Ask the Scholar
Page 39 of 147
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
pue UOXIN the the
The Governors' Conference, 1954
167
tion and financing of certain well established public
officially established groups. A number of the Gov-
functions which, in large part, already are being
ernors felt it would be advantageous if every state
handled by them but now are based in part on fed-
formed a commission on intergovernmental rela-
eral grants and federal controls?
tions, to obtain a full analysis of federal-state-local
2. If so, should the federal government withdraw
relations in that state. The commissions could evalu-
to the extent feasible from areas of taxation which
ate the capacity of the states, it was suggested, and
could be used effectively by the states, SO as to pro-
their willingness to take over certain grant-in-aid
vide them with necessary revenues to carry out these
programs. This information would be made avail-
functions?
able to the National Commission and to Congress,
Governor Langlie keynoted the session by pro-
to assist them in formulating final recommendations
posing the following points for discussion:
and legislation.
1. No additional federal grant-in-aid programs
should be enacted or existing programs expanded.
2. Consideration should be given to strengthen-
ing the fiscal power of the states by relinquishment
THE POSITION of the Governors' Conference, af-
or reduction of certain federal excise taxes, such as
firmed and reaffirmed at previous annual meetings,
taxes on gasoline, payrolls, telephone and telegraph
for repeal of the federal gasoline tax, was empha-
services, admissions, transportation of persons and
sized by participants in the discussion. For example,
property, alcohol and tobacco, estates and gifts. In
one of the Governors, although stating it would be
return, consideration should be given to reduction
difficult to take action SO radical as to eliminate all
of federal grants-in-aid for highways, unemploy-
federal grants, underlined the importance of the
ment compensation administration, vocational edu-
fact that a consensus had been reached with regard
cation, school lunches and a number of other pur-
to grants for highways. If the federal government
poses.
repealed the federal gasoline tax, members of the
3. There is no justification for maintaining some
Conference said, it would be possible for all states
forty-odd, different grant-in-aid programs, each with
to raise their gasoline taxes proportionately, and for
intricate controls. The states should be left to deter-
the great majority of states to proceed without fed-
mine their own programs. If grants are found nec-
eral grants for highway purposes. It was recognized,
essary to support a minimum level of services in
however, that special provisions would be needed
some states, financial aid might be extended to
for approximately nine states with large amounts of
these states, but without stipulations or controls.
public land and sparse populations.
4. There should be adequate payments in lieu of
Meantime, the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1954
taxes for property the United States Government
had increased federal grants from about $500 mil-
owns in the states.
lion to around $900 million, and the federal gaso-
5. The regulatory powers of federal and state
line tax remained intact. Thus the federal govern-
agencies should be re-aligned.
ment would be returning to the states an amount
6. There should be a declaration by the Gover-
approximating its collections from the federal gas
nors that they intend to maintain essential services
tax. To some degree, Governors pointed out, this
as state responsibilities.
was in line with the position of the Governors' Con-
Governor Langlie called attention to the fact that
ference, insofar as it based its position on the fact
in 1931 grants from the federal government to the
that the federal government took from the gas tax
states totalled more than $219 million; in 1941,
more than it returned to the states. Moreover, it
more than $616 million; and in 1953, $2,802,365,-
was recognized, the Highway Act reflected in part
266. And the most spectacular increase had come
the concern of Congress over the requirements of a
in the past seven years-years of prosperity and rela-
national system of highways and federal responsi-
tive peace.
bility in connection with the Employment Act of
Mr. Kestnbaum, as Chairman of the National
1946. Pressures for stimulating employment were
Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, ex-
heavy and, to a significant degree, had influenced
plained its progress and plans of operation. One of
Congress in increasing federal highway grants.
its projects, he reported, was to prepare a chart on
As for long-range prospects, it was noted that the
the fiscal capacity of each of the states. He suggested
National Commission on Intergovernmental Rela-
it would be of great help if each state would indi-
tions had not completed its study of the highway
cate where it could pick up federal programs on its
problem and did not plan to submit a separate re-
own, and submit its ideas in this regard to the Com-
port on highways. Instead the commission felt it
mission. Some thirty-two states have set up commit-
should present a unified report to Congress when
tees of various types to study intergovernmental re-
its work as a whole was completed.
