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
4525975
label
Virginia Municipal League Convention, Richmond, VA, September 18, 1966
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4525975
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Virginia Municipal League Convention, Richmond, VA, September 18, 1966
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Speeches
subjects
Revenue sharing
Urban policy
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4525975
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1966-09-30
month
9
year
1966
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1966-09-01
month
9
year
1966
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
36124415db060b6c
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D21, folder "Virginia Municipal League
Convention, Richmond, VA, September 18, 1966" of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press
Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. The Council donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box D21 of The Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
Congress is working on truth-in-packaging
legislation this year. Speaking of
mislabeling, wouldn't the dollar be a good
place to start?
GERALD FORD
LIGHT TOUCHES FOR RICHMOND
You know, of course, that there are some people in Washington who
think the way to solve every problem is just to appropriate a few more
millions of dollars.
That reminds me of something Admiral Rickover once told the House
Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, b ac k when I was XIII a member of ttx that
groups
Said Rickover, commenting on Washington habitax of spending problems
out of existence: "If the Soviet Undon announced they were going to send a
BERRAD FORD (IBRAR,
man to Hell, there would be at least two government agencies before the
Appropriations Committees of the Congress demanding that the funds to make sure
we got there first."
JOKE FOR RICHMOND
I'm not going to talk too long because I too have suffered at the hands
of speakers EMEREX entranced with the sound of their own voices.
You may have heard of the deaf old couple who were sitting out on their
porch one evening. The old man tried to tell his wife how much hex appreciated
all she had done for him during his lifetime. XXRX Being deaf, she could not
understand shayzhsxwx what he was trying to say. Finally, he shouted as loudly
as he could, "I'm proud of you." And she answered, "I'm tired of you, too."
--Well, I'm not going to ramble on and on and gmixthatzkindxx risk that kind
of reports response from you.
FORD
JOKE FOR RICHMOND
)
One of rh the problems we have with spending cutbacks in Congress is
that everybody wants to give the ax to somebody else's project but not his
own.
Whenever I want to emphasize that point I tell the story of the fellow
who was sitting in a restaurant and saw a thief grab his coat off the rack and
run off with it. The diner dashedment out into the street and called a
policemen. Both of them started running after the thief. The policeman
ordered the thief to halt but he kept right on going. "Shoot him, "shoatxhimy*
the coat-owner shouted "Shoot him--in the pants."
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
SEPT. 18, 1968
Congress of the United States
Office of the Minority Leader
Herald R. Ford
house of Representatives
M.C.
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
Sun, SEPT. 18
SPEECH CARDS
VA. MunicipAL LEAGUE
RICHMOND, VA.
REMARKS of U.S. S. nator Robert P. Griffin
Before the Michigan Municipal League, Convention
September 9, 1966
The theme of your convention this week is a fitting one.
During the past few years, the nation's attention has focused increasingly
on the ailments and problems of our urban centers; and this means, of
course, that the nation's attention is focused on you, the men and
women who make up the leadership of our municipal governments.
On your shoulders rest innumerable burdens, and I am not
at all sure that you will thank me for proposing here today that we
seriously consider giving you even more power and more responsibility.
When the majority of our urban grant programs were con-
ceived, over a decade ago, City Hall still had a reputation for being
an overtly political center, unconcerned with problems of blight and
poverty. Old-line politicians ruled the roost; and few of them really
understood the need for urban revitalization.
Consequently, the salvaging of our cities was a remote-
control operation from the beginning. Federal officiašdominated
BERAL the FORD LIBRARY
-2-
actual planning; and Federal decisions on specific problems generally
overruled alternative proposals offered up by local officials.
Very few local authorities in those days had the self-
confidence to challenge Washington's expertise on urban matters --
although, as we know now, Washington was usually bluffing during
those early years. The fact is that in an area totally without
precedent no one quite knew what he was doing.
As the years passed, Federal domination in all aspects of
urban reform hardened into orthodoxy. If a city wanted Federal funds,
it had to accept Federal regulations, a maze of paperwork, plenty of
red tape and tight supervision. But this was often the best way. The
post-war grants-in-aid programs coincided with the Last Hurrah of
the
the
AGENCIES
courthouse politics - - and Federal looked upon
local officials as politicians who understood nothing of the renewal
process.
We still have some flagrant examples of crassly political
local governments. It is, for example, debatable as to which entity
is more uneasily governed: The city of Chicago or the Congo
Republic
But for the most part, the municipalities are no longer the
naughty orphans of our political system. The cost-accountant has re-
placed the political hack; the precinct boss has been supplanted by the
specialist in urban planning. Serious and dedicated men have come
into municipal government with ideas of their own about the future --
and their appearance has revolutionized politics on the grassroots
level.
know in fact of no city where this is more evident than
lo
here 1.1 Detroit, whe Mayor Jerry Cavamigh has proven himself an
the I'm certain that every
one in this room today is mindful of the Mayor's recent attempis to
lo
FORD LIBRARY AR
send our 431M SIN pup anim aw HIM Haswin
What I am suggesting is that we have, either actually or
potentially, more able and more imaginative officials in our state
and municipal governments than we have in the various Executive
departments of the Federal government.
The reasons for this are not difficult to find:
The cities, both great and small, are becoming magnets for
talented city planners, architects and management experts. And the
cities are also able to draw on the great resources and talent within
the community itself.
So what we are stuck with in the year 1966, if you will
pardon a gruesome metaphor, is a rather unimaginative federal tail
wagging a very restless urban dog. The cities are now capable of
generating their own solutions in ways that Washington cannot --
And this is particularly true when solutions require the participation
of private organizations.
-5-
Let me give you an example.
The aftermath of the Watts riots in the city of Los Angeles
saw the Federal gove rnment coming in with loans for businessmen and
stepped-up activity in the various job-training programs.
It became apparent, several months after the explosion there,
that the government simply could not solve the problem -- mainly because the
big need in Watts was for more and better jobs
In an independent move,
Los Angeles officials began working with local employers in an effort to
find jobs for the unemployed of Watts.
To
date,
more than 12,000 jobs have been landed.
I think there is a lesson here which we tend to forget.
The business community in any given city is capable of adding tremendous
power to the effort of local officials to cure outstanding social deficiencies.
And yet the nature of Washington's approach practically eliminates this
kind of intimate and informal public-public cooperation. It was City Hall
-6.
that brought in private industry to solve the Watts problem of unemployment
--and, in retrospect, we can see that it couldn't have been handled in any
other way.
I think that we are standing today at a crossroads. Shall we
continue to rely so heavily on Federal grants that we lose the voice and
influence of those officials closest to the problem? Or shall we embark on
a system that will emphasize and strengthen the ability of states and
municipalities -- and private citizens :- to solve their own problems?
I believe this is one of the most important questions facing
us today; and in a rapidly changing world, we cannot afford to let it go
unanswered for very long.
This is why I have favored a system of revenue-sharing
that would return to the states and cities a portion of Federal tax-
collections -- and with it, a larger portion of the authority for making
decisions and generating new ideas.
-7-
Obviously, the states and cities have just about reached the
peak of their taxing power. Bond indebtedness is high; education demands
greater revenues each year; capital improvements become more expensive
as urban population continues to rise. The problem of how to treat
polluted water and foul air has assumed giant proportions in our municipal
governments -- and giantbudgets. And the complicated problem of
extending municipal services to recently incorporated areas is a standing
fiscal headache. The only alternative to municipal bankruptcy seems to
be an increasing reliance on Federal grants, which involves not only the
surrender of local judgment but a shrinkage in the effectiveness of the
programs themselves.
An enduring characteristic of our nation has always been
diversity, and yet it is a fact that locally-conceived solutions to local
problems must first be "sold" to Federal officials if the area concerned
expects to receive a grant. And because there are so many areas of need
not covered by Federal grants :- long-standing bond indebtedness, for
1
-8-
example -- the city's future is usually dictated by Federal whim.
I think we have gone full circle and have reached the point again
where men and women such as yoursclves can and must determine what
the local problems are :- and the solutions for those problems. But
the only way we can break down the kind of orthodoxy which constantly
preaches that "Washington is always right" is to devise a method of streng -
thening local autonomy while providing our urban areas with the resources
they need to do the job.
I believe,in other words, that it is time you were released
from Washington's complicated pattern of remote-control and allowed,
in your own wisdom and judgment, to go forward independently.
-15-
Urban Problems
"X"
******
I'm sure that no one here relishes the idea of our inner
cities becoming dead craters surrounded by crowded suburbs. The
central business area is the tax-base for all of our metropolitan areas;
and when the central city cannot foot its share of the bill, the suburbs
have to make up the difference. It is in the interest of all of us to
guarantee vitality for this important area. But I do not believe that what
we are now doing in the areas of urban renewal and slum clearance really
strikent the problem.
So we must reach for new ideas. We must invite new solutions.
We must experiment with concepts that will preserve the independence
and integrity of state and local government. Most important of all, we
must broaden and intensify the effort to save our towns and cities by
making it the responsibility of all of our citizens -- not simply the city
manager or the urban-planner. For we are engaged not only in curing
our urban ailments and salvaging the lives of our disadvantaged citizens.
-16-
Urban Problems
We are also engaged in a struggle to redeem ourselves -- and to
retrieve the self-confidence we lost somewhere along the trail to
Washington. Environmental reform, from the beginning of time, has
been the business of those who live there. And I do not believe we can
ignore this imperative.
I am not suggesting that a revenuc-sharing plan or public-
private coordination in finding jobs for the unemployed will bring the
millenium. I'm not even sure there is a millenium. But I am saying
that the answers of the past decade, keyed to an overwhelming Federal
presence in community affairs, have proved inadequate. I am saying,
Ribiouff, that the expenditure of 196 billion
FEDERAL DOLLARS
IN THE PAST DECADE,
on our cities/has not given us a proper return on the
investment.
in
of
the
-9-
Seps. 9.1966
Urban Problems
note:more liberal visiopoint
(PAUSE)
from Griffin speech
When we strip away all the euphemisms, we usually find
that the problem of the large American city is the problem of the
American Negro. Our cities will not be made well until the Negroes
who inhabit the inner core are given social mobility and the opportunity
to hold decent jobs.
"Social mobility" is the key phrase. And if we can compel
our Southern colleagues in the Senate to quit filibustering, we will be
able to devise legislation that will -- theoretically, at least -- free the
Negro from his ghetto prison. I am talking, of course, about the Equal
Housing title of the civil-rights bill, a measure which I wholeheartedly
endorse.
I might add in passing that we could have been spared this
filibuster if President Johnson had not ducked out of his responsibility
in this matter. As many of you know, the President could have issued
FORD 079839 LIBRARY
-10-
Urban Problems
an Executive Order prohibiting discrimination in all housing related in
any way to government mortgages and public funds.
He chose not to do this -- and the result was a breakdown in
the momentum of Senate business. I believe we will get a reasonable
housing provision, something we should have put on the books a long
time ago, but I'll never quite forgive the President for backing away
from the issue. He has told us in so many words that he was going to
lead us to the Promised Land -- and suddenly he deserts us in the
wilderness.
But reform in housing -- when it comes -- must be accompanied
by good jobs for those who want to leave the ghetto forever -- and this
is the most important task on our agenda.
Without the means of breaking out, what good will it do the
inhabitant of a slum to be told that he can at last move away? Where
will he move without work? Why move at all if he must continue to rely
-11-
Urban Problems
on public-housing to cover his children -- if he must continue to depend
on surplus food and a dole to keep his family together?
I cannot believe that this nation, which has solved so many
problems, cannot uplift the condition of our urban Negro citizens and
bring them into the mainstream of national life. It is just this sort
of task that Americans can handle best -- if they are given the chance.
And by this, I mean a concerted effort on the parts of private industry
and government officials to open up the doors for those who are able
and willing to enter.
The Watts experiment in public-private cooperation is cer-
SUCH
tainly not the only attempt in the country to bring the disadvantaged into
the nation's economic life. Many companies and many city halls
throughout the nation are struggling to accomplish this same task. And
although I am not familiar with the statistics, I will throw out a
FORD
LIBRAR
-12
Urban Problems
s
comparison which suggest what I am driving at. I would wager that the
public-private effort on the grassroots level to find jobs for our poor
catizens is eminently more successful in terms of man-hours and dollars
spent than the Federal effort to train and place such individuals through
the anti-poverty program.
Again, the reason for this is not difficult to find.
Local governments are in a position to harness the resources
of private industry and to gain the confidence of private employers. They
are in a position to understand the total needs of a community -- and they
are able to apply pressure or persuasion at precisely the right point.
They are where the action is -- and there is no substitute for
this kind of activity on behalf of those citizens who need decent jobs to
break out of squalor and poverty.
During the past year or so, I have scen a note of desperation
creep into speeches, conferences and hearings on the American city. I
-13
Urban Problems
certainly share this concern, but I am not prepared to declare the city
a hopeless invalid.
Jane Jacobs, in her remarkable book, "The Death and Life of
Great American Citics, " argued that city life, under certain conditions,
can be the most rewarding life of all. She explained how sections of
Boston, Philadelphia and New York City had been "un-slummed" by
residents who cared. She noted the numbers of middle-class families
moving back into the central city; and the number of private renewal
projects undertaken by citizens' groups. And she suggested that this inner
core need not be the grisly, sprawling, ugly place it has become in our
times.
She pointed out that the United States is the only nation in the
Western world that surrenders its inner cities to decay and deterioration.
And she is convinced that these inner cities can be regenerated and made
attractive, not for Negroes or for whites -- but for people -- people who
want to live in the center of things, who want to be near their places of
H-
Urban Problems
work, who want to reside near shops and restaurants and theaters.
This is particularly true now that industries are moving away
from the metro centers. The role of the city is indeed changing in our
time. It is becoming, once again, a place where people live and play --
as well as work. And the key to this transition, I believe, is the
individual man and woman.
The Negro in the ghetto lives there because he has to; and he
is not happy there because he sees a predominantly white, middle-class
society passing him by. But what if this Negro were a functioning part
of our middle-class society, able to live anywhere he wished -- and what
if the slum areas themselves were regenerat ed? I don't mean torn down
to make room for a used-car lot -- but regenerated, restored, made
habitable again? I believe that this would lead to the kind of environment
envisioned by Mrs. Jacobs, the sort of neighborhood that anyone would be
proud to live in.
Urban Problems
As Lincoln said over a century ago, "The dogmas of the quiet
past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high
with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new,
so we must think anew and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves."
Thank you for having me with you today.
FORD LIBRARY
REMARKS BEFORE THE VIRGINIA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE CONVENTION, sunday, SEPT. 18, 1966
BY REP. GERALD R. FORD, R-MICHIGAN, HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER.
I have leag felt that se job in government was as tough as that of the city
official.
Sitting in the balls of Congress is not like City Council meeting on Honday
night, when complaining citizens appear to gripe about special assessments and
to protest that their street really doesn't need paving.
Now you find your voes greatly compounded. By pursuing excessively empeacionery
policies, the present administration has leased the forces of inflation is this
great country of ours and made your jobs far more difficult then before.
Inflation has hit city hall hard, and your people will be feeling It is increased
tax bills or reduced city services.
1 am merely stating a fact of life with which I - sure you are already
painfully familier.
Is recent months the cost of government anterials, payroll and service has
gone up sharply.
City officials in Michigan tell as this will mann less service, higher costs
for street, sower and water idprestments, less building and therefore leed
recreation, park; playgrounds, migher pay for sity employees, hiring of fever
city employees or ellowing jobs to remain vacant when semebody leaves or retires.
There's 0 drive for higher pay among public employees because, after all,
the cost of living has gone up for them, too.
I know you're finding that the cost of just about everything. including the
borrowing of money for public improvements, has gone up.
(MORE)
-2-
so where do you go from here? There appear to be just two routes for city
officials is their present prodicement--try to raise more revenue locally or go
after more strings-attached federal grants.
But there is still snother avenue and it is the one the Michigan Municipal
League has resolved to travel: To boat the drume for federal revenue-sharing
until the cities get a fair slice of the huge sume collected each year is federal
income tax.
We know that the existing methods of urban aid--urben renewel and anti-poverty
programs-are not really the snower to the problems now plaguing the cities. We
know that these programs, while affording some relief, seriously endanger leeal
rule, lead to vaste of taxpayer dollars and make proper management of lessl fiscal
affairs extremply difficult.
You men have tremendous problems. Yet. I - proposing here today that you be
given even greater burdens.
For too long the salvaging of our cities has been a remote control operation.
Federal officials have dominated the planning. Federal decisions on specific
problems generally overruled alternative proposals affered by local officials.
Few local authorities love had the self-confidence to challenge Weekington's
expertise on urban matters. Yet we know that Washington often is bluffing, The
fast. 15 that--especially is the aprly days. rendwaleymobody is Meshington quite
knew what he was doing.
If & city wants federal funds, it mot accept federal regulations, a mase of
paperwork, all inds of red tape and tight supervision. Federal agencies in many
(HORE)
-3-
cases look upon local officials as politicisms who understand nothing of the
renewal process.
But the truth is that the cities se longer are the orphane of our political
system.
The cost accountant has replaced the political back. The procinet boss has
been supplanted by the specialist is urban planning. Serious and dedicated -
have entered municipal government with ideas of their own about the future--and
their appearance has revelutionised city development.
I am suggesting that we have more able and more imaginative officials is our
state and municipal governments than we have in the various departments of the
federal government.
so what we are stuck with-in this year, 1966-18 a rather unimaginative
federal tail wegging a very restless urban dog.
The cities are now capable of generating their own solutions is ways that
Washington cannot. And this is particularly true when solutions require the
participation of private organizations.
That is why I propose revenue-shering. I say give the cities the money they
need to come up with their own solutions, And I say lot's bring in private
industry to help them.
Private industry has an divesome name is this ore for what used to be know.
simply as efficient problem-nolving. That name is systems management. This is
a tool which I believe can be used to great advantage in helping city officials
meet their problems.
R.FORD.
Maybe it's because the application of the systems management concept to city
LIBRARY
(MORE)
&
problems 10 revolutionary, but not much attention has been paid to it to date.
If I may be partisan for just a minute, let me point out that it is the uinerity
party is the Congress which has proposed this method of urban problem-sclving.
And may I add that the minority has 6 certain amount of trouble getting action
on any of its proposals, no matter how meritorious.
Our plan calls for using the new technology of this space age to assemble,
measure and employ all the information that relates to a given problem and thereby
come up with a single coordinated approach to it.
As we see it, immense problems like water pollution, crime, traffic congestion
and slum housing would be farmed out by the government to private industry.
Industry, then, would use the systems management approach to develop and administer
a comprehensive solution is cooperation with city officials.
Legislation to implement this plan has been introduced in Congress by 54
members of the misority party-44 is the House and 10 is the Senste. Their bills
would create a National Commission on Public Management. The commission would
examine the techniques developed by the defense and патоврасе industries for complex
problem-selving and recommend how they might best be applied to critical domestic
problems.
We do not believe that the other perty's problem-selving concepts are adequate
for the overweelming wrban problems that fees us. Appropristing more and more
billions has not solved these problems. It has simply given ud more and more
bureaucrate who spend their time shuffling papers in some federal office.
Ten housend communities are facing serious air pollution problems. The demand
for wate: consumption may exceed the available supply before the end of this century.
(MORE)
-3-
There are nine million substandard housing units in America, most of them is urban
areas. Traffic jame cost the nation over $5 billion annually. These are some of
the monumental problems ve must tackle and lick with the aid of the systems
management approach.
Today we are standing at a crossroads is the governing of this nation, its
states and its cities. Shell we continue to rely heavily on federal grents--leek
so helplessly to the federal government that we loss the voice and influence of
those officials closest to local problems? Or shall we enbark on a system that
will emphasize and strengthen the ability of the states and cities--and private
enterprise-to solve our urben problems?
I believe this is one of the most important questions facing us today. Is a
rapidly changing world, we cannot afford to let it go unsnewored for long.
I know how I would answer that question-and that is why I favor a system of
revenue-sharing that would return to the cities and states a porcion of federal
tax collections--and with it, a larger portion of the authority for making
decisions and generating new ideas.
Obviously. the cities and states have just about reached the peak of their
texing power. And now the cities seaking to launch new public improvements are
squeened by the highest interest retes is 40 years, interest rates driven up by
the administration's wistaken policied
Bonded indebtedness is high; educational needs demand greater revenue each
year; capital improvements become more expensive as urben population continues
to grow.
FORD
So many steas of need are not covered by federal grants. And, is truth, the
LIBRAR
entire existing system is shot through with vochness and waste.
(MRX)
-6-
I think we have come full circle. We have reached the point again where
men and women like yourselves can and must determine the solutions for lessl
problems and then carry through-earry through with the help of federal funds
with no strings attached.
We must break away from the feelish and dangerous approach that declares,
"Washington is always right." We must strongthen lecal autonomy while providing
our urban areas with the resources they need to do the job.
I have long been concerned that America 10 becoming a land in which the
private citizen does not think for himself, does not think about tomorrow but
looks to "Big Daddy" government is Washington to take care of him.
This is so far removed from the America that you and I know and leve that it
is en ugh to make a strong maa weep.
Often when I ponder the great land that is ours I think of that day is
Philadelphia when Benjamin Frenklin left the Constitutional Convention after that
body had completed its task of drafting our basic laws.
"Which have you given us," a bystander asked him. "A monarchy or a republie?"
"A republic," Frenklin replied. "If you can heep it."
I look at you--you people with the toughest jobs in the country--and I think
Pranklin had reason to be hopeful,
Thank you.
....
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
REMARKS BEFORE THE VIRGINIA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE CONVENTION, SUNDAY, SEPT. 18, 1966
BY REP. GERALD R. FORD, R-MICHIGAN, HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER.
I have long felt that no job in government was as tough as that of the city
official.
Sitting in the halls of Congress is not like City Council meeting on Monday
night, when complaining citizens appear to gripe about special assessments and
to protest that their street really doesn't need paving.
Now you find your woes greatly compounded. By pursuing excessively expansionary
policies, the present administration has loosed the forces of inflation in this
great country of ours and made your jobs fat more difficult than before.
Inflation has hit city hall hand, and your people will be feeling it in increased
tax bills or reduced city services.
I am merely stating a fact of life with which I am sure you are already
painfully familiar.
In recent months the cost of government materials, payroll and service has
gone up sharply.
City officials in Michigan tell me this will mean less service, higher costs
for street, sewer and water improvements, less building and therefore less
recreation, park, playgrounds, higher pay for city employees, hiring of fewer
city employees or allowing jobs to remain vacant when somebody leaves or retires.
There's a drive for higher pay among public employees because, after all,
the cost of living has gone up for them, too.
I know you're finding that the cost of just about everything, including the
borrowing of money for public improvements, has gone up.
GERALD LIBRAGY
(MORE)
-2-
So where do you 80 from here? There appear to be just two routes for city
officials in their present predicament--try to raise more revenue locally or go
after more strings-attached federal grants.
But there is still another avenue and it is the one the Michigan Municipal
League has resolved to travel: To beat the drums for federal revenue-sharing
until the cities get a fair slice of the huge sums collected each year in federal
income tax.
We know that the existing methods of urban aid--urban renewal and anti-poverty
programs-are not really the answer to the problems now plaguing the cities. We
know that these programs, while affording some relief, seriously endanger local
rule, lead to waste of taxpayer dollars and make proper management of local fiscal
affairs extremaly difficult.
You men have tremendous problems. Yet I an proposing here today that you be
given even greater burdens.
For too long the salvaging of our cities has been a remote control operation.
Federal officials have dominated the planning. Federal decisions on specific
problems generally overruled alternative proposals offered by local officials.
Few local authorities have had the self-confidence to challenge Washington's
expertise on urban matters. Yet we know that Washington often is bluffing. The
fact is that--especially in the early days of renewal--nobody in Washington quite
knew what he was doing.
If a city wants federal funds, it must accept federal regulations, a maze of
paperwork, all kinds of red tape and tight supervision. Federal agencies in many
(MORE)
LIBRARY
-3-
cases look upon local officials as politicians who understand nothing of the
renewal process.
But the truth is that the cities no longer are the orphans of our political
system.
The cost accountant has replaced the political hack. The precinct boss has
been supplanted by the specialist in urban planning. Serious and dedicated men
have entered municipal government with ideas of their own about the future--and
their appearance has revolutionized city development.
I an suggesting that we have more able and more imaginative officials in our
state and municipal governments than we have in the various departments of the
federal government.
