Mr. KEE. Mr. Harsha. Mr. HARSHA. I want to make one remark, because this is an important vote and I do not want to miss it, but, Governor, you made a very profound statement before the Subcommittee on Appalachia. I am sorry that the members of the administration could not hear this statement because Mr. Clausen and I and a number of us for several months have been trying to tell the administration that they have the wrong tack on this revenue sharing. For example, that the approach, the more successful approach, the more logical approach, in our judgment, to many of the problems, not only to revenue sharing, would be to take the Appalachian approach with other Federal programs, and there you get the grassroots participation. You get grassroots involvement and grassroots decision; but not only this, if we can build up the economic basis of these rural communities and rural areas and provide jobs for our young people, that will bring a halt to this outmigration to the metropolitan sprawl and ghetto and alleviate many of their problems at the same time. I just wish there was some way you could find time in your busy schedule to join us and try to present your point of view to the administration, because you have summed the problem up far more eloquently than I have been able to. I think the administration should have the benefit of your considered judgment on this problem. I hope that if we can arrange a meeting with some of the officials that you could find it in your schedule to join with us on that. Governor MOORE. I would be happy to, Mr. Congressman. Mr. HARSHA. Thank you. One thing I want to call your attention to, and it is right down on all fours with your problem in funding sewage treatment facilities. That is the administration's water pollution package, which I have introduced along with some 92 cosponsors. Here part of the distribution formula is based on the State's ability to contribute, either directly though grants or loans, and in all probability, this is going to affect your State. I want to give you a copy of this bill and suggest that maybe you will want to submit a statement to the committee when we get into that area, of pointing up your ideas. Probably other States have it. Governor MOORE. I would like very much, Congressman Harsha, to do that. I am familiar with the bill you introduced. I am for the bill you introduced, and I would like very much to present for the committee's consideration a statement in support thereof. Mr. HARSHA. I would like to know how it affects your particular situation. Maybe we can all resolve that. STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN MELCHER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MONTANA A REGIONAL APPROACH TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IS NEEDED IN THE UPPER MISSOURI BASIN Mr. Chairman, a regional approach to economic development is essential in areas of relatively sparse population, capital, and public revenues. In such areas, it takes the combined strength and numbers of the people of a river basin, or a geographic region with common problems, to provide the capital and other essentials for growth which a single state, or small political subdivision, does not have standing alone. Energy is an excellent example. Low cost energy is essential to industrial development. Small electric generating units are uneconomical. Only when an area with consumers sufficient to justify generating plants of at least 100,000 KW capacity-and a million is better-has been linked into a single transmission grid can the economies of size be achieved which are necessary to be competitive in the field of electric energy supply. The Upper Missouri Basin was one of this Nation's highest cost electrical energy areas until development of the main stem of the river required the development of a transmission grid to market the power. That grid now serves eight states and has now made possible the construction of generating units, to meet load growth, in multiples of 100,000 kilowatts. We are increasingly confronted with the need for size an adequate service or supporting area-to justify specialized educational programs; a medical college, for example; or adequately broad research programs, in plains grazing lands management as an example in that field; or on transportation problems, animal health, livestock breeding-many problems which one farmer or rancher, or even one state, cannot support alone. In the Upper Missouri Basin we have common minerals development problems which need joint attention. I believe we are on the threshold of a breakthrough in use of giant beds of low-sulphur coal found in both of the Dakotas, Eastern Montana, and Wyoming. Our coal is now moving east to generate power for the Twin Cities and Chicago in competition with oil, gas, and atoms. With the perfection of magnetohydrodynamics (MHD), which is a process for generating electricity directly from coal, which doubles its efficiency and provides nearly pollution-free generation, our area can become the powerhouse, or power source, of the northwestern quarter of the United States. But we need a united regional effort to speed the development of this process-and the Tennessee Valley Authority developed high concentrate fertilizers to the benefit not only of its own area but of the whole nation. And we will need a regional approach to regulatory problems in this same aspect-common requirements, for strip-mined land restoration because we must have land conservation for the future rather than competition for coal resource development in terms of lax and inadequate strip-mined land restoration requirements. We have a great opportunity to develop recreation-leisure industries—in the Upper Great Plains area. On the West are Glacier National Park, Yellowstone and the Grand Tetons. A plan for a vast recreational complex including the Great Lakes of the Missouri River-the reservoirs behind the great mainstream damsa Lewis and Clark Trail tourway, a prairie wildlife refuge, Indian reservations, and historic sites, has already been blueprinted for us. A prairie tourway through the center of the regional commission's area, and a parkway linking our Western mountain parks from Glacier to the Rocky Mountain National Park in Colorado, have all been proposed but still lay on the drawing boards for want of an agency, or a vehicle, which will unite the efforts of the states to bring about their completion and the expansion of tourist, or leisure industries, which our area and the citizens of the nation, now being