ _72 73. Two hundred years of human liberty and economic .73 74. freedom produced an American enterprise and social system _74 Z5 that has given ordinary individuals the widest possible _75 76. 76 77. MORE 77 78_ 2 _78 70 for EDGE PAPER CUIDE READ INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE TYPING TOP EDGE PAPER GUIDE 310 210 110 PICA 10 10 20 210 30 40 50 60 310 70 ELITE 214 316 1. 2. .2 3. Page 5 .3 4. _4 5. _5 6_ opportunity under which their drive and productivity have _6 7. achieved the highest standard of living in history. In 1.7 8. these accomplishments, the United States developed a prag- .8 9. 10. matic balance between personal freedom and the common good. _9 10 11. .11 12_ A realistic examination of the history of the 12 13. American enterprise system reveals that it was by no means a _13 14. totally private enterprise endeavor. Government has always .14 15. played not only a significant but a crucial part in American .15 16. economic life. The role involved not alone the negatives of 16 17. restraints but the positives of promotion as well. .17 18_ _18 19. .19 20. This system achieved a productive balance between .20 21. autonomy in enterprise and governmental direction and .21 22. restraints in economic activity. These relationships between 22 23. government and the public have been dynamic, not static, a .23 24 continuing evolution politically and economically. _24 25. _25 26. And if you just want to think for a second, take .26 27. 27 28. the automobile industry, which is one of the greatest .28 29. industries in this country, based on roads built by govern- .29 30_ ment, billions of dollars. One of the other great indus- _30 31. tries in this nation, -the aviation industry, is based on .31 32. research and military plane development and construction. .32 33. The farmers of America have all been related to government .33 34. policies, starting with the land grants, the railroads, _34 35. .35 36_ land grants of property. You go through the whole history _..36 37. of our country and there is a very interesting and exciting 37 38. balance between the government and the private sector. And .38 39. government has never hesitated to do those things which .39 40. would stimulate national objectives and stimulate individuals 40 41. and private enterprise in achieving those objectives. .41 42_ _42 43. 44. Now, how does that balance stand today? Are the _43 .44 45. basic concepts set forth by the Declaration of Independence .45 46. as sound today as they were 200 years ago? The Federal .46 47. Government has played an extraordinarily constructive and 47 48_ essential role throughout our economic history. The tremen- _48 49 dous dedication of loyal civil servants has made government .49 50. work. And the need for Federal leadership and creative .50 51. 52. initiatives continues. 51 .52 53. 53 54_ Nevertheless, there are growing and legitimate _54 55. claims that a dominant central government in Washington is .55 56. already placing impediments and nonproductive restraints .56 57. upon individual activity, voluntary association and economic 57 58. 58 59. enterprise. And, of course, the one that concerns me most 60_ is the willingness to take risks, the willingness to be .59 _60 61. creative. And that requires a framework of laws within .61 62. which the freedom -- certainly, if you are going to invest .62 63. $100 or $100,000 and you are not sure if the rules of the _63 64. game are going to be changed while you are making the .64 65. investment, you are just not going to make the investment. .65 66_ What I worry about is this is going to have a serious _66 67. effect on the creative dynamic drive of our whole American _67 68. .68 69. enterprise system. 69 70. 70 71. There are those who see a danger that this central _71 72_ government and its bureaucracy -- remote from the great 72 73. productive regions of industry and commerce, remote from the 73 74. farms, factories, mines and márkets, remote from communities .74 75. and their governments -- is enacting laws and laying down _75 76. 76 77. .77 78_ MORE 78 79 MIMEOTYPE 900 MIMEOTYPE YOU MIMEOTYPE you MIMEOTYPE TOP EDGE PAPER GUIDE READ INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE TYPING TOP EDGE PAPER GUIDE 30 210 110 PICA 1111 10 110 210 20 LEEL 30 40 50 310 LITT 1111 60 1111 12 24 ITTTI mm; 11170 GELLIII 316 214 $8111 112 ELITE 12 214 316 1. .1 2. .2 3. .3 4. Page 6 .4 5. .5 6_ edicts that unnecessarily stifle growth and bear little _6 7. relevance to the actual scene .7 8. .8 9. There are those who warn that designs set in _9 10. _10 11. Washington are stifling individual and corporate initiative, 12_ thereby constraining growth, productivity, and the necessary 11 12 13. increase in job opportunities. And so we must ask'ourselves: 13 14. Is there a threat to human liberties today because economic 14 15. freedoms are being restricted, initiative discouraged and .15 16. individual creativity thwarted? 16 17. 17 18_ Here in our own land, we run the risk of falling 18 19. into the trap of thinking that human liberties and economic 119 20. .20 21. freedoms can exist one without the other. They never have .21 22. and they never will. Throughout the world the thrust for 22 23. individual liberty has been challenged and blunted by .23 24_ doctrinaire assertions that edonomic security must be the 24 25. prime object of society. It is held by some that only 25 26. centrally-adopted and centrally-directed planning and 26 27. programming, and implementation by an all-powerful government, 27 28. _28 29. can achieve economic security. 29 30_ _30 31. The risk here in America is not SQ much that we 31 32. will take up the worship of the false gods of totalitarian 132 33. ideologies. It is more that we may drift into Statism by _33 34. government's progressively legislating such overwhelming .34 35. 36_ and detailed responsibilities for the ordering of society .35 37. that liberty will be surrendered in the process. _36 .37 38. .38 39. It was clear in the hearings on domestic policy 39 40. that I held on behalf of President Ford around the country .40 41. that there is a growing concern on the part of people in all _41 42_ walks of life -- that due to a great deal of well-intentioned _42 43. but hastily-enacted legislation, enormous authority has 43 44. 45. already been delegated to a proliferating governmental 44 .45 46. bureaucracy under myriads of statutes, administrative rules. .46 47. and regulations, resulting in a maze of red tape. .47 48_ 48 49. To comply with this ever-changing complex of laws, _49 50. rules, regulations and orders has already become an ever- 50 51. growing burden. It perplexes and inhibits individuals. It .51 52. stymies small business. It stifles initiative and compounds .52 53. the costs of large and small enterprises alike. Even deter- .53 54_ _54 55. mining the proper legal mode of conduct is becoming so com- .55 56. plex as to be unintelligible. 6 .56 57. 5 .57 58. More and more the citizen or his lawyer or both .58 59. must go to the bureaucracy for the answers, and hope that the .59 60_ answers are not contradictory when more than one agency or _60 61. 62. one level of government is involved. We run the danger of .61 _62 63. reaching that stãge at which too many other nations have .63 64. already arrived, where one must go to the offices of the _64 65. particular ministries to find out what the laws are and how .65 66_ they are being interpreted, and to do this periodically _66 67. to be sure that the interpretations are still the same. .67 68. .68 69. The genius of the American system lay in the fact -69 70. 71. that government established a broad framework of policy and .70 .71 72_ law within which individuals, groups and enterprises could _72 73. operate with great flexibility. And that also is true for .73 74 local government. It is timesto reemphasize this essential .74 75. concept to foster a climate within which enterprise, .75 76. individual and voluntary group endeavors are stimulated .76 77. 77 78 DICK AB DICK A B DICK A B DICK MIMEOGRAPH MIMEOGRAPH MIMEOGRAPH MIMEOGRAPH 960 © MIMEOTYPE 960 MIMEOTYPE 960 © MIMEOTYPE 960 © MIMEOTYPE TOP EDGE PAPER GUIDE READ INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE TYPING TOP EDGE PAPER GUIDE 3Ю 2j0 110 PICA 11110 20 110 30 40 20 50 310 60 1111 36 SOTTTI 70 48 0 3/6 24 112 111122211111 ELITE 12 24 #861111 316 1. I _1 2. :2 3. Page 7 .3 4. .4 5. .5 6_ for the productive benefit of all Americans. This does not _6 7. mean a retreat into the past, la scrapping of social progress, _7 8. nor abandonment of goals of equity, fairness and progress, .8 9. It means the development of a framework of law and enlight- .9 10. ened regulation geared to today's needs and tomorrow's .10 11. 11 12_ challenges, that will call into play the energies of the 12 13. American enterprise system, the dynamism of our industry, 13 14. the creativity of our labor, the ingenuity of our science .14 15. and technology. It means that government regulations .15 16. should not only achieve national social goals but should .16 17. also promote productivity and increasing job opportunities _17 18_ 19. rather than hinder them. _18 .19 20. .20 21. Toward that end, I specifically recommend that .21 22. the executive and legislative branches of government, _22 23. together with labor and management, science and technology, .23 24_ should in each area of regulation: _24 25. _25 26. (a) Establish clear national objectives and _26 27. .27 28. criteria for regulations to achieve them; _28 29. .29 30 (b) Determine the effects of regulation, both _30 31. intended and unintended; .31 32. .32 33. This is one of the most serious aspects, that we .33 34. moved so fast in so many areas that we are not clear about .34 35. 