Not only are some of the federal offices moving out of Detroit,

but the more than $2 million worth of offices the Federal government

rents in privately owned buildings may deny space in the city to

private firms.

And finally, the McNamara Building is needed so that the present federal building may be devoted completely to federal law enforcement agencies.

In closing, I would like to comment on the possible effect of the proposed Public Buildings Amendment of 1971 might have on this

request.

As I understand the bill, the amendments would establish

a public buildings fund and authorize a crash lease-purchase or purchase-contract program for 41 public buildings already authorized. That latter provision would enable private developers to construct federal buildings on federally-owned land, which would apply to the McNamara project.

Frankly, at this point in time, I am reluctant to bank on that bill, now tied up in conference, as an answer to the McNamara

situation.

For all of these reasons, then, I urge approval of funds

for construction of the McNamara Building.

Not only would such an action honor a long-overdue federal commitment, but it would give hope to those of us, public officials, business executives and labor leaders alike, who believe that there is a future to a city called Detroit.

And, of course, in a city plagued with an unemployment rate well above the national average, work on the McNamara Building would provide a welcome stimulus to the economy.

U.S. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

STATEMENT OF ROBERT E. HAMPTON, CHAIRMAN

ACCOMPANIED BY:

L. J. ANDOLSEK, COMMISSIONER

BERNARD ROSEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

RAYMOND JACOBSON, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF POLICIES AND
STANDARDS

IRVING KATOR, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

JOSEPH M. ROBERTSON, DIRECTOR,

PERSONNEL PROGRAMS

INTERGOVERNMENTAL

ANDREW E. RUDDOCK, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF RETIREMENT
AND INSURANCE AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

DONALD J. BIGLIN, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF MANAGEMENT
SERVICES

WILLIAM F. SPECK, BUDGET OFFICER

JAMES A. HAMILL, CHIEF, BUDGET SECTION

AMENDED 1973 BUDGET ESTIMATES

Senator MONTOYA. We will now take testimony from Mr. Robert Hampton, Chairman of the Civil Service Commission, on the amended budget estimates for fiscal 1973.

It is my understanding that the January estimate amended for pay increases in House Document 92-267 was further amended over the weekend with the submission of a request for an additional $2.782 million to strengthen the Commission's Equal Employment Opportunity program. Thus, the fiscal 1973 estimates for the Civil Service Commission, as amended, total $893.030 million, or an increase of $162.756 million over revised 1972 appropriations.

COMPARATIVE TABLE

A comparative table reflecting fiscal 1972 appropriations and 1973 estimates and increases for the six accounts of the Commission will be placed in the record at this point. Full-time permanent position increases should also be reflected in the table.

(The table follows:)

STATEMENT OF ROBERT E. HAMPTON

Senator MONTOYA. Mr. Hampton, we certainly welcome you and your colleagues before this committee.

You may proceed, sir, with your statement. Do you have a highlight statement?

Mr. HAMPTON. No, sir; I do not.

Senator MONTOYA. You may proceed to present your statement as you wish.

Mr. HAMPTON. All right, sir. I was going to say, Mr. Chairman, if you would prefer we could enter the first 10 pages and let me pick up on the summary, which would give you the highlights.

Senator MONTOYA. The statement will be inserted in the record, and you may proceed to cover it as you wish.

(The statement follows:)

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:

We are pleased to be here today to discuss the budget request of the

Because last year was our first

Civil Service Commission for fiscal year 1973. appearance before this committee, we tried to explain in detail what the Civil Service Commission was about. We reviewed our programs and responsibilities, and the manner in which the programs were funded.

This year I believe you will note that both our statement and our budget are considerably shorter. The revision to five categories should serve a useful purpose for both the committee and the Commission. Our budget now concentrates on the three basic goals of the Civil Service Commission: Assuring a Merit Work Force so that the public can be assured of a personnel management program and a work force of the highest quality, Providing Retirement and Insurance Benefits to employees and their survivors, and Strengthening State and Local Personnel Administration so that other governmental bodies have the personnel and skills needed to make our Federal form of Government work. The fourth and fifth categories, Other Programs and General Administration, respectively, contain our miscellaneous programs like Voting Rights and our acrossthe board administrative expenses.

In this statement I'd like to describe some of the actions taken during the past year, and also to describe our plans for the coming year. I would like to begin with the merit system itself, and the programs which support it.

Merit and fitness must continue to be the prime factors in filling Federal jobs. The principles expressed in the Civil Service Act of 1883 are as sound today as they were then. To provide the kind of service the public expects from the Federal service, we must staff the Federal Government with the best qualified persons available.

The personnel system should continue to be responsive and adaptable both to mission needs of Government programs and to rapidly changing social and economic conditions affecting employees.

This means that personnel programs

must be reasonably flexible in their administration.

The system must maintain an appropriate balance between the Government's responsibilities to its employees and its responsibilities to the public. A