crowded into overflowing parks and campgrounds and other recreational facilities, very greatly need. There is need for the development of industry of all kinds, including general industry, our agricultural industry, mining, and the so-called leisure industries. Our need for specialized educational facilities and research is extensive, and our need for the development of common policies in many fields, illustrated by the strip mining problem I have mentioned. Our common problems are numerous, and so are our common opportunities. All of the Governors of the five states, all of the Senators of the five states, and all of the Congressmen from the five states-men of both political parties— joined in petitioning for an Upper Missouri Basin Regional Economic Development Commission in April and May, 1970. A copy of a joint letter to Secretary of Interior Maurice Stans signed by all members of the House from the five states involved and dispatched June 22, 1970, is attached. A similar letter was sent by all 10 Senators. The Secretary of Commerce subsequently advised the members of Congress that the Administration was reviewing the Commission program and would consider the Upper Missouri Basin proposal in that connection. At the instance of the five State delegations, the Public Works Appropriations bill was amended to include an item of $300,000 to launch the Upper Missouri Basin Commission. An equal amount was provided for a Mid-South Commission in Tennessee, Arkansas, Mississippi and Louisiana. There was no action to establish the Commissions, so the Governors of the 5 states appeared, with Senator Mike Mansfield of Montana and me before the Senate Public Works Subcommittee on Economic Development, urging them to extend the Economic Development Act, including Title V, authorizing regional economic development commissions. The formal statements of Governors Forrest Anderson of Montana and William Guy of North Dakota, on behalf of the states, are attached, and submitted for your record. The testimony of Senator Mansfield on that occasion is also attached, and I request that his statement be included in your record. Subsequent to the hearing, the five Governors and the nine active Senators from the five States (Senator Karl Mundt is recuperating from a heart attack) addressed a letter to the President, requesting him to release the funds appropriated for the Upper Missouri Basin Commission and activate it. The President has since proposed that the funds of the Appalachia Commission and funds intended for the Title V commission in New England, the Upper Great Lakes, the Ozarks, the Four Corners and the Southeast be included in his revenue sharing "rural development" proposal. In a response to the February 24 letter of the 5 Governors and nine Senators, John D. Ehrlichman, writing for the President, has stated that the President prefers his "revenue sharing" proposal, contained in his "rural development" message, but that if Congress sees fit to extend Title V Commissions, the Upper Missouri Basin application will be reconsidered "in that light." I offer a copy of Mr. Ehrlichman's letter, responding to the Governors and Senators, for your record. Twenty-four hours after his message reached Congress, the United States Senate voted 77-to-3 to extend the life of the Appalachia Commission for four years, and the Title V authority, including the authority to establish the Upper Missouri and Mid-South Commissions, for one year. It has been the intention of the Senate Public Works Committee to deal with the regional development commissions in a separate bill extending the Economic Development Act. It did not, however, resist an amendment to the Appalachia Act by Senator Norris Cotton of New Hampshire, extending them for one more year, to signify the Senate's intention to continue the program. It is anticipated the Senate Committee will, in dealing with the EDA Act, extend Title V by four years instead of the one year authorized by the Cotton amendment. It is our hope in the Upper Missouri Basin that this Committee will recommend an extension of the authorities contained in Title V of the Economic Development Act and the Act itself for the same term of years the Appalachia Act is extended, including a specific authorization of the Upper Missouri Basin Regional Economic Development Commission. If it is the desire to return power to the people, and to let States develop policy, then this regional commission should be approved. The elected spokesmen for the States, the Governors, and all members of their Congressional delegations are unanimously supporting its establishment. They say "Yes." The President's policy of giving States a greater voice in program determination says "Yes." It is difficult to understand why the States' wishes have not been granted in these circumstances. The Commissions, and other Economic Development efforts, are locally initiated, as a result of local and State decisions. The whole program is now a revenuesharing device with areas in economic need. I trust this Committee will extend Title V commissions, and the Act as a whole. (Appended to my statement are: (1) joint letter to Sec. Maurice Stans from House members of 5 states (June 22, 1970). (2) formal statements from governors on behalf of states. (3) testimony of Sen. Mansfield. (4) Feb. 24 letter to the President. (5) John Ehrlichman letter.) CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., June 22, 1970. Hon. MAURICE STANS, Secretary of Commerce, U.S. Department of Commerce, DEAR MR. SECRETARY: The Governors of the five Upper Missouri Basin States of Nebraska, North and South Dakota, Wyoming and Montana have jointly applied to you for the establishment of a regional economic development commission under Title V of the Economic Development Act of 1965. As United States Representatives from the five state area, we wish to endorse their application and urge you to establish such a commission. Regional development commissions provide for State-Federal cooperation in line with President Nixon's policy of encouraging greater state leadership in government programs. A multi-state unit offers our states an opportunity to work together with federal agencies in attacking the common problems of high unemployment, outmigration, agricultural, rural and industrial development, transportation, pollution control, and many others which can best be dealt with regionally. We will appreciate your early consideration and favorable action on the Governors' request. JOHN MELCHER, GLENN C. CUNNINGHAM, MARK