36 the potential unintended side effects of these regulations .35 36 37. designed to create certain specific social objectives. 37 38. _38 39. (c) Change, where necessary, existing laws, rules .39 40. and procedures to assure that they are promoting, not .40 41. hindering, the attainment of our overall national objectives. 41 42_ 42 43. 43 44. In the future, any proposed new laws or regulations 44 45. should be made in light of our broad objectives, instead of 45 46. the piecemeal, ever-changing process of the past which has 46 47. hindered productivity and progress. 47 48_ _48 49. Twelve days ago the President sent legislation to 49 50. the Congress that would make a major contribution towards .50 51. .51 52. achieving these ends. This legislation called "The Agenda .52 53. for Government Reform Act" requires the President and the .53 54_ Congress to jointly consider and act on reform proposals 54 55. in each of the next four years. The President would analyze .55 56. the total effects of government regulation on major sectors .56 57. of the economy, and the Congréss would commit to act upon .57 58. 4 .58 59. these proposals. 3 .59 60_ 2 _60 61. By setting forth an agenda for action, we will .61 62. encourage individual Americans in all walks of life -- .62 63. businessmen, workers, consumers, teachers -- to work in 63 64. concert with their government to build a more rational .64 65. regulatory environment. The question is not and should-not .65 66_ 67. be whether government should play an economic role. The _..66 question is how government should be creatively involved in _67 68 68 69. protecting and promoting the freedom, well-being and .69 70. opportunity of American citizens as individuals as well as 70 71 protecting our environment and assuring our national .71 72_ security. _72 73. 7 73 74 In the Declaration of Independence the Founding 74 75 960 © MIMEOTYPE 960 MIMEOTYPE 960 MIMEOTYPE 960 © MIMEOTYPE EDGE PAPER GUIDE READ INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE TYPING OF EDGE-PAPER GUIDE - 310 210 110 10 20 PICA 1111 30 10 40 210 50 310 | TTT 214 316 1. I .1 2. 1.2 3. I 3 4. Page 8 4 5. 1.5 6_ expanding economic opportunity in a boundless America would _6 7. not only provide better living but would be a principal 7 8. guarantee of human freedom. They saw an America that would 8 9. not mandate the life style of its people but encourage them 9 10. to develop their own. They saw an America that looked to 10 11. 111 12_ dynamic economic growth for the future well-being of all. 12 13. 13 14. And I say, at this Bicentennial let us rediscover 14 15. this America. At this conference you can make an important 15 16. contribution toward that rediscovery. _16 17. 17 18 19. I thank you very much for letting me be with you. _18 19 20. 20 21. QUESTION: Mr. Vice President, we have heard a .21 22. great deal of talk here concerning the difference between 22 23. economic and social regulation. If you could address your- 23 24_ self to perhaps the issue of, say, the Environmental Pro- _24 25. 26. tection Agency, is it possible to meet the goals established _25 27. by the EPA, the social goals of a clean and protected environ- 26 27 28. ment, while at the same time not stifling the economic .28 29. ability of business and industry to grow and provide jobs? .29 30_ 30 31. THE VICE PRESIDENT: I -think- the answer is yes, 31 32. if we are realistic and if we are willing to be a little 32 33. flexible. 33 34. 34 35. 35 36_ Just take one case. Everybody said Lake Erie was 36 37. dying and that there was no chance of its ever coming back 37 38. to life again. Don't ask me to explain what it means for .38 39. a lake to die, but neveromind.. Well, what has happened is .39 40. that by the control of sewage disposal in the lake from 40 41. New York and Ohio and surrounding areas, the lake is coming 41 42_ back to life at a very much more rapid rate than anybody _42 43. had anticipated. 43 44. 44 45. 45 46_ One of the things and it is somewhat contro- 46 47. versial, naturally - the 1977 standards which applied --- 47 48_ it is the best practical elimination of pollution, that it, 48 49. may well be that that will go la long way to achieving the 49 50. 1983 standards, wAscalliyoucbusinessmen know, as you .50 51. eliminate anything -- all these curves are the same -- the 51 52. .52 53. bulk of elimination is relatively inexpensive. Then as you .53 54_ get down to the last 20 percent, last 10 percent, the _54 55. curve goes up, and the last 10 percent may cost you more .55 56. than the first 90 percent to eliminate. .56 57. 18.57 58. Se we may be in a pdsition where we can achieve .58 59. 60_ social goals and not put this inordinate burden on the -59 productivity of our country. _60 61. 1.61 62. - 62 63. Now, there is a fascinating thing; I happen to .63 64. live in New York, and Con Ed has built two atomic power .64 65. plants and they are now in the process of trying to be able -65 66_ to build a third. This water goes into the Hudson River _66 67. from their cooling operation. It does heat the water, and 67 68. 