Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

in jest that perhaps those things might be said about him if he were going out of politics, also. I went on to say and asked the indulgence of my mother and mother-in-law that politicians are very much like beautiful ladies, we all look better from the rear. [Laughter.]

Mayor LANDRIEU. So as I leave office, I suspect there will be some acknowledgments, I certainly hope so.

I came this morning really to just thank you and Senator Johnston for bringing this subcommittee here to the city of New Orleans. You are right, I think, in your analysis, though perhaps a bit exaggerated, that the job of mayor is a tough one. As a matter of fact, it was an impossible job 7 or 8 years ago, and but for the help that the Federal Government has given to cities, I am satisfied that many of them would have deteriorated to the point that they would be unsalvageable. The new partnership that has been struck between the Federal Government and the cities has had an extraordinarily healthy change in the fundamental ways in which these levels of Government had been operating in the past.

They have not bypassed the constitutional rights of the States and yet it found ways to assist not only the structure of city government, but likewise the people that are living in greater urban centers. So I am very indebted to you and Senator Johnston for your assistance throughout the years, and I am sure that every mayor shares that view.

You are here today on another matter that is of the utmost importance. Cities all over the country are becoming the places of residence for the elderly, and we welcome them. They are extraordinarily valuable assets. They are here because the other areas lack the kind of special services that the elderly require. They can make a great contribution if, in fact, they can get transportation and in fact they can get the kind of cooperation they need so they can become valuable assets in and of themselves.

Without the kind of assistance that we are now becoming sensitized to, we suffer what I think is a great loss of human dignity and life and at the same time I think the Government and the citizens lose a great productive element.

So I thank you very much for focusing attention on this. We are becoming more sensitized to it here as we have for all groups in society. I don't think we have ignored the elderly, we have been a little bit too busy in other areas to recognize that there is much to be gained by focusing attention on the problems of the elderly and then trying to develop a program to assist those who have been the most productive citizens and surely have paid their dues to society, and maintain them as productive elements of our society.

So you have my congratulations and best wishes for a fruitful committee hearing. Mr. Gates will be given testimony on our behalf. I simply wanted to stop by to thank you and welcome you to the city of New Orleans.

[Applause.]

Senator EAGLETON. Let me ask you one question, Mayor, if I could, and then I will yield to my colleagues. In conversations I have with mayors, especially the two big cities in my State, St. Louis and Kansas City, they always place great emphasis on revenue

31-8130-79-15

sharing. This has been of enormous value to them, and most of them would have no other way of meeting their budgets but for revenue sharing. It gives discretion to the mayor and the city council as to the priority needs in their own judgment. A mayor and a council can make the determination on which of the multiplicity of problems a city faces the money should be spent.

Now, with that sort of a backdrop, taking into account that the thrust of this committee is programs pertaining to the elderly, do you believe, as mayor, that we have a proper mix of focus in terms of general revenue sharing? Does it give the discretion that you

'emen, of course, like to have, yet still specifically target programs so that an area of need is not somehow overlooked or ignored. How do you balance those two: the desire to have great local discretion, "we will decide how to spend it, just give us the money and we will spend it," vis-a-vis "we want a significant amount of that spent on problems relating to America's elderly"?

Mayor LANDRIEU. Senator, I always lean to the broader category. I don't think it would or should ever reach the point where we abandon the categorical grant system. I think they play an extraor dinarily important role in the terms of development of programs and new approaches. I honestly feel that when those new approaches have been developed, then we have a more efficient machinery for delivering the services on a broad scale.

Obviously, if you simply gave money in a form of general revenue sharing to cities that are terribly strapped, we are inclined to continue what we are doing at our point in the programs because there isn't any time or money to experiment. Categorical-in my judgment, its most important usage is in the development of new programs, new systems that haven't been tried before.

I know that many who are advocates of particular groups have the great fear that this money would not be spent unless it is absolutely earmarked for that purpose. The problem with that, as you well know, is that the dollar has so many earmarks that it is more holes than dollars. I think that is to be avoided.

