Original of 2 copies NATIONAL GOVERNORS' CONFERENCE 1974 WINTER MEETING March 6 & 7 Washington, D. C. AGENDA PAGE Wednesday, March 6, 1974 Opening Plenary Session Presiding: Governor Daniel J. Evans, Washington - Chairman, National Governors' Conference Remarks of the Chairman . 1 Address by the Vice President of the United States . .. 15 "Economic Outlook for 19741/"Uational Budget FY 1975" Participating Guests: Herbert Stein, Chairman - Council of Economic Advisers 27 Arthur Okun, Senior Fellow - The Brookings Institution and former Chairman, Council of Economic Advisers 34 Alan Greenspan, President - Townscnd- Greenspan & Co., Inc., New York City, New York ... 43 General Discussion 48 Roy L. Ash, Director - Office of Management and Budget . 67 General Discussion . 72 Thursday, March 7, 1974 Plenary Session 103 Energy Related Problems Presiding: Governor Stanley K. Hathaway, Wyoming, iliairman, NGC Committee on Natural Resources and Environmental Management 105 Thursday, March 7, 1974 (Continued) Participating Guest William E. Simon, Administrator - Federal Energy Office 106 Brief Reports from each of the Regional Governors' Conferences. • . • . • • • 117 General Discussion . 148 Executive Luncheon Session for all Governors - "NGC Future Operations" Remarks by Governor Daniel J. Evans, Presiding. 180 Mr. Ken Olson ! • • • 189 General Discussion 201 Reports by Standing Committee Chairmen and Actions on Resolutions: Governor Cecil D. Andrus . 236 Governor Calvin L. Rampton • 240 Governor Robert B. Docking . 247 Governor Chrisopher S. Bond 249 Governor Stanley K. Hathaway 250 1 PRO C E E DIN G S (Whereupon, the conference was convened for the opening Plenary Session, Wednesday, March 6, 1974, at 9:20 o'clock, a.m., Governor Daniel J. Evans, Washington, Chairman and Presiding.) GOVERNOR EVANS: If the Governors will take their seats, others will do likewise. Please take your seats so we can begin this morning's session. Good morning, this mid-winter meeting of the National Governors' Conference will come to order. Mr. Vice President, guests, we are delighted to have you here in a time of some concern for the nation; some concern for the issues which face us and which we will deal with in the next couple of days. We are delighted, also, to welcome some new members. I don't know if all of them are here yet this morning but I would like to introduce them to all of you. I can't see through the lights to tell whether all are here. I do know that we welcome back to our Conference Governor Mills Godwin of Virginia. (Applause) And the new Governor of New York, is Governor Wilson here yet? The new Governor of New Jersey, Governor Brendan Byrne. (Applause) Governor Vanderhoof of Colorado. (Applause) I have one brief announcement that will set the style of any 2 proposed resolutions so that all the Governors may be aware of it. I know that there are some resolutions, or concerns, about issues at this Conference and under the Articles of Organization it is intended that resolutions, and public policy statements, should be developed through our Standing Committee operation. We generally wait, as you know, for action by the full body at our annual meeting in June. This winter meeting is not normally suited for the adoption of policy statements, although it may very well be at this meeting there will be issues of such urgency and concern that resolutions are desirable. It is the desire of the Executive Committee that an orderly procedure be adopted at this meeting, and I urgently request that any individual Governor who seeks adoption of a resolution do so by submitting it to the appropriate Standing Committee. In accordance with past tradition, we are operating under the Rules of Procedure as we last adopted them at the annual meeting at Lake Tahoe. Under those rules any Governor has the right to seek suspension of the Articles in order to consider an individual resolution and, as you remember, that suspension requires a three-quarters vote, and it is also required to distribute copies of the proposal to all Governors at least one session before the motion is put to a vote. Therefore, please give notice either this morning or 3 tomorrow morning about your resolutions so that they can be voted on at the business session during tomorrow's lunch. The motion to suspend, of course, is not debatable and , requires a three-quarters vote to be before the body for consider- ation, and an equal three-quarters vote for adoption. An even better way, of course, is to present resolutions to the Standing Committees and then they may be brought to the body if the Committees vote to do so, and in that case no rule suspension is required. But, of course, a three-quarters vote for adoption will still be required. The Executive Committee of the National Governors' Conference has worked remarkably hard during the course of this year, and before we get into the remainder of this morning's program ltd like to bring you up to date for a few minutes on how I view the state of our States today, and particularly with what comfort I view the operation of our States. The French have a saying that the more things change the more they remain the same. While few of us as Cbief Executives who have plowed through the challenges of the past years would subscribe to the entire truth of that aphorism, as we approach the 200th year of our founding as a Republic one can be struck by at least some similarities. I had a chance to look back into the early history of this Republic. March 6, 1774 was a Sunday. Happily, in those distant days, the business of the prior six days came to a halt. 4 Furthermore, on Sundays the citizenry was granted a respite from the blaring headlines, and no one was as yet exposed to the trumpeting of newsmakers disgorging their views on nationwide television, or that hourly jolt of the most pervasive addictive drug known to man today the radio news broadcast. However the next day, Monday, March 7, 1774 brought things back into perspective. In a leading newspaper of the day, the "Boston Gazette and Country Journal" whose masthead declared it contained "The freshest Advices, Foreign and Domestic" the entire front page was devoted to the impeachment of a high public official for "High Crimes and Misdemeanors". The public official involved was one Peter Oliver, Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Judicature of Massachusetts. Although the bill of impeachment passed the House of Representatives of the Massachusetts Legislature, the Governor refused to countenance the proceedings. When the British forces evacuated Boston in March 1776 Oliver, a Loyalist, left for England where he dies in 1791. A far more common occurrence, however, has been the low regard in which state governments have been held in the past few years. They have been reviled, disparaged, ignored and discounted in both academic and political circles, not to mention by citizens generally. The "failures of the states" have been chronicled for years, most energetically since the 1930's when political scientists saw the national government as action oriented and state government 5 as reluctant and timid. David Brinkley in 1967 said that "States are pretty much disappearing as a political force; they are almost through. I think in another generation they will be, politically speaking, just about insignificant." The late Senator Everett Dirksen, in a characteristically orotund sentence, predicted in 1965 that in the not too distant future "the only people interested in state boundaries will be Rand-McNally ... Perhaps the saddest commentary on the state of the states during the 1960's came from former Senator Joseph Tydings who wrote--again in 1967--tlFor a hundred years, the states have been losing ground to the federal government and they have sunk into lower and lower repute in the eyes of the electorate. In recent years, they have been increasingly bypassed as federal funds to cure urban ills go directly to our cities. Unless the states act decisively to shake off their lethargy, and meet the challenges of this decade and the next, they will wither on the vine. This is, I believe, their last chance." Not only have we allowed too many of these disparaging comments to go unanswered, but on occasion we have allowed the federal government to speed the states onward to that so often predicted oblivion. I, for one, simply am not content to see the states or the office of the governor tlwither on the vine." I am not content 6 to allow the federal government, the congress, or the administration to disregard the vital role of state government. We have, for too long, allowed others to take massive credit for domestic programs while the majority of funds have come from state and local tax dollars. The Great Society Program of the 1960's capitalized on a direct federal-local government concept. Because it failed to recognize the necessity of statewide planning and coordination, many of the even conceptually valid programs have faltered. Since then the states have been in the vanguard in calling for inter- governmental coordination and responsibility. In an effort to decentralize the federal government and return decision making to the people, the national administration announced the beginning of the new federalism in 1969. Heralded as a new era for state/federal/local government partnerships, the concept was vigorously supported by state and local officials who have utilized the theory and practice of revenue sharing for many years. In fact, of the 51 state and federal legislative bodies only one--the federal congress--seems to regard revenue sharing as anything out of the ordinary.