69. this is a very controversial issue about the fish. 68 -69 70 .70 71 So they have come up with a plan to avoid putting 71 72_ hot water into the Hudson because some fish, when they 72 73. first put it in, are killed. Although, I have to say to 73 74 you, one of the best fishing spots is where the hot water 74 75. comes in from the atomic power plants. We changed one on 75 76 76 77 77 MIMEOTYPE MIMEOTYPE TOP EDGE PAPER GUIDE READ INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE TYPING TOP EDGE PAPER GUIDE 0 310 210 110 PICA 10 LETTER 1111 10 1111 20 1111 1111 30 210 LLL 1111 40 LLLI LILL 50 1111 310 REFI 60 mm TTTI mm 60m 11170 0 316 24 112 ELITE 72 12 214 316 1. I I 1 2. .2 3. .3 4. Page 9 4 5. 5 6_ the lake on Lake Erie and all the fish died after we took 6 7. the hot water out. .7 8. 8 9. (Laughter) _9 10. .10 11. 11 12_ So this is one of the exciting things, three sides _12 13. to every coin. But they have come up with a plan to meet 13 14. this problem of not putting the hot water into the Hudson. 14 15. They have got a cooling tower that is 1,000 feet tall, that 15 16. is 600 feet across the base, that is about 60 stories and 16 17. 300 feet across, the top. It puts steam up another 1,500 17 18_ 19. feet, so that is 2,500 feet sticking up in the air. _18 19 20. .20 21. When I was governor we set up a commission to 21 22. protect the beauty of the Hudson River Valley. Well, this 22 23. has got to be the most unbeautiful and monstrosity that ever .23 24 happened. Now you have got a question of aesthetic pol- _24 25. lution, but you have got another problem. 25 26. .26 27. 28. We have a variableiclimate in New York, and in 27 .28 29. the fall and spring you get that point where it is just at .29 30_ the freezing point. Now, you put tons of water up in the _30 31. air in the form of vapor in_a period when it is freezing 31 32. - some of you have been in ice storms -- and that comes .32 33. down on the highways and freezes. We may have the most .33 34. serious highway proglem of accidents because of skidding -34 35. 36_ on the highway. So these are the very questions you are .35 _36 37. asking about. 37 38. _38 39. Now, this thing gets| back to how flexible can we _39 40_ be in this society? And I don't blame the ecologists, and 40 41. I have a tremendous admiration for them. They have made .41 42_ a tremendous contribution to our country, and they have had 42 43. a tough battle to fight and they have won tremendous 43 44 44 45. victories. But we have gotten to a point where people have 45 46. gotito have a little flexibility. 46 47. 47 48_ Their rigidity was what made it possible for them 48 49. to make the gains. But if they maintain the rigidity, I 49 50. think we are going to find we are going to pay a very 50 51. serious price in this country and not serve the long-term 51 52. best interests. 52 53. 53 54_ 54 55. With science and technology there is no problem .55 56. relating to pollution we cannot solve. We may not be able 56 57. to do it yesterday or today, but it will be easier to do .57 58. it tomorrow when the scientists have had a little more time. .58 59. We can balance these things out. I have total confidence .59 61. we can do both. And the research ought to be done together 60 not separately, so you don't det these clashes which result .61 62. 62 63. in the blocking of any progress. .63 64. .64 65. QUESTION: Mr. Rockefeller, what is your opinion 65 66 of Senator Muskie's so-called Sunset proposal, which would 66 67. require regular review of the functions of regulatory 67 68. agencies? Do you support such legislation? .68 69. .69 70. 70 71. THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I support regular 71 72 review of regulatory agencies. I hope the Sunset isn't for 72 73. New England. 7 73 74. 6 74 75 (Laughter) 5 75 76. 4 76 77 MORE 77 78 78 960 960 960 © MIMEOTYPE MIMEOTYPE MIMEOTYPE 960 © MIMEOTYPE TOP EDGE PARER GUIDE READ INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE TYPING TOP EDGE-PAPER GUIDE 310 210 110 PICA 10 20 110 30 40 210 LILL 1111 50 310 1111 LEE 60 12 3611111 48'1'11 1111160 70 3/6 214 112 ELITE 112 214 to 316 1. I I _1 2. 2 3. Page 10 3 4. 4 5. .5 6_ I hadn't heard about! that, and I don't know what _6 7. the Sunset means. But I am for regular review of regulatory .7 8. agencies. .8 9. _9 10. He and I served on this commission together, and .10 11. 12_ I am a great admirer of his. He and I are both Mainiacs. .11 12 13. That means we were both born in Maine. .13 14. 14 15. (Laughter) .15 16. .16 17. I like the idea of regular review of regulatory 17 18_ agencies, but I don't understand the Sunset business. _18 19. 19 20. 20 21. QUESTION: I asked a question of Dr₁. Friedman and 21 22. Mr. Nader last night on which there was an evasive answer .22 23. given. 