What is important, I think, to all of us is the raising of the level of consciousness about problems such as the problem of aging. but you can take that and multiply it any number of times. We are dealing, for instance, now with a problem in terms of transit in ordering new buses in the Mass Transit Act. We obviously want to accommodate the handicapped. There isn't any question that here is another element of our society that can be very productive, not simply ignored in society and put away to a nonfruitful life.

But how do you accomplish that goal and at the same time service the other citizens of the community who also have to be serviced? I only mention it because in dealing with the problem, we are looking at some equipment, new buses that may very well cost five or six times what present equipment costs, in order to accommodate the handicapped. Is it preferable to do that or is it preferable to establish an alternative system of transportation? It is that kind of thing that we are wrestling with right now. It isn't the lack of sensitivity, a question of not being concerned and wanting to be concerned; it is, how do you get the most production for the least amount of dollars?

If, in fact, you go out and buy 200 buses, all of which are perfectly equipped for the handicapped and, in fact, instead oflet us assume you are riding 200, 300, even 500 per day, the cost per ride is extraordinarily high. We examined the possibility of perhaps creating a separate transportation system, small vans and phone and pickup. I don't know that anyone has the answer. We are trying different things.

So, too, in dealing with the aged. I think, for some time to come, you would have to maintain a system of categorical grants until such time as the sensitivity is built to where cities themselves will carry on the program even if the grants were widened. I don't know at what point you get there, but I think it is a question of raising the sensitivity level.

The Congress of the United States, in my judgment, can never abandon, even as we move to broader grants, the obligation that it has to direct the set priorities for this country. That is one of the fears, of course, when you go to simply sharing of revenues, that in some way Congress fears the abandonment of its responsibility to direct at least the national purpose.

I don't share that fear, but it is certainly one to be noted and to be watched.

Senator EAGLETON. Senator Johnston.

Senator JOHNSTON. Thank you very much, Senator Eagleton. First, I would like to associate myself with the remarks of my colleague about Mayor Landrieu. It is a remarkable accomplishment, I think, to have served the full time that the charter allows and to be able to leave office with such universal acclaim. That is notnotwithstanding your little story about the direction from which women look best-that is not universally true in this State. It may be in some other areas of the country.

[Laughter.]

Senator JOHNSTON. That is a condition that I devoutly wish that when I retire, I hope as an older American, I will have that kind of acclaim.

I heard you on the McNeill-Lerher report the other night, by the way, and it was an outstanding performance, as I would have thought, detailing the problems of the cities. I think in many ways the problems of the cities and the challenges of older Americans are very much the same because, as you point out, older Americans in increasing percentages locate in the cities.

I think the basic question is, I think that Senator Eagleton raised the question, between a categorical grant and general revenue sharing and who should set priorities. My own feeling is that cities and States do not become sensitized until after you go through the process of a categorical grant. In other words, people don't think down in the State levels of the problems, say, of the handicapped or of the aging until you come in with a Federal grant which sets up a commission on the aging or sets up a commission on the handicapped. Then when the Federal programs, federally financed, are in place then maybe you can take away the Federal funding as a categorical grant and put it in a general category and have the program continue and prosper and develop.

The state of the art and the state of sensitivity at this time, it seems to me, with respect to older Americans would dictate we must proceed with a categorical program because we are not sufficiently sensitized and developed. We don't have the expertise, and the problems or the challenges, should I say, are burgeoning so quickly with the increase in older Americans.

I was pointing out a figure just a moment ago that between 1950 and 1975, the number of older Americans in this State doubled, thank the Lord. We hope that trend continues and that we all join as part of that trend, but it dictates that we give greater emphasis and greater sensitivity to those problems.

So with that, let me add my congratulations to that of the chamber of commerce last night and all of New Orleans and thank you very much for being here.

Senator EAGLETON. Mrs. Boggs, do you have a question of the mayor?

