Mr. MILLER. If I might, if the gentleman would yield at that point

MEMBERSHIP OF ACIR

It seems to me that the balance is not there, that the county officials and the mayors and State legislators and the Governors have 14 members. Then you take the other side of the coin, those people that would be interested in having the full responsibility put on the shoulders of local officials, or their share of responsibility. They would be senators, representatives, and even if the Federal representatives received the support of the private citizens and the three officers of the Federal executive branch, you would only have 12. It is weighted toward the local government getting you to lobby for their cause, so that the Federal Government would raise the dollars and send them back to the local governments.

Mr. MERRIAM. You could look at it that way, but it has not worked that way.

As you know, to get the mayors and Governors in agreement is not always an easy task.

Mr. MILLER. What I am talking about is agreement. They are going to agree to something that will help them locally. If they can get a Federal program that will send dollars back to the local political subdivision-I have had very few people, if any, that I have ever talked to that didn't want the money.

Mr. MERRIAM. I understand what you are saying very clearly. Let me say this: The most startling denial of this very human tendency took place at our December meeting, where, as I mentioned earlier, two new Federal categorical grant programs were proposed, small albeit, but still new programs that would deliver money to the State and local governments. One was a suggested limited program to help in the equalization of school financing Serrano-type problem-with which the Supreme Court has just dealt. The other was a limited program to provide relief for elderly property taxpayers. Both of these proposals suggested Federal categorical grant programs. Both of them were voted down by the Commission, including most of the State and local members. Actually the Federal members in this case were encouraging a new Federal program more than the State and local members.

Mr. MILLER. Could this be because many of the States do now have some type of tax reduction for the elderly?

Mr. MERRIAM. No. Some of them do; yes, sir.

Mr. MILLER. They have homestead acts approved by the States.

COMMISSION PROCEDURES

Mr. MERRIAM. Yes. Some of them do, but not all of those that were voting there.

There is another thing, which we do at the Commission, and this is where the Chairman exercises some of his prerogatives; that is, if we have a meeting where representatives of one level of government are predominantly absent for one reason or another, we put off decisions, we wait until they are all there. Second, while the Commission has in a number of instances had split votes, it allows the opinions

of all groups to be stated. But more importantly, we will not do any active work on any program-when I say active, I mean what we call implementation, attempting to publicize and bring to people's attention on a wide scale, as we do in some cases, the Commission's views on a matter where there is a close decision.

Through these various means we try to overcome this problem, and I think the most encouraging thing I would have to say to you is that the State and local officials that have served while I have been involved with the Commission have been very conscious of the fact that if the Commission becomes just a means of getting Uncle to do it all, it might as well be abolished. They have been responsible in this regard. I have been very pleased.

Mr. MILLER. I am glad to hear that because I visualize a Commission such as yours working properly and the need for it, but I can also visualize the political pressures that will be thrown at you to get you to lobby and have in your report a recommendation for programs that would help the local people have the funds coming to them from the Federal Government, so they would not need to raise the funds locally. You don't feel that it is a great problem?

Mr. MERRIAM. No, sir. The minute that would happen, the Commission's usefulness would be ended, in my opinion.

Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. STEED. Gentlemen, I would like to again express our appreciation to you for your appearance and your information and cooperation. Mr. MERRIAM. Thank you for your time and attention.

Mr. STEED. The committee stands adjourned until 1:30, Tuesday.

The Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations was established by Public Law 86-380 (September 24, 1959), as amended by P.L. 89-733 (November 2, 1966).

The Commission occupies a unique place in the governmental structure of the United States. First, it is unique in its mission which, in effect, is to monitor the operation of the federal system, to identify and analyze the causes of intergovernmental tensions and conflicts, and to recommend ways of improving the American federal system.

Second, it is unique in its composition. Its bipartisan membership includes representatives from the legislative and executive branches of all levels of government (Federal, state and local) as well as the general public.

Third, its financial support is unique. Although its basic operation is supported by Congressional appropriations, the Commission also receives token contributions from state and local governments, contributions from non-profit organizations and grants from private foundations and occasionally from other Federal agencies.

Fourth, its permanence is unique. Unlike Presidential commissions and other temporary advisory groups that are set up for the sole purpose of studying specific problems, and cease to exist after they report their findings and conclusions to the President and Congress, the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations as a permanent agency, has the opportunity and the obligation to encourage and assist policy makers at all levels to place into effect the changes in program and structure that will strengthen and improve the American federal system.

The mission of the Commission

The mission of the Commission is particularly significant in light of the curren widespread interest in strengthening state and local governments so that they ma more effectively carry out their responsibilities in dealing with the complex domes tic problems facing the Nation.

The law establishing ACIR contains the following "Declaration of Purpose" "Because the complexity of modern life intensifies the need in a federal form of government for the fullest cooperation and coordination of activities betwee the levels of government, and because population growth and scientific develop ments portend an increasingly complex society in future years, it is essentia that an appropriate agency be established to give continuing attention to inter governmental problems.

"It is intended that the Commission, in the performance of its duties will"(1) bring together representatives of the Federal, State and local governments for the consideration of common problems;

"(2) provide a forum for discussing the administration and coordination of Federal grant and other programs requiring intergovernmental cooperation "(3) give critical attention to the conditions and controls involved in the administration of Federal grant programs;

"(4) make available technical assistance to the executive and legislative branches of the Federal Government in the review of proposed legislation to determine its overall effect on the Federal system;

"(5) encourage discussion and study at an early stage of emerging public problems that are likely to require intergovernmental cooperation;

"(6) recommend, within the framework of the Constitution, the most desirable allocation of governmental functions, responsibilities, and revenues among the several levels of government; and

"(7) recommend methods of coordinating and simplifying tax laws and administrative practices to achieve a more orderly and less competitive fiscal relationship between the levels of government and to reduce the burden of compliance for taxpayers."

The law also spells out the following "Duties of the Commission":

"(1) to engage in such activities and to make such studies and investigations as are necessary or desirable in the accomplishment of the purpose set forth in section 2 of this Act;

'(2) to consider, on its own initiative, ways and means for fostering better relations between the levels of government;

'(3) to submit an annual report to the President and the Congress on or before January 31 of each year. The Commission may also submit such additional reports to the President, to the Congress or any committee of the Congress, and to any units of government or organization as the Commission may deem appropriate."

The composition of the Commission

The Commission is a twenty-six member, bipartisan body. To assure political balance and wide representation, the Act mandates that nine of the twenty-six Commission members represent the Federal Government; fourteen represent State and local government, and three the public-at-large.

Six Commissioners are Members of Congress: three U.S. Senators appointed by the President of the Senate; and three U.S. Representatives appointed by the Speaker of the House.

The President appoints twenty members: three private citizens; three officers of the Federal Executive Branch; four governors nominated by the National Governors' Conference; three State legislators nominated by the Council of State Governments; four mayors nominated by the National League of Cities and the U.S. Conference of Mayors; and three elected county officials nominated by the National Association of Counties.

Of the Members of Congress, two from each House must be of the majority party. Of the State and local officials, no more than two of each category may be from the same party. The private citizens are appointed without regard to political affiliation. Commission members serve for two years and may be reappointed. However, a member who is a public official can serve only as long as he holds the office from which he was appointed to the Commission. The Commission names an Executive Director who heads a small professional staff which is divided into three sections: Government Structure and Functions; Taxation and Finance; and Program Implementation.

Congressional oversight

The Subcommittees on Intergovernmental Relations of the House and Senate Committees on Government Operations maintain continuing oversight of the Commission's research and other activities. The Chairmen of the Subcommittees, Rep. L. H. Fountain and Sen. Edmund S. Muskie are members of the Commission. Other Congressional members of ACIR are Sen. Ernest F. Hollings, Sen. Charles Percy, Rep. Clarence J. Brown, and Rep. Al Ullman.

In November 1971, during the First Session of the 92nd Congress, the joint Subcommittees held the second five-year review hearings on the ACIR, the first review having been held during the 86th Congress.

The report of Subcommittees has been released and covers the operation, structure, activities and financing of the Commission since its inception in 1959. The report also contains recommendations for Commission activities in the future. Continuing implementation of Commission recommendations

As a permanent agency with a unique mission, the Commission recognizes that its contribution to the strengthening of American federalism will be measured in part in terms of the actual results achieved in improving the operation of the federal system as a whole and the relationships between and among Federal, State and local governments. It therefore devotes a substantial share of its resources to encouraging consideration by government at all levels of its recommendations for legislative and administrative action.

In implementing the Commission recommendations for action at the national level, the ACIR staff works closely with Congressional members of ACIR and other members of Congress and their aides and advisors as well as officials of the executive branch of the Federal Government. In addition, the staff, on request, reviews pending and proposed bills in terms of their intergovernmental impact and submits comments to Congressional Committees and to the Office of Management and Budget.