23 24_ _24 25. THE VICE PRESIDENT: 26. I wouldn't have thought 25 Mr. Nader was evasive. 26 27. 27 28. .28 29. QUESTION: He didn't get a chance to answer. He .29 30_ was monopolized by Dr. Friedman. I got a cnance to read a 30 31. little more on the theme of- the question in last night's _31 32. paper. I will read you the two paragraphs. .32 33. .33 34. 35. "Agencies find themselves pulled from one crisis 34 to another with little time to look ahead or behind. 35 36_ 36 37. Traditional lack of emphasis on long-term chronic dangers, 37 38. Regulatory emphasis has generally been on the obvious _38 39. short-term problems rather than the more invisible ones .39 40. such as cancer." .40 41. _41 42_ This gets back to my question of last night. In _42 43. 44. anticipatory management how would you instill that, sir? 43 44 45. 45 46. I am very, very sympathetic to what you are 46 47. saying. I am a great believer in long-range planning. You 47 48_ can't do anything in less than five years, probably ten 48 49. years. So you have got to plan. 49 50. 50 51. The public likes to have things done, as I said, 51 52. .52 53. yesterday or today, which is impossible, and we waste a lot .53 54_ of money when we try to do them. _54 55. 7 55 56. Now, John Glenn, who was an astronaut, when he was .56 57. a Senator and he is a great believer of this -- through .57 58. the Government Operations in the Senate, called a hearing on 158 59. 60_ long-range planning in government, which is what you are .59 61. talking about. He asked Senator Humphrey and myself to be _60 .61 62. the first witnesses, both of us being very much interested .62 63. in this subject. There were a distinguished group of .63 64. Senators there and a large group of public. _64 65. .65 66_ I went and Senator Humphrey was there for the _66 67. 68. pictures and then he got called off. 67 .68 69. 70. (Laughter) .69 .70 71. 1-71 72_ So I am testifying and one Senator after another _72 73. had to slip off to a committee meeting and so forth. Now 73 74. we are down to John Glenn and ⁶myself and the public. Every- _74 75. thing was going well and then one of his aides came over .75 76. .76 77 TO? EDGE PAPER/GUIDE READ INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE TYPING TOP EDGE PAPER GUIDE 310 210 110 PICA 10 20 30 40 210 50 310 50 11170 316 214 112 ELITE 12 214 48,1111 316 1. .1 2. .2 3. Page 11 .3 4. .4 5. -5 6_ and whispered in his ear. He said, "Please forgive me. _6 7. There is a roll call. 11 1/7 8. .8 9. So I stood up and turned around and I spoke to _9 10. the audience, a very sympathet ic audience. I said, "Now .10 11. you understand why there is no longer any long-term plan- .11 12_ _12 13. ning in government. Nobody has time to sit still long 13 14 enough to think." I don't mean to say "think," but "to plan." 14 15. _15 16. They think while they are on the run. And this 16 17. is really the problem. Everybody is running from one .17 18_ crisis, one roll call, one committee meeting to another. 18 19. And this is really very serious. This is why the Commission 19 20. .20 21. on Critical Choices for Americans -- because I deeply believe .21 22. the only way we can intelligently reflect on our best long- .22 23. term interests is to get views from people in all walks of _23 24_ life, thrashed these things out. And there isonothing we cań't _24 25. do in this country if we set our minds to it. _25 26. _26 27. 28. I am totally in agreement with you, and that when .27 29. you are talking about something ten years from now, there _28 .29 30. isn't the same danger of confrontation that you have when _30 31. you are talking about something today where everybody is .31 32. upset. But ten years from now we have got time to work it .32 33. out, reconcile differences, find new solutions and do it on .33 34. a sound basis. So I am delighted with your question and .34 35. totally in agreement with you. .35 36_ _36 37. .37 38. I will take one more over here. _38 39. .39 40. QUESTION: Mr. Vice President, I believe that _40 41. periodic review of agency purposes is desirable. As a _41 42_ practical matter, how much do you thinkait maccomplish in _42 43. the vested interest in the agencies? 43 44. 44 45. 45 46. THE VICE PRESIDENT: Don't limit it to the vested _46 47. interest in the people of the agencies. There are vested 47 48_ interests on the Hill, in stafifs, in members of the Congress _48 49. who sponsor programs very popular at home, and there are 149 50. vested interests in every group. .50 51. _51 52. .52 53. Therefore, the only way this can be done, in my .53 54_ opinion, is to bring in all of the interested parties -- _54 55. business, labor, executive branch, legislative branch -- to 55 56. sit down to say, "Where do we ewant to be in this industry? 56 57. What are our objectives?" 5 .57 58. 