Mrs. BOGGS. Mr. Mayor, I associate myself with the remarks. I think you have looked good to me and your performance looked good to me coming and going.

[Applause.]

Mrs. BoGGs. I do have a comment though on the fact of categorical grants and general revenue sharing. In the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as you will remember, we addressed ourselves to this problem where we put five categorical grants into hold harmless position for those cities already employing the categorical grants and then, of course, we tried to ease the categori cal grant system into the general community development program, housing and community development program, and as all of you know, the end of the 3-year hold harmless has come about this summer and this fall and there is a very great difficulty for some of the programs that have been under categorical grants.

So many of the programs that were initiated under the categorical programs are very splintered programs. Of course, that was the idea, to show that there were community resources that could indeed develop them, but with the moneys being eased off of them, there are so many people that come to us, as you well know, saying, "Why is my program, that is a good ongoing program serving the people and meeting the needs, being phased out? These other programs that are new and untried are the only ones getting any money."

I do think that this is something that we must address ourselves to, that certainly there should be some categorical grants left within the overall general revenue sharing.

Senator EAGLETON. Thank you, Mrs. Boggs.

I would yield to my colleague, Senator Johnston, so that he may introduce our next witness.

Senator JOHNSTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, we have just discussed the outgoing mayor who is going out in a blaze of glory. The next gentleman I want to introduce is coming in a blaze of glory, an old friend of mine. I have been in politics with him now for I think 14 years when we first served together in the State legislature, but I think it is an indication of the spirit of this city, of its cosmopolitan view, of its sophistication. of its high state of civilization, of its good sense that it would elect a man of the skill and capability of Ernest (Dutch) Morial.

It gives me great pleasure to introduce him to this committee. Dutch, we are glad to have you.

[Applause.]

STATEMENT OF ERNEST (DUTCH) MORIAL, MAYOR-ELECT OF NEW ORLEANS

Mr. MORIAL. Thank you for your very kind remarks, Senator. I hope I am loved as much going as I am coming.

I have prepared some testimony and I would like at this time to refrain from covering in my presentation that portion of it through the middle of page four and begin at page four.

Senator EAGLETON. The entire statement will be printed in the record, and you may pick up at page four.

Mr. MORIAL. Thank you, sir.

Senator Eagleton, Senator Johnston, distinguished committee members and staff, interested citizens, I welcome this opportunity to share with you the pressing problems of older persons in the city of New Orleans and to urge continued leadership by the Congress in the development and implementation of a unified policy on the elderly.

CHARACTERISTICS OF ELDERLY NEW ORLEANIANS

Older New Orleanians reflect, to a large extent, the demographic characteristics, needs and concerns of older persons in most major American cities. According to 1975 census estimates, those persons aged 60 plus in Orleans Parish number 90,200 and already comprise 16 percent of the total population. It is anticipated that this group will continue to grow more rapidly than other segments of the city's population, due to declining birth rates. medical advances. and the continuing-although lessening-outmigration of the more mobile and affluent.

Of our present elderly population, 35 percent are members of minority groups, 62 percent women, and approximately 33 percent live alone with no one to assist them in the activities of daily living. Nearly 25 percent of the elderly are considered by their advanced age-over 75 years-to be particularly vulnerable.

IDENTIFIED NEEDS AND CURRENT RESPONSE

During my recent mayoral campaign, in recognition of the increasing community concern over the well-being of our elderly population, I developed a platform on the elderly which addresses their critical identified need. Primary among these is income. Nearly one third of the elderly- 31.5 percent are living below established poverty levels with an additional 20 percent at near-poor levels. These statistics point to the failure of income-assistance and pension payments to adequately provide for older citizens. Minimum payments made in Louisiana to supplemental security income-SSIrecipients, social security recipients, Federal retired employees, and State retired employees are all below the established State poverty level for a one-person household. But it is not only those at subsistence levels whose incomes are inadequate. Many older persons have difficulty meeting basic costs on their fixed incomes during

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »