It is my contention, however, that Governors should be given the authority to designate the regional Manpower Planning districts within the states through which the federal manpower funds should be directed and allocated. The reasons for this are at least threefold. First, we have been asked by the Federal Government to establish regional planning and development regions for the planning and delivery of other vital services.* We have created and established these entities. In Michigan, I have established 14 Governor's State Planning and Development Regions. We are working toward using these regions as the basis for all comprehensive planning and delivery of services. In this way, the distribution of manpower monies would be linked to our economic development, health service, and other regional activities.

Secondly, and probably most importantly, this regional system would allow for an equitable distribution of manpower funds within the state. It is my belief that all candidates for manpower services (in similar circumstances) should have an equal opportunity to receive these services and that a person should not be penalized because he or she happens to live in one part of the state instead of in another.

Thirdly, this regional system would allow the Governor's office to know what manpower monies are being utilized in the state, where they are being utilized, and for what purposes. At the present time, this knowledge is simply not available.

For example, Economic development, Health, Criminal justice.

I would like to emphasize that within these regional districts, the
local public officials should have both the authority and the right to
select their own local manpower sponsors. They should have the respon-
sibility of determining their own local manpower needs, assessing the
resources available to them, and planning for the delivery of these
services. They should have the freedom to design their own delivery
systems without a presumptive role played by either the Federal or state
government.

It is my belief that this division of responsibility between the Governor's Office and the local elected public officials will result in the most harmonious and effective system for the delivery of manpower services at the state and local level.

It is my judgment that this concept of shared responsibility would be the most effective system for achieving the objectives of equity of access to manpower services for those in need; for providing the mechanism for proper evaluation of the operation of manpower programs; and for assigning accountability for manpower delivery performance. It would locate the responsibility for statewide planning, for fiscal responsibility, and performance accountability in the Governor's Office, while leaving the selection of manpower programs to meet local needs in the hands of local public elected officials.

The fourth point that I would like to emphasize is that manpower policy is the bridge between economic policy and social policy. Therefore, manpower must be related to our goals and objectives concerning vocational education, higher education, economic development, welfare

reform, and health manpower development. The Manpower services provided by other legislation such as that concerning the Employment Service,

vocational rehabilitation, and welfare need to be integrated to the

fullest extent possible in any Comprehensive Manpower legislation reform. For example, there is obviously the need for a strong linkage between welfare reform and manpower reform.

For this reason, the manpower plan developed by the state must be Comprehensive in nature and must be compatible with the state plans developed for the Employment Service, for Vocational Education, for Higher Education, for welfare services, etc. This can only occur if the Governor is given the responsibility for developing the State Manpower Plan as the State Manpower Agent, and if this type of interrelationship is mandated in the Manpower Reform legislation. With this authority, the Governor can then assure the local public officials that they will receive the cooperation and assistance of the various state agencies that conduct these manpower-related activities. In this way, the state and the local units of government can become partners in the delivery of the needed manpower services. The local units of government would then be able to fulfill their manpower service obligations within the framework of an overall state plan.

The fifth point that I would like to emphasize is that whatever disputes might arise between Governors and local public officials concerning manpower colicy and objectives should be resolved between them and not by a third party not of their choosing. If there exists the need for a due process procedure, this due process procedure should be conducted by individuals selected by the parties to the dispute that is, selected by the Governors

and the local elected public officials.

In summary, I would like to reiterate the five major points that I have emphasized in my statement:

A.

B.

C.

D.

E.

We need Comprehensive Manpower Reform legislation

now. A continuation of the present manpower program

maze with minor modifications and changes is not accept-
able.

The role of the Nation's Governors in the delivery
of manpower services must be strengthened. This can

best be accomplished by designating the Governor as the
State Manpower Agent.

The responsibility for the delivery of manpower services at the state and local level must be shared responsibility between the Governor and local elected

public officials.

Since manpower policy is the bridge between economic policy and social policy, manpower policy and manpower planning must be fully integrated with the policy and planning functions. of manpower-related activities such as education, welfare, economic development, and health.

The resolution of manpower policy and manpower plan

ning problems between Governors and local public officials must be decided through a due process system developed by the

parties involved

-

that is, by the Governors and the local

public officials.