« 이전계속 »
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
JANUARY 31, 1973 Mr. Muskie introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred
to the Committee on Government Operations
To provide that budget requests of executive agencies shall be
made known to the Congress and the public and to require public disclosure by Government agencies of participation in its rulemaking process by other Government agencies.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 That this Act may be cited as the "Public Budgeting and
4 Rulemaking Act of 1973".
SEC. 2. (a) To assist the President in carrying out his 7 duties under the Budget and Accounting Act, 1921, the 8 head of each executive agency shall for each fiscal year 9 (beginning with the fiscal year ending June 30, 1975)
1 submit to the Office of Management and Budget a budget
2 for that agency setting forth proposed new obligational 3 authority and proposed outlays for such fiscal year. Each 4 such budget shall include, but not be limited to,
(1) a full explanation of and justification for the 6
proposed new obligational authority, proposed outlays, 7 and levels of personnel contained in such budget, 8
(2) a full explanation of and justification for any differences between the proposed new obligational au
thority and proposed outlays contained in such budget 11 and the levels of new obligational authority and outlays 12 authorized by the Congress, and 13
(3) an identification of all funds available froin
obligational authority for any fiscal year prior to the
for which such budget is submitted which are not intended to be obligated (or if obligated, with respect to which outlays are not intended to be made) before the beginning of the fiscal year for which such budget is submitted, and a full explanation of and justi
fication for the failure to obligate or spend such funds,
as the case may be. 22
(b) On the same day on which the head of an 23 executive agency submits the budget of that agency to the 24 Office of Management and Budget pursuant to subsection
(a) for each fiscal year, he shall transmit a copy of such
2 budget to the Senate and the House of Representatives. 3 (c) The head of each executive agency shall make 4 copies of the budget submitted by him pursuant to sub5 section (a) for each fiscal year, together with copies of 6 any documents submitted with such budget, available for 7 public inspection during regular business hours at a place 8 designated by him. The preceding sentence shall not apply 9 with respect to any portion of such budget, or of any
10 document, which the President certifies should not be made
11 public for reasons of national security. 12 (d) For the purposes of this section, the term “execu
tive agency” has the meaning given to it by section 105 of 14 title 5, United States Code.
Sec. 3. (a) The first sentence of section 553 (c) of title
17 5, United States Code, is amended by striking out the period
at the end thereof and inserting in lieu thereof a comma and
the following: "and the agency shall give other agencies an 20 opportunity to participate in the rulemaking, but only to the
same extent and in the same manner as interested persons
(b) Section 552 (a) (2) of such title is amended
(1) by striking "and" at the end of clause (B);
(2) by inserting "and” after the semicolon at the
end of clause (C); and
(3) by inserting after clause (C) the following new
“(D) any written data, views, or arguments submitted by, and any transcripts of any oral presentation made by, another agency under section 553 (c);".
Senator MUSKIE. I would like to read this paragraph from a letter from one of my constituents. I think by speaking from a Maine constituent I am speaking for a conservative:
As Chairman of the Senate Water Pollution Subcommittee it would seem that you, above all, would be angry about the way the President has usurped the constitutional powers of the Congress by deliberately withholding funds voted for pollution control even over his veto. Don't you realize that what the President is doing is, in the truest sense of the word, unconstitutional? Nowhere in the Constitution is the President allowed to use or not use funds voted by Congress as he sees fit. This is one of the things our Constitution was trying to prevent—an arbitrary, over-powerful Chief Executive. Surely you have some recourse other than simply thinking about it. This is the type of acction that should be taken to the Supreme Court, if needed, to prevent such power plays.
Congress is bending over backward, and you with it, to accommodate the President. But don't you think that calmly handing over to him your constitutional responsibilities is going a bit too far? After all, your first duty is to the people you serve, not the President.
So in response to that mandate from my constituents, as well as my own instincts about this whole issue, Mr. Chairman, I have appreciated this opportunity to present these thoughts to you this morning.
Senator CHILEs. The committee is delighted to have your testimony. The letters will be included as a part of the record. (The letters referred to follow :)
JANUARY 5, 1973. Senator EDMUND MUSKIE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MUSKIE: As Chairman of the Senate water pollution subcommittee it would seem that you, above all, would be angry about the way the President has usurped the constitutional powers of the Congress by deliberately withholding funds voted for pollution control even over his veto. Don't you realize that what the President is doing is, in the truest sense of the word, unconstitutional? Nowhere in the Constitution is the President allowed to use or not use funds voted by Congress as he sees fit. This is one of the things our Constitution was trying to prevent—an arbitrary, overpowerful Chief Executive. Surely you have some recourse other than simply thinking about it. This is the type of action that should be taken to the Supreme Court, if needed, to prevent such power plays.
Congress is bending over backward, and you with it, to accommodate the President. But don't you think that calmly handing over to him your constitutional responsibilities is going a bit too far? After all, your first duty is to the people you serve, not the President. Sincerely,
CAROLE H. HALL,
OLD TOWN, MAINE. Hon. EDMUND MUBKIE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MUSKIE: I was a dairy farmer for ten years and the elimination of the Rural Environmental Assistance Program disturbs me. I understand that the program was eliminated because farmers have a high level of income and can afford to finance these needed soil, water and forestry conservation and pollution control practices on their own. This is far from the truth! Even though farmers receive on the average only approximately $200 per year in assistance, which is more than matched by their own money, there is the incentive to do the necessary work that would not ordinarily get accomplished. These farmers would tend to spend their money on projects that return a quicker profit to them, I know from past experiences. Do you really think farmers in Aroostook County, just because the price of potatoes is high, will carry out these practices on their own in 1973? Some people have forgotten about the low farm income during the past ten years and who knows what they will be during the next ten years. This has not been a normal year when speaking of farm income because of natural disasters. And even if it were, the