lations and assist the national Commission. The
Construction and maintenance of highways, Gov-
committees are of all types-private, voluntary, and
ernors emphasized, always has been primarily the
Page data
- Page
- 39
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- photo
- Media ID
- 55b24b5136367bf0
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 242845599
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "242845599",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/242845599",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "7-12-54 Bolton Landing, N.Y. Governors Conference",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/242845599",
"collections": [
"Pre-Presidential Papers of Richard M. Nixon",
"Appearances and Invitations Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-vp/6721514/Batch0002/242845599/242845599_Page_001.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-vp/6721514/Batch0002/242845599/242845599_Page_001.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-vp/6721514/Batch0002/242845599/242845599_Page_001.jpg",
"imageCount": 147,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "242845599",
"label": "7-12-54 Bolton Landing, N.Y. Governors Conference",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/242845599"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "242845599",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/242845599",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "7-12-54 Bolton Landing, N.Y. Governors Conference",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/242845599",
"collections": [
"Pre-Presidential Papers of Richard M. Nixon",
"Appearances and Invitations Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-vp/6721514/Batch0002/242845599/242845599_Page_001.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-vp/6721514/Batch0002/242845599/242845599_Page_001.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-vp/6721514/Batch0002/242845599/242845599_Page_001.jpg",
"imageCount": 147,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/242845599",
"naId": 242845599,
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 39,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "photo",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/nixon/rn-vp/6721514/Batch0002/242845599/242845599_Page_039.jpg",
"mediaId": "55b24b5136367bf0",
"ocrText": "pue UOXIN the the\nThe Governors' Conference, 1954\n167\ntion and financing of certain well established public\nofficially established groups. A number of the Gov-\nfunctions which, in large part, already are being\nernors felt it would be advantageous if every state\nhandled by them but now are based in part on fed-\nformed a commission on intergovernmental rela-\neral grants and federal controls?\ntions, to obtain a full analysis of federal-state-local\n2. If so, should the federal government withdraw\nrelations in that state. The commissions could evalu-\nto the extent feasible from areas of taxation which\nate the capacity of the states, it was suggested, and\ncould be used effectively by the states, SO as to pro-\ntheir willingness to take over certain grant-in-aid\nvide them with necessary revenues to carry out these\nprograms. This information would be made avail-\nfunctions?\nable to the National Commission and to Congress,\nGovernor Langlie keynoted the session by pro-\nto assist them in formulating final recommendations\nposing the following points for discussion:\nand legislation.\n1. No additional federal grant-in-aid programs\nshould be enacted or existing programs expanded.\n2. Consideration should be given to strengthen-\ning the fiscal power of the states by relinquishment\nTHE POSITION of the Governors' Conference, af-\nor reduction of certain federal excise taxes, such as\nfirmed and reaffirmed at previous annual meetings,\ntaxes on gasoline, payrolls, telephone and telegraph\nfor repeal of the federal gasoline tax, was empha-\nservices, admissions, transportation of persons and\nsized by participants in the discussion. For example,\nproperty, alcohol and tobacco, estates and gifts. In\none of the Governors, although stating it would be\nreturn, consideration should be given to reduction\ndifficult to take action SO radical as to eliminate all\nof federal grants-in-aid for highways, unemploy-\nfederal grants, underlined the importance of the\nment compensation administration, vocational edu-\nfact that a consensus had been reached with regard\ncation, school lunches and a number of other pur-\nto grants for highways. If the federal government\nposes.\nrepealed the federal gasoline tax, members of the\n3. There is no justification for maintaining some\nConference said, it would be possible for all states\nforty-odd, different grant-in-aid programs, each with\nto raise their gasoline taxes proportionately, and for\nintricate controls. The states should be left to deter-\nthe great majority of states to proceed without fed-\nmine their own programs. If grants are found nec-\neral grants for highway purposes. It was recognized,\nessary to support a minimum level of services in\nhowever, that special provisions would be needed\nsome states, financial aid might be extended to\nfor approximately nine states with large amounts of\nthese states, but without stipulations or controls.\npublic land and sparse populations.\n4. There should be adequate payments in lieu of\nMeantime, the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1954\ntaxes for property the United States Government\nhad increased federal grants from about $500 mil-\nowns in the states.\nlion to around $900 million, and the federal gaso-\n5. The regulatory powers of federal and state\nline tax remained intact. Thus the federal govern-\nagencies should be re-aligned.\nment would be returning to the states an amount\n6. There should be a declaration by the Gover-\napproximating its collections from the federal gas\nnors that they intend to maintain essential services\ntax. To some degree, Governors pointed out, this\nas state responsibilities.\nwas in line with the position of the Governors' Con-\nGovernor Langlie called attention to the fact that\nference, insofar as it based its position on the fact\nin 1931 grants from the federal government to the\nthat the federal government took from the gas tax\nstates totalled more than $219 million; in 1941,\nmore than it returned to the states. Moreover, it\nmore than $616 million; and in 1953, $2,802,365,-\nwas recognized, the Highway Act reflected in part\n266. And the most spectacular increase had come\nthe concern of Congress over the requirements of a\nin the past seven years-years of prosperity and rela-\nnational system of highways and federal responsi-\ntive peace.\nbility in connection with the Employment Act of\nMr. Kestnbaum, as Chairman of the National\n1946. Pressures for stimulating employment were\nCommission on Intergovernmental Relations, ex-\nheavy and, to a significant degree, had influenced\nplained its progress and plans of operation. One of\nCongress in increasing federal highway grants.\nits projects, he reported, was to prepare a chart on\nAs for long-range prospects, it was noted that the\nthe fiscal capacity of each of the states. He suggested\nNational Commission on Intergovernmental Rela-\nit would be of great help if each state would indi-\ntions had not completed its study of the highway\ncate where it could pick up federal programs on its\nproblem and did not plan to submit a separate re-\nown, and submit its ideas in this regard to the Com-\nport on highways. Instead the commission felt it\nmission. Some thirty-two states have set up commit-\nshould present a unified report to Congress when\ntees of various types to study intergovernmental re-\nits work as a whole was completed.\nlations and assist the national Commission. The\nConstruction and maintenance of highways, Gov-\ncommittees are of all types-private, voluntary, and\nernors emphasized, always has been primarily the"
}