ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

Senator John Glenn
March 24, 1976
Page 2

professions, and the effect which HEW's interpretations of Title IX has had on educational institutions, in general, and in intercollegiate athletic programs, in particular.

I believe that your committee would be well advised to pursue these items to a happier conclusion than is presently presaged by recent activities. I wish you well in your attempts to improve government operations.

WMS: sb

Sincerely yours,

2. M. Sangster

William M. Sangster

Dean

Office of the

Executive Vice President

and Chief Academic Officer

The Florida State University
Tallahassee, Florida 32306

March 24, 1976

The Honorable John Glenn
United States Senate

Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Glenn:

Thank you for the invitation to express some thoughts on the subject addressed by a recent symposium, "Our Third Century: Directions."

Two proposals are offered here. The first is:

The Council of Economic Advisers should provide quarterly forecasts of the nation's economy as a matter of public information. The forecasts should contain detailed predictions for a period, say 18 months to 2 years, into the future. The forecasts should be available promptly to any public or private agency or person.

The proposal has a number of merits: (1) It focuses attention on the economic assumptions underlying the budgeting and appropriations processes. (2) A uniform basis would be available for federal, state, and local governmental and for private planning. (3) Comparison of plans would be facilitated among agencies. (4) A better basis for comparison of plans over a time period would be available. (5) Healthy and serious public debate on national economic policies would be spurred in all branches of government and among the citizenry. (6) The forecasts would communicate a means of better understanding of governmental processes at a time when popular interest and support needs encouragement. (7) Expert attention would be focused on the forecasting assumptions, techniques, and models, with the anticipated result of hastening further refinement of the science of forecasting. (8) Popular interest in and knowledge of governmental finance should be increased, with the result a better informed citizenry. (9) An additional necessary and valuable service would be the product, different in purpose but akin in magnitude of value to the data compiled by the Bureau of the Census. (10) The capability for making more extensive and detailed forecasts is now at hand.

The Honorable John Glenn
March 24, 1976

Page Two

The second proposal is:

Long range capital budgeting should be undertaken agency by agency.

The issue is important: (1) The budgeting process has an influence on the business cycle, intensified by adherence to shortterm planning. (2) Long-term goals call for long-term plans, and capital budgeting is a useful planning instrument. (3) The public would be afforded an opportunity to participate in early stages of discussion of the government's capital budget. (4) The focus of attention should serve to prevent long and detrimental time lapses between project authorization, appropriation, and implementation. (5) The regular review implicit in capital budgeting would call for reassessment and modification of plans to meet changing needs.

Thank you for this opportunity to comment. Every thoughtful person must wish success to you and the Senate Government Operations Committee in your important undertaking of planning for long range governmental planning.

Sincerely yours,

Bernard 7. Slager.

Bernard F. Sliger

Executive Vice President

BFS/prr

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

WILLIAMS COLLEGE

WILLIAMSTOWN. MASSACHUSETTS 01267

March 25, 1976

Senator John Glenn
United States Senate

Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Glenn:

Many thanks for your letter of March 12 in regard to recent Government
Operations Committee symposium on long-term policy development and planning.

I cannot at this time deal effectively with such a broad and imposing and crucial set of questions. But perhaps you will be interested to know of a development within the American Political Science Association, of which I am President this year. We are presently planning to celebrate the "Bicentennial Era" of 1976-1989 by sponsoring a major re-assessment of the American political system. We expect to do this with our sister professions, particularly American historians. The emphasis will be very broad, embracing the political and constitutional and institutional systems. We feel that fundamental questions must be raised about federalism, the primary and presidential primary systems, the enhanced role of the courts and many other related questions.

The enclosed project description presents our hopes for the future, and I hope very much that if and when we develop this program we could be in touch with you and your committee in dealing with the profound questions that you raise. Many thanks for keeping me in touch.

Singerely yours,

При

James MacGregor Burns

JMB/cr
Encl.

A PROPOSAL FOR THE BICENTENNIAL ERA, 1976-1989

The American Political Science Association, on the initiative of a committee chaired by Harold Lasswell, proposes to sponsor a comprehensive reassessment of the American political system during the Bicentennial Era. The reassessment would be designed to be rigorous, tapping the best scholarship in the political science, historical and related disciplines; to be realistic, focussing on specific processes and institutions that could be maintained, reinvigorated, or reformed; to be constructive, leading to widespread citizen education, discussion, and action.

The need for such a reassessment seems compelling. The loss of trust in our political system, decline in citizen participation, pervasive corruption as reflected in Watergate and other episodes, uneasiness over presidential power and congressional ineffectiveness, unprecedented reliance on judicial decision-making in sensitive social and political areas, rising potency of special-interest groups compared with the decomposition of parties, disarray in federal-state-local relationships, erosion of a sense of involvement and responsibility on the part of the individual, and above all the widespread feeling of purposelessness, loss of national goals, and disruption of long held values -- all these are acute symptoms of deep-seated ills.

Fortunately, we have an inspiring standard to seek to meet, however we might fall short of it. This is the work of the Framers in their ten years of governing, testing, assessing, and re-thinking during 1776-1789. It is a striking fact that a serious reassessment of our system would require our own confrontation with almost all the issues that preoccupied the Framers 200 years ago the power of the national government, the role and relationships of the three branches of that government, the division of power between the national and state governments, the vitality and validity of the system of representation, and the rights and responsibilities of citizens under a republican form of government.

Tentatively the Association has developed the following guidelines:

1.

The project should be undertaken as a major commitment by the Association, in the spirit of the reassessment of American political institutions that took place during the era 1776-1789, with full participation by other relevant scholarly groups.

2. In the spirit of the original assessment, the project would emphasize the defining of the questions to be asked, clarifying general values and goals and political and governmental means, relating process and purpose.

3. The project would fully exploit the long lead time allowed. Crash projects and quickie proposals would be rejected. Early stages could be devoted to a systematic inventory of present resources of data, ideas, and expertise. Findings and recommendations would be offered during the later stages. The period 1987-89 might be devoted especially to the publicizing of findings and proposals and intensive discussion of them in the press, local and regional meetings, and the like.

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »