« 이전계속 »
MATERIAL SUBMITTED SUBSEQUENT TO CONCLUSION OF HEARINGS
(CLERK'S NOTE: By order of the Chairman, the following material, received subsequent to conclution of the hearings, will be inserted in the record at this point:)
STATEMENT OF SENATOR ABOUREZK
Thank you Mr.
Chairman for allowint metna opnortunity to
present this statement to your subcommittee.
The programs of the Economic Development Administration and
of the Regional Planning Commissions, like the old West Retional
Commission, are of real importance to states like South Dakota.
As neople working with these programs at the local level are
quick to point out, funding from SDA serves to nartially
compensate for the largely unfunded provisions of the Pural
This Federal assistance is immortant for a
number of reasons.
For one thins, it is frequently essential to
making it possible for local areas to meet the national standards
bein, mandated by Federal law.
As an exazole, implementation of
the Safe Drinking Water Act is goin. to add to the pressure for
water system fundinr, and this is an area which EPA shares with
other agencies such as Farmers Home Administration.
EDA programs are important also because they frequently
permit a sort of 'leveragin' effect.
In Rapid City, Sn,
example, the availability of public works fundinn from CD4 for
streets, sidewalks, and related development, made possible the
use of other prorrans to rehabilitate a bli htet area and provide
improved housing for low-income Indians and others.
areas, EDA fundin?, of infrastructure for industrial development,
means a much-expanded local tax-base and that means
resources for other public activities.
Of course, this is what economic development is all about
and it is in the nature of coon economic development that it has
including expanded amoloyment opportunities
which can halt or reverse the traditional out-migration of the
young people from rural areas and small towns, better protection
of the environment, and more efficient use of available
As you know, EDA programs have been narticularly
helpful to some of the Indian tribes in my state.
This is as it
should be since Indian communities are all-too-frequently the
most economically depressed areas around.
Datí recently provided by the Treasury Department, indicates
that in Siscal 1975, more than 3.2 million in EDA funds went to
state and local governments in South Dakota.
Since most of these
outlays probably reflected in FV 74 appropriations and Congress
provided increased funding levels in the next two succeeding
years, it is likely that our state can expect to do even better
this year and next.
But, the President's proposed funding levels
for EDA and the Title V Commissions in FY'77 would spell extreme
hardshin for states like ours in the years after that.
recomnendation that we cut back fundinn by i half or two-thirds
is absolutely incredible at a time when the demand on SDA
programs are growing.
Congress has, in recent years, exnanded
the eligibility of highly urban areas for some EDA prograns.
This being the case, increased funding is in order rather tha?
As you know, the Public Works Committee has responded to
this loric and is recommendini full fundinn of the Economic
Development Administration and the Title y Commissions. While not respondins completely to that recommendation, the Bucet
Committee, it is noteworthy, does $672st that ED4 ororrams be funded at this year's level plus an allowance for inflation. 1
believe that the Budget Committee mark should be regarded as
minimuy in this case.
LETTER FROM SENATOR BAYH
United States Senate
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510
JAMES R. CALLOWAY
June 2, 1976
Honorable John O. Pastore, Chairman
Dear Mr. Chairman:
We are writing to you to recommend that the fiscal year 1977 State, Justice, Commerce and Judiciary Appropriations Bill provide $100 million for implementation of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act. This recommendation is $50 million less than the authorization for fiscal 1977.
With your assistance and support, Mr. Chairman, the juvenile justice program was funded at a level of $40 million for fiscal 1976. The Administration proposes to reduce that appropriation by 75 percent in 1977, to $10 million a step which would undermine much of the progress that has already been made.
The juvenile justice program, initiated in 1974, is the foundation of a nationwide campaign against juvenile delinquency. Its goal is to direct attention to the prevention of crime rather than responding to criminal acts after the fact. We believe that it represents the most constructive and cost-effective approach to reducing crime.
Over one-half of all serious crimes are committed by young people. Young people have the highest recidivsm rate of any age group upwards of 85 percent. Each dollar spent to prevent crime by a young person represents many dollars saved -- in terms of property loss and the public costs of processing and incarcerating offenders, not to mention the incalculable costs of human suffering and wasted lives.
It is noteworthy that one of the most cost-effective aspects of the program is the coordination of efforts by private groups as well as state and local governments. A very modest amount of federal assistance has resulted in significant volunteer efforts by private groups such as the Big Brothers of America, the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, YMCAS and YWCAS.
Lack of adequate funding will severely hamper juvenile crime prevention efforts. Understaffed state and local agencies lack the expertise and resources to provide effective correctional assistance and services to young offenders. No other federal program provides the coordination and direction which is necessary to mount a comprehensive effort against juvenile crime.
We hope that you will agree on the need to adequately fund the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act so that we may help hundreds of thousands of young people to lead productive lives and reduce the rate of crime in our society. Thank you for your consideration.
Bund Baugh and Indo
Charles McC. Mathias, Jr.
LETTER FROM SENATOR BEALL
United States Senate
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510
May 17, 1976
Honorable John 0. Pastore
Justice, Commerce and the Judiciary
Dear Mr. Chairman:
As a cosponsor of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974, I have had a strong interest in the activities of the National Fire Prevention and Control Administration. It is my understanding that your subcommittee will shortly be considering the Fiscal Year 1977 appropriations for this Administration, and I want to take this opportunity to urge you to fund this program at the authorized level of $ 20.5 million.
As you know, fire waste is a national tragedy we can ill afford. Twelve thousand lives are lost annually hy fire, and three hundred thousand people are seriously injured by smoke and fire during that same period, as well as an $11 billion loss to our Nation. The 1974 Act was designed to combat this tragic loss of life, health, and property, and, based on the comments of fire service personnel and other citizens throughout the country, I believe we have developed a solid foundation upon which to build our national effort.
Yet, despite high hopes, these programs are being strangled for lack of financial support. Although Congress authorized the NFPCA at a modest level of $32.5 million for two years, only $14.6 million was appropriated. $9.2 million of this appropriation was for on-going programs, and thus the Congress has only provided $5.4 million in new funding for what was designed to be a major commitment against the menace of fire.