But one way or another, the Federal budget will be affected. I believe the approach in these bills is a responsible one. It is up front. It does not seek to hide the costs or the impact. It does not shift responsibility away from elected officials.

These proposals are ones on which we will value highly the counsel of our many distinguished witnesses who have come to help us. In closing, it is appropriate to note that the structure that symbolizes our national freedoms, the Statue of Liberty, is scheduled to be closed next year for extensive repairs.

What more melancholy symbol of the challenge we confront in these hearings? We must rebuild that statue, and we must rebuild our Nation.

Now, Senator Randolph, I am sure that you have an opening statement.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JENNINGS RANDOLPH, U.S.

SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA

Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you, very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, earlier this year the committee held several days of hearings on two pressing problems facing our Nation-the large number of jobless Americans and the deterioration of our public facilities. Unemployment levels are totally unacceptable. The number of people unemployed at points during this recession has been equal to those out of work during the Great Depression. My State has unemployment statewide of 20.4 percent. Thousands of coal miners are out of work, and other industries are suffering.

Equally important is the deterioration of our capital stock at both the State and local levels. Years of inflation have caused many State and local governments to neglect orderly maintenance, routine rehabilitation, and appropriate replacement of our public facilities. As one author has said, "America is a Nation in ruins." I agree wholeheartedly with this characterization.

The hearings which the committee held in February demonstrated again the truth of this statement. There is no question that there is a need in this country for an infrastructure rehabilitation program and programs which stimulate economic growth. Almost every witness who testified earlier strongly suggested programs of this type and voiced their local and regional needs.

S. 724, which you and I introduced, Mr. Chairman, was a proposal to address problems which had been brought to our attention. These hearings will allow members of the public expert in this area to give us their views on possible improvements in this legislation.

Mr. Chairman, for most of our nearly 207 years as a Nation, we have placed a great emphasis on building. From a wilderness a strong and prosperous Nation has been constructed which provides its citizens the highest standard of living in the world. Our economy and our way of life were created and are supported by a public capital investment program representing many billions of dollars. We have become increasingly aware in recent months that public facilities on which we depend are wearing out faster than they are being rehabilitated and replaced. Investment in our public works has declined dramatically over the last decade.

Our citizens are aware of this in everyday life. Drive over our roads, ride our trains, look at our water systems and sewers, and it is plainly obvious that America's underpinnings are no longer staisfactory. A reliable report indicates that public capital investment at all levels of government has declined by two-thirds in constant dollars in the last 10 years. A substantial number of our communities are unable to support modern development until new investments are made in their basic facilities.

Mr. Chairman, we must revitalize our economy, and to do this we must invest in the capital stock of this Nation. The Committee on Environment and Public Works will give careful consideration to the four bills that have been introduced-S. 23, S. 532, S. 724, and S. 871. I look forward to the testimony of all witnesses and to a series of valuable and productive hearings.

Senator STAFFORD. Thank you, very much, Senator Randolph.

I guess that now brings us to the business of the day, which is the listening to our distinguished guests.

I do want to say that one of our problems here in Washington is always that we never have enough time to do full justice to those who, at their own trouble and expense, in many cases, and at the additional expense of a great deal of effort, do come here to help the committees of the Congress in their deliberations.

Today is no exception. We have the full statements of the first four witnesses. We will place them in the record and we would ask you, as reasonably as you can, to summarize the statements so that we will be able to complete the committee's work this morning.

The first witness is Mayor Dutch Morial. You are up here from some rather wet country and that in view of the bad weather we had here recently, we are delighted that the weather cleared up enough to allow you to get up here.

We are very happy you are here, and we hope that New Orleans is drying out as well as we are here.

With a great deal of pleasure, we would ask you to make whatever statement you wish.

STATEMENT OF HON. DUTCH MORIAL, MAYOR, CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, ON BEHALF OF THE U.S. CONFERENCE OF MAYORS

Mayor MORIAL. Thank you.

Thank you, very much, Mr. Chairman.

As you indicated, I am the mayor of the city of New Orleans. I am here this morning on behalf of the U.S. Conference of Mayors. I serve within the Conference of Mayors as a trustee and also as chairman of our committee on health, employment, education, and human services.

Over the years, I have been active in all recent conference deliberations on infrastructure, jobs, and urban finance.

We are delighted to be here this morning at the invitation of this committee and to share with you some of our views and to compliment the committee for having taken the lead, and some members of this committee, in developing very worthwhile and intriguing approaches to our combined problems in infrastructure and unemployment.

We would like to discuss our reactions to these proposals and suggest some directions which the committee might consider as it proceeds toward the next step.

As to Senate bill S. 724, the Public Investment Jobs Act of 1983, all four titles of that bill are ambitious and comprehensive attempts to deal with pressing urban and national problems.

Each title generally outlines solutions to problems which the conference has addressed in recent years.

We think that the existence of such broad-based legislation certainly indicates how far the national debate on the problems of cities has come in the last 2 years.

Our comments are essentially to form and structure of S. 724, not to its mission or goals. This is how we view the separate titles of S. 724.

The public capital investment title, title I, is a $5 million per year, 10-year national capital investment program designed to create both immediate job opportunities and a favorable long-range climate for urban economic development.

We in the Conference of Mayors salute the sponsors of S. 724 for such foresight in understanding that this is an appropriate national responsibility, as Senator Randolph indicated in his opening remarks, and in cooperation with States and localities and the private sector, we will be able to address this problem.

However, we have some questions and some hesitation as to the design of title I which can be summarized very briefly: We as mayors concerned about the centrality of the Army Corps of Engineers as the responsible agency for such a national effort.