Implementation of Commission recommendations for state and local action involves constant and continuing efforts to secure the cooperation and support of national organizations of state and local officials including the National Governors' Conference, the National Conference of State Legislative Leaders, the Council of State Governments, the National Association of Counties, the National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors and others. It involves working closely with governors, state legislators and administrative officials, state organizations of municipal and county officials and other public, private and non-profit organizations in their consideration of ways and means of strengthening the role of state and local government in the federal system. And it involves scores of appearances by Commission members and staff before national, regional and state conventions and special meetings.

A summary of action on Commission recommendations by the Federal government and by the states is included in the Commission's 14th Annual Report (February 1973).

Budget request for fiscal year 1974

The Commission requests a congressional appropriation of $901.000 for the 1974 fiscal year, an increase of $107,000 over the amount appropriated for FY 1973. This does not take into account the 5.14 percent across-the-board increase and its attendant costs to the Commission. This will be handled through FY '73 and FY '74 supplemental requests, if necessary.

Total estimated FY 1974 obligations by object classification

In addition to the congressional appropriation requested ($901,000), the Commission estimates during FY 1974 it will receive $57,000 in contributions from State and local governments and miscellaneous non-profit organizations. Total estimated obligations of $958,000 for FY 1974 are to be distributed as follows: Total personnel compensation: $706,000, an increase of $42,000 estimated for total personnel compensation over the $664,000, for FY 1973. It should be noted that $99,000 of the increase requested will go to fund a new revenue sharing analysis program. Personnel compensation for this project amounts to $42,000 reflecting in the whole a maintaining of personnel compensation at current levels prior to consideration of the January 5.14 percent pay raise.

Personnel benefits, civilian employees: $59,000 (Salaries and Expenses Account). An increase of $6,000 over total estimated obligations for this purpose in FY 1973, $4,000 of which is tied to the revenue sharing program.

Travel and transportation of persons: $39,000 (Salaries and Expenses Account). and $5,000 (Contributions Account) for a total of $44,000, an increase of $11,000 over estimated total obligations for this purpose in FY 1973. Of the total amount, $19,000 will be required for travel costs in conjunction with the revenue sharing project; $8,000 will be used to cover travel of Commission members to an ACIR meeting outside of Washington; $10,000 will cover their travel costs to three Washington meetings; and the remaining $7,000 will be used to pay staff travel to meetings of state and local government officials.

Transportation of things: $2,000 (S&E Account) and $2,000 (Contributions Account) for a total of $4,000, an increase of $1,000 over estimates for this purpose for FY 1973.

Rent, Communications, and Utilities: $25,000 (S&E Account) and $10,000 (Contributions Account) for a total of $35,000. Of the total amount, $7,000 is for postage, $6,000 is for FTS, $6,000 is for other telephone, telegraph and teletype services, and $16,000 is for equipment rental and ADP usage.

Printing and Reproduction: $47,000 (S&E Account) and $20,000 (Contributions Account) for a total of $67,000, a decrease of $2,000. Of the total amount, $20,000 will be used, in the revenue sharing program.

Other Services: $11,000 (S&E Account) and $7,000 (Contributions Account) for a total of $18,000. A decrease of $8,000. This includes an estimated $5,000 for the General Services Administration to cover limited administrative services which that agency continues to perform for ACIR, consultants, computer sevices, and other miscellaneous services.

Supplies and Materials: $15,000 (S&E Account) and $1,000 (Contributions Account) for a total of $16,000.

Equipment: $7,000 (S&E Account) and $1,000 (Contribution Account) for a total of $8,000, an increase of $3,000 over estimated obligations for FY 1973. The revenue sharing program would use 50 percent of these funds.

At this time, it should be noted that this presentation is in accordance with the figures present in the President's budget submitted to Congress. It does not include comment on possible supplemental requests for FY '73 and FY '74, which may be necessitated by the across-the-board 5.14% pay increase.

ADVISORY COMMISSION ON INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS

Federal Funds

General and special funds:

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

For expenses necessary to carry out the provisions of the Act of September 24, 1959 (73 Stat. 703 706), including not to exceed $1,300 for official reception and representation expenses, [$794,000] $901,000. (Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government Appropriation Act, 1973.)

1 Selected resources as of June 30 are as follows: Undelivered orders, 1971, $50,000 (1972 adjustments, -$44,000); 1972, $3,000; 1973, $3,000; 1974, $3,000.