4 _58 59. Now, we have grown up under what many people feel -59 60_ 61. is a free market system and that the government hasn't had _60 .61 62. anything to do with it. Well, of course, they are really .62 63. wrong, because government does have a lot to do with these .63 64. things. But we don't think of it that way. _64 65. -65 661 Therefore, the first thing we have got to do is _66 67. recognize government has a leditimate role and that that -67 68. role should be creative and stimulative in terms of .68 69. .69 70. incentives and penalties as well as regulatory in terms of .70 71. protecting people's interests and this balance we have .71 72_ found. _72 73. .73 74. Now, I think it is time we did this more con- _74 75. sciously, because life has gotten much more complicated. _75 76. We are totally interdependent "on the rest of the world _76 77. not totally, but extremely interdependent -- and change 77 78 _ 1_78 79231 MORE 1.79 s DICK A.B DICK DO A.B DICK A.B.DICK MIMEOGRAPH MIMEOGRAPH MIMEQGRAPH MIMEOGRAPH 960 © MIMEOTYPE 960 © 960 © MIMEOTYPE MIMEOTYPE. 960 © MIMEOTYPE TOP EDGE PAPER GUIDE READ INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE TYPING TOP EDGE-PAPER GUIDE - 0 310 210 110 PICA 10111 1120 110 LITT 30 1111 40 210 LLI 501111 310 1111 60 4811111 0 316 214 12 ELITE 12 TITLE 70 214 316 1. I I .1 2. 12 3. I Page 12 .3 4. .4 5. I 1.5 6_ is moving very rapidly. I think you cannot have just an _6 7. agency of government reexamine its own program because - 1.7 8. you are absolutely right -- they have got a vested interest. .8 9. Now can you take a regulatory agency, which is like a hothouse, _9 10. 11. plant, and take it out of the greenhouse and put it in the _10 .11 12_ snow and expect it to live. This has got to be something _12 13. done with intelligence. 13 14. .14 15. I think this is a very exciting challenge to our .15 16. country and that it would be very stimulating and very _16 17. worthwhile for all of us to consciously think together as .17 18_ to what we want to accomplish, how we can do it, how we can _18 19. 20. maximize our extraordinary resources, talents, abilities, .19 .20 21. both human and natural, in this country and restore our .21 22. strength at home and our leadership and ability to meet our .22 23. responsibilities in the world. .23 24_ _24 25. I thank you very much. _25 26. _26 27. I END (AT 10:12 A.M. EST) .27 28. .28 29. .29 30_ _30 31. .31 32. .32 33. .33 34. -34 35. .35 36_ _36 37. .37 38. _38 39. .39 40. _40 41. _41 42_ _42 43. _43 44. 244 45. 10.45 46. .46 47. _47 48_ _48 49. _49 50. .50 51. .51 52. .52 53. .53 54_ _54 55. 7 .55 56. 6 .56 57. 5 .57 58. 4 _58 59. 3 .59 60_ 2 _60 61. 1 .61 62. - - - I 1 - 0 - - I I - - _62 63. .63 64. _64 65. I .65 66_ _66 67. 67 68. .68 69 .69 70 6/5/76 Art -Exallet with idea - could megs THE WHIREHOUSE MA group the To WASHINGTON 5 wost hoted June 1, 1976 equlations? MEMORANDUM FOR: JIM CANNON ED SCHMULTS Jun PAUL McAVOY PAUL LEACH FROM: ART QUERN ThoCQ SUBJECT: Regulatory Reform As we have discussed, until recently we have not been able to generate real interest or attention for the President's regulatory reform program. It occurred to me that one possible way of approaching this would be to pursue reform by focusing our attention on the "institutional" targets of regulation such as: --- universities -- hospital -- banks -- farmers This would mean that an effort parrallel to the broad review occurring in the departments would be initiated to examine all Federal regulations and paperwork requirements which impact on universities. Another effort could focus on hospitals, etc. Each review would be from the point of view of the effected "institution" and would deal with all Federal regulations affecting that institution no matter what department they originate from. I would be pleased to discuss this with you if you think it worthwhile. Reg Reform COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS WASHINGTON ALAN GREENSPAN, CHAIRMAN July 20, 1976 PAUL W. MACAVOY BURTON G. MALKIEL DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT FROM: Paul W. MacAvoy pm SUBJECT: Status of Task Forces to Improve Government Regulation Presidential Task Forces in OSHA, FEA, and the Export Administration are now at work revising present regulations. Each has a somewhat different objective and time schedule. But it is expected that at least preliminary indications of improved regulatory procedures or practices will be available before Labor Day. OSHA Task Force The Task Force working with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) of the Department of Labor began operations on July 1 under the direction of Philip Harter of the Administrative Conference and Joseph Kirk of the Department of Labor. The immediate goal of the Task Force is to recommend revisions and simplifications in the regulations pertaining to machinery, machine guarding, and hand held power tools. The Task Force is