While some cities-and most assuredly mine-have had a wealth of experience with the Corps of Engineers, there are a number of other cities in this Nation which have not.

While we recognize that perhaps the corps should play an active and strong role in the development and administration of such a program as title I envisions, but that there are other agencies within the committee's jurisdiction that we think should be given some opportunity in sharing this process; the Economic Development Administration, the Department of Transportation or the Environmental Protection Agency should have roles in the implementation of such a key program.

We certainly would also support a more significant pass through to local governments than just those above the 250,000 population. Mayors of cities of less than 250,000, mayors of cities of 50,000, for example, now have programs and now manage programs in community development, transit, employment and training, and many others which have substantial Federal funds. That capacity exists now in local governments. The unnecessary step of having mayors forced to petition their Governors for access to Federal funds, in our opinion, should not be necessary.

A formula which makes some attempt at targeting funds to areas of greatest need would have our support, and we recommend it to you for your consideration.

Various indicators of age, growth, and distress should be factored into that formula. The Conference of Mayors has had some experience with this, and we would be pleased to work with the commit

tee in the development of a formula which goes beyond the simple criteria of population and road mileage.

We would also hope that the committee would give further examination to the issue of match. As currently drafted, the match would require a State or local dollar for every Federal dollar. A ratio which was more consistent with other national efforts, such as the highway programs, would be far more compatible, in our opinion, with the realities of local finances as we must confront them in our cities today.

As to title II, the economic stabilization and job creation, the bill would authorize some $250 million per year for a variety of capital, planning and technical assistance efforts aimed as private sector job creation and long-term economic development.

The conference strongly supports the aim of title II in this regard. The structure of the specific programs which would be undertaken within this title mirror some of the excellent programs which have been part of the Economic Development Administration over the years.

The EDA has enjoyed a vigorous and strong support of the mayors from across the country. We think that the EDA has a sufficient track record and quality of its delivery system which compels us to believe that the EDA should be strengthened and not supplanted by another agency performing similar functions.

We would urge that title II be administered not by the Army Corps of Engineers, but by the Economic Development Adninistration.

As to title III, standby public investment, we in the Conference of Mayors have long called for the creation of a standby countercyclical public works program so that needed work could be performed by otherwise idle workers in times of economic downturn. By proposing to authorize up to $200 million per year over the next 10 years, the committee, in our opinion, has stepped forward with a creative and, if enacted, extremely useful vehicle.

We strongly believe that the EDA, which has run massive programs of countercyclical public works in 1976 and 1977 and has had the talent and the relationships with local governments, should be given an opportunity to run this program, as well. And we certainly think they should be involved in title I.

The trigger mechanisms for implementing the program will need close examination.

As to title IV, the historic sites, mayors have strongly supported and worked with historic preservation in our communities. It provides for considerable economic development and many added amenities, as well.

We are pleased to support title IV which would provide some $525 million on a 1-year basis to undertake some of the important physical renovations involved with historic preservation.

We think that component, which includes the inner-city ventures program for the National Trust, is extremely important. We will work with the committee at some later point to insure that local governments have access to whatever funds are made available, and to that extent possible, the work is undertaken in coordination with other local development efforts.

Title V, as to youth employment. As you know, Senator, and the other members of the committee, and, I think, the Nation as a whole, one of the most pressing problems facing our cities today is the staggering amount of youth unemployment, approaching more than 50 percent among our minority youth and very high levels across the board.

The combination of a revitalized youth adult conservation corps and a summer youth employment for community improvement projects is a good start toward meeting that crisis.

The $3 billion per year dedicated to these important efforts is a significant sum but is needed by our cities across this Nation as we approach the summer.

As the committee continues to examine the best mix of efforts toward alleviating the youth joblessness issue, we would urge that close attention be paid to the implementation of the Jobs Training Partnership Act, to insure maximum cooperation with local programs under that banner.

In summarizing our views on S. 724, Mr. Chairman, the Conference sees the outline within it of superb legislation. We wish only to work with you over the next several weeks so that the sum experience that we have as mayors in running programs with considerable success with a variety of Federal agencies can be factored into the approach of this very important legislation.

S. 23, the Rebuilding of America Act of 1983, Mr. Chairman, there is considerable merit in the proposal by Senator Moynihanwho is not here with us today-to establish a National Commission on Rebuilding America which would inventory public improvements needs at all levels and recommend various financing methods for achieving their rebuilding, repair, and renovation.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors, as you know, is proposed for membership on such a commission, and on behalf of the conference, let me say that we would be eager to serve. The Commission would also begin to move the Federal Government into the direction of looking in a more uniform manner at its capital expenditures. We think that is long overdue.

Every city that I know of in this Nation has a capital budget. A Federal capital budget would have an important impact on our annual fiscal and budgetary debates and, in our opinion, improve considerably the public's perception of how the Federal Government does business.

To the extent that the Commission will be looking into concepts like these and those embodied in S. 724 and the Commission suggested by Senator Moynihan, mayors of this country would hope that they are viewed in a coordinated fashion; that there will be a relationship between a commission and the public works type activities to follow that type of inventory.

The Commission might also want to consider whether it might not be appropriate to provide local governments with a year of planning funds with which to establish the equivalent of their own inventories and priorities along commission guidelines and within certain perameters that might be established by the commission, then followed by a program of public works as contained in S. 724. As to S. 532, the Public Investment Incentive Act of 1983, Mr. Chairman, the concept of State infrastructure banks is one of the