ANDREWS, ROBERT V. DENNEY, DAVE MARTIN, BEN REIFEL, JOHN S. WOLD, Members of Congress. AN UPPER MISSOURI BASIN DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (Statement by Governor Forrest H. Anderson, Mont., to the Subcommittee on Economic Development of the Committee on Public Works, February 24, 1971 in Washington, D.C.) We are standing at the beginning of a new era on the northern plains. I believe the economic decline that has plagued this region of great farmlands in the recent past can be halted. We can begin to move forward again. The agriculturally based economy of the plains states has suffered. Many farms have vanished, agricultural employment has decreased, per-capita income has fallen and good people have moved away. In Montana alone, the number of persons employed in agriculture fell from fifty-four thousand in 1950, to thirty-three thousand at the end of 1968. This general decline has also caused economic problems in cities that support the agricultural population. Montana has been static in an age of progress. We did not keep pace with the tremendous advances the national economy achieved in the last decade. National per-capita income has increased 66 per cent since 1960. During the same period, per-capita income in Montana has risen only 53 percent. These are disturbing figures because they relate directly to the manner in which we live and raise our children. The economic decline I have mentioned is not exclusive to Montana. The same problems exist in Cheyenne, Bismarck, Rapid City and all across the plains. The region has common problems, interests and resources. It has a mutual need to move forward with the rest of the nation. The Missouri River Economic Development Commission will be built on this foundation of commonality. The Commission will emphasize the role of the states in a federal-state relationship. The national government will work in cooperation with the five Commission states to analyze problems, inventory resources and develop plans to improve the quality of life in the region. The Commission is needed to work to improve the economic and social conditions of the rural and urban areas within the region. priorities have already been 58-980-71-pt. 1-12 established-recreation and tourism, improved transportation, and increased trade. Human and natural resources will be better utilized. The economic base will be expanded to halt out-migration, raise median family income and provide additional job opportunities. Achievement of these objectives will require much time and effort. There will not be immediate results, but programs such as the Commission offers are steps toward a better tomorrow. We are confident these steps will become strides. The Missouri River is the timeless bond of the northern plains. It was the route of exploration and commerce that enabled young America to expand into the open lands of Nebraska, the Dakotas, Wyoming and Montana. The course of the river has been the course of history in this region. Through the Commission. the Missouri River Basin States intend to begin a new history-a history of progress. The states to be involved in this compact, as I have mentioned, have common problems, interests and resources. Regional solutions, through the Commission, rather than a proliferation of separate programs, will reduce costs and save tax money in each state. A regional approach would be particularly effective in combatting air and water pollution. The Commission could establish effective and uniform emission control standards for the entire region. This would eliminate the possibility of an individual state reducing its pollution standards and threatening its environment to gain a competitive advantage in the search for new industries. Antipollution legislation would be enacted and enforced on a regional basis. Uniform laws would assure maintenance of the quality of our environment and promote balanced economic development. A Regional Commission will be the best means of promoting judicious development. The Commission will have broad authority from initiating research on improved range management and livestock improvement, to financing all methods of transportation, industrial parks, housing grants, recreation facility loans, or any project which can be related to economic growth. The primary problem in agricultural areas throughout the region is a lack of facilities to process the abundance produced on our farms and ranches. Most of the livestock, grains and other products of our ranches and farms are shipped directly east for processing. The only return we receive is higher consumer prices and marginal farm prices. A priority of the Commission will be to attempt to develop processing facilities in the region to establish vertical integration of the agricultural economy. This would benefit the man who raises the product and the man who buys it in the market by reducing excessive transportation costs. The Commission is not a pipe dream nor an empty scheme hidden behind a pompous title. This idea has been tested under the most difficult circumstances, and it works. The Appalachian Regional Commission has achieved substantial social and economic improvements in that area of extreme social disintegration and hardcore poverty. And there are 5 other regional commissions presently in operation. If the application for the establishment of the Commission is approved-and the states work together in a common effort-we will begin to realize the enormous potential of the northern plains region and its people. This will not be easy, but in all of the states of the Missouri River Basin there are those that believe the Commission will achieve the progress we need. A regional commission will not conflict with revenue sharing proposals presently being considered by Congress and the Administration. The Commission will be an administrative apparatus. It will be an inter-state compact to develop cooperation, better utilization of resources and common solutions to the social, economic and environmental problems of the northern plains region. It will actually enhance the effect of any finally enacted revenue sharing program by establishing the administrative capability to apply regional solutions to regional problems. Let me assure you that this Commission is necessary. I have outlined the serious collection of problems afflicting the northern plains states. Nothing has been done for too long. And I believe it is time we counter the economic decline of recent years and begin to move toward a better tomorrow. |