currently reviewing each regulation line-by-line to determine why it is required, what effect it is having, and what alternative ways there are to accomplish its goals. The results of this effort will be an analysis of the regulation and a proposal for its revision. The document containing the analysis and proposed changes has to then appear in the Federal Register as an invitation for the public to express its ideas on how to revise the regulations. After public comments have been received, the officials of OSHA will consider the work of the Task Force and will then propose and adopt appropriate revisions in the regulations. The general approach of the Task Force to date has been to consider moving towards regulatory criteria based more on performance or results and less on physical conditions in REVOLUTION the work place. One way of doing this is to put in place AMERICAN BICENTENNIAL FORD is LIBRARY 0ERALD 1776-1976 ® -2- general requirements with currently used detailed physical design regulations being listed only as examples of ways of complying with the general requirements. In that way, business, labor and enforcement officers would have guidance as to what is required but would be free to determine other ways of providing the requisite level of safety. FEA Task Force Effort is underway to improve and simplify FEA regulations on prices and sales allocations for refined products. A Task Force directed by Donald Flexner of the Department of Justice comprised of nineteen professionals, including lawyers, economists, and regulation specialists, has commensed research with FEA's cooperation to determine the extent to which current FEA regulation of refined products has achieved the economic and social purposes intended under the governing statutes. On the basis of that analysis the Task Force will consider alternative modes of regulation for potential future application. The current timetable for research is to have a draft report by September 30, 1976, recommendations by October 31, 1976, receipt of FEA comments by the middle of November, and recommendations of final report on or before December 10, 1976. Export Administration Task Force The Task Force on the Administration of Export Controls has now been established under the auspices of the Export Administration Review Board which is chaired by the Secretary of Commerce. The Task Force will review the procedures and mechanisms involved in interagency consultation respecting export license applications. The goal is to identify and institute such improvements as are necessary to enable license applications to be processed within ninety days. Significant improvements in the Office of Export Administration have already been made as the result of an intensive management review in the Department of Commerce. The Task Force will extend these efforts with an analysis of the interagency review of export applications, particularly in the areas of computer and other electronic equipment, numerically controlled machine tools, and nuclear related equipment which have required the longest processing in the past. FORD & GERALD LIBRARY -3- The Task Force Director is Carl Hystad, formerly with OMB, and the Deputy Director is Major James Golden, USA, currently on temporary duty with the Council of Economic Advisers from his position as Associate Professor of Economics at the Military Academy. The Task Force includes two other members from agencies which are not involved in the application review process, and five members representing the principal agencies involved in interagency review (DOD, ERDA, Commerce, State, and CIA). Administrative support for The Task Force is being supplied by the Department of Commerce. The Task Force has already begun screening Export Administration files to document delays, interviewing key personnel in the application review process, and discussing problems with industry representatives. A preliminary report outlining major problem areas is scheduled for the end of July, and the final report with recommendations for new procedures will be submitted in September. & FORD GERALD LIBRARY THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON July 30, 1976 MEMORANDUM FOR: PHIL BUCHEN JIM CANNON DICK CHENEY DAVE GERGEN BOB HARTMANN JACK MARSH BILL SEIDMAN FROM: ED SCHMULTS SUBJECT: Regulatory Reform Attached is a column that I have sent to the National Association of Manufacturers for inclusion in a special regulation issue of NAM reports. The column outlines the Administration's approach to regulatory reform. Attached also are two recent one-page articles from the National Journal on airline reform and "Busing-Big Government Link" which may be of interest. FORD & LIBRARY GERALD National Association of Manufacturers Report - Special Regulation Issue The Administration's Approach to Regulatory Reform The Ford Administration is firmly committed to achieving fundamental