So what we are stuck with--in this year, 1966--is a rather unimaginative
federal tail wagging a very restless urban dog.
The cities are now capable of generating their own solutions in ways that
Washington cannot. And this is particularly true when solutions require the
participation of private organizations.
That is why I propose revenue-sharing. I say give the cities the money they
need to come up with their own solutions. And I say let's bring in private
industry to help them.
Private industry has an awesome name in this era for what used to be known
simply as efficient problem-solving. That name is systems management. This is
a tool which I believe can be used to great advantage in helping city officials
meet their problems.
Maybe it's because the application of the systems management concept to city
(MORE)
+
problems is revolutionary, but not much attention has been paid to it to date.
If I may be partisan for just a minute, let me point out that it is the minority
party in the Congress which has proposed this method of urban problem-solving.
And may I add that the minority has a certain amount of trouble getting action
on any of its proposals, no matter how meritorious.
Our plan calls for using the new technology of this space age to assemble,
measure and employ all the information that relates to a given problem and thereby
come up with a single coordinated approach to it.
As we see it, immense problems like water pollution, crime, traffic congestion
and slum housing would be farmed out by the government to private industry.
Industry, then, would use the systems management approach to develop and administer
a comprehensive solution in cooperation with city officials.
Legislation to implement this plan has been introduced in Congress by 54
members of the minority party--44 in the House and 10 in the Senate. Their bills
would create a National Commission on Public Management. The commission would
examine the techniques developed by the defense and aerospace industries for complex
problem-solving and recommend how they might best be applied to critical domestic
problems.
We do not believe that the other party's problem-solving concepts are adequate
for the overwhelming urban problems that face us. Appropriating more and more
billions has not solved these problems. It has simply given us more and more
bureaucrats who spend their time shuffling papers in some federal office.
Ten thousand communities are facing serious air pollution problems. The demand
for water consumption may exceed the available supply before the end of this century.
(MORE)
-5-
There are nine million substandard housing units in America, most of them in urban
areas. Traffic jame cost the nation over $5 billion annually. These are some of
the monumental problems we must tackle and lick with the aid of the systems
management approach.
Today we are standing at a crossroads in the governing of this nation, its
states and its cities. Shall we continue to rely heavily on federal grants--look
so helplessly to the federal government that we lose the voice and influence of
those officials closest to local problems? Or shall we embark on a system that
will emphasize and strengthen the ability of the states and cities--and private
enterprise--to solve our urban problems?
I believe this is one of the most important questions facing us today. In a
rapidly changing world, we cannot afford to let it go unanswered for long.
I know how I would answer that question--and that is why I favor a system of
revenue-sharing that would return to the cities and states a portion of federal
tax collections--and with it, a larger portion of the authority for making
decisions and generating new ideas.
Obviously, the cities and states have just about reached the peak of their
taxing power. And now. the cities seeking to launch new public improvements are
squeezed by the highest interest rates in 40 years, interest rates driven up by
the administration's mistaken policies.
Bonded indebtedness is high; educational needs demand greater revenue each
year; capital improvements become more expensive as urban population continues
to grow.
So many areas of need are not covered by federal grants. And, in truth, the
entire existing system is shot through with weakness and waste.
LIBRARY
(NORE)
-6-
I think we have come full circle. We have reached the point again where
men and women like yourselves can and must determine the solutions for local
problems and then carry through--carry through with the help of federal funds
with no strings attached.
We must break away from the foolish and dangerous approach that declares,
"Washington is always right." We must strengthen local autonomy while providing
our urban areas with the resources they need to do the job.
I have long been concerned that America is becoming a land in which the
private citizen does not think for himself, does not think about tomorrow but
looks to "Big Daddy" government in Washington to take care of him.
This is so far removed from the America that you and I know and love that it
is en ugh to-make a strong man weep.
Often when I ponder the great land that is ours I think of that day in
Philadelphia when Benjamin Franklin left the Consti tutional Convention after that
body had completed its task of drafting our basic laws.
"Which have you given us," a bystander asked him. "A monarchy or a republic?"
"A republic," Franklin replied. "If you can keep it."
I look at you--you people with the toughest jobs in the country--and I think
Franklin had reason to be hopeful.
Thank you.
****