reform of our nation's regulatory system which, over the years, has become sluggish, self-serving, and stereotyped. Almost two years ago, President Ford announced his intention to eliminate regulatory inefficiency as a part of the effort to halt inflation. His goal was not de-regulation but rather the development of a more enlightened, streamlined regulatory system which better serves the economic and social needs of modern society. Since that time, the American people have become increasingly aware of the unnecessary costs and inequities produced by the present system and as a result, some significant progress has been made towards reform. For example, in the past 8 months, we have reduced the number of Federal forms by more than 12.5% and we are now working to reduce the burden which Federal paperwork requirements places upon the American public. We have successfully encouraged the major independent regulatory agencies to improve their regulatory practices. In the past year they have made notable progress in reducing costly regulatory delay, improving economic analysis and placing greater reliance on market competition as a regulatory tool. One agency has even asked Congress to legislatively reduce its regulatory authority so that natural competitive forces are allowed to operate. Throughout the Executive Branch, the Administration has worked hard to make decision-makers more aware of the consequences of their actions. Agencies are required to analyze the economic impact of their regulatory actions before they are put into effect. And actions are being taken to increase public participation in regulatory proceedings. In addition, the President has established several short-term task forces to re-write and simplify existing regulations and streamline regulatory procedures in the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the Federal Energy Administration and the Commerce Department's Export Administration. These task forces have been directed by the President to make it easier for businessmen and consumers to deal with government requirements. FORD & GERALD LIBRARY 2 On the legislative front, we have also made some progress. Federal laws sanctioning State fair trade laws have been repealed. Fixed rates for securities brokerage commissions have been abolished. Federal regulation of railroad rates has been reduced, and civil and criminal penalties for antitrust violations have been increased. In addition, the Administration is continuing to press for congressional action on proposals to reform airline, motor carrier, banking and natural gas regulations. But progress does not come easily. While recognition of regulatory problems is bipartisan and widespread, agree- ment on specific issues and solutions is less clear. At every step, specific reform attempts are met with sharp and vocal opposition from a variety of interests seeking to preserve the status quo. In some cases, even asking the question "Is there a better way" evokes sharp protests and further progress toward meaningful reform is forestalled. The real question facing both the Administration and Congress is not the need for reform but whether or not current public indignation and concern over government inefficiency can be translated into productive and lasting reform. Too often in the past, we have been content with organizational or procedural solutions to complex economic or social problems. But the Administration believes the American people can no longer afford to accept rhetoric as a substitute for results. Therefore, President Ford has proposed to Congress the Agenda for Government Reform Act which would guarantee the systematic re-examination and reform of Federal regulatory activities within the next four years. This legislation requires Con- gress and the President to agree to undertake a fundamental reassessment of the combined effects of all government regu- lations on individual sectors of the economy. And it requires them to adhere to a disciplined timetable to assure annual results. We believe this plan will produce several desirable results. First, it will enable Congress and the Administration to focus on the real-world consequences of their decisions. It will foster increased public understanding of the costs and ineffic- iencies of regulation and help to build an active public con- stituency for change. Consumers, businessmen, workers, and academics will have a better idea of what Government is trying to do and be able to plan and participate accordingly. Finally, this legislation will help assure concrete results. This Administration is serious about reform. The present system demands fundamental change. The American people deserve no less. LIBRARY GERALD R. FORD REGULATORY FOCUS/RICHARD E. COHEN FORD is LIBRARY GERAL Up, Up and Away with Airline Reform REGULATORY FOCUS/LOUIS M. KOHLMEIER The Busing-Big Government Link LIBRARY GERALD R. FORD