(The tabulation referred to above is as follows:) 3 Hawaii, Kentucky, and New Jersey missing as of April 15, 1955. No copy of California, reply; it was a telegram. Source: American Association of State Highway Officials, Washington, D. C. Senator GORE. At this point in the record, without objection, there will be printed the letter and the telegram which I addressed to the governors of our various States, and their replies. (The documents above referred to are as follows:) Gov. JAMES E. FOLSOM, WASHINGTON, D. C., March 7, 1955. Governor of Alabama, Montgomery, Ala.: Senate bill 1048 which I have introduced proposes to increase Federal annual funds for secondary roads from the present $210 million to $325 million; for primary roads from the present $315 million to $500 million; for urban roads from the present $175 million to $275 million. This to remain on a 50-50 matching basis between Federal and State Governments. It also increases funds available for the interstate roads from $175 million to $500 million per annum. This, however, is to be on a two-thirds to one-third matching basis. The committee is also considering the Clay committee report. This report recommends greatly increased Federal expenditures on the interstate roads but also recommends that the States and local governments spend within the next 10 years $29 billion more than their present level of expenditures to bring all roads and streets other than Interstate System up to required standards. Meassured by the present Federal-State apportionment standard, your State's part of this additional 10-year expenditure over and above present levels would be very substantial. A portion of the Clay report is embodied in Senate bill 1160. It provides no increase in Federal funds for primary, farm-to-market, or urban projects but does propose $25-billion Federal expenditures for the Interstate System for expenditure in 10 years with the States required to supply matching funds cnly to the extent required under interstate authorization contained in Federal Aid Highway Act of 1954. The Senate subcommmittee has instructed me to invite submission of the views of the governors with respect to the ability and present inclination of their respective States to raise the additional funds to match and implement proposals now before it. The subcommittee will appreciate submission of your views for its consideration. ALBERT GORE, Chairman, Subcommittee on Public Roads, Senate Public Works Committee. Hon. ALBERT GORE, STATE OF ARKANSAS, Chairman, Subcommittee on Public Roads, Senate Public Works Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR GORE: I have been following with interest the proceedings in Congress relating to the construction of State highways. As a former highway commissioner and highway director, I have had a great deal of experience in this field. I strongly feel that the Federal Government should aid a great deal more in the construction and improvement of State highways. In the matter of intertate roads traversing the Nation, the Federal Government would do well to bear all the cost of construction, save perhaps the acquisition of rights-of-way. At least the Federal authorities should bear a proportion of cost of 75 percent to 25 percent as the part required of the States. On other roads of lesser importance to the Nation, the present 50-50 ratio I feel is equitable and fair. However, the amount of Federal funds in this field of construction could be materially increased with great benefit to the individual States and to the Nation as a whole. Very truly yours, ORVAL E. FAUBUS, Governor. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, Sacramento, Calif., March 9, 1955. DEAR SENATOR GORE: I wish to acknowledge your telegram of March 8 to Governor Knight, relative to your Senate bill 1048. Your wire will be called to the Governor's attention at the first opportunity. Sincerely, JAMES WELSH, Personal Legal Counsel. [Telegram] Hon. ALBERT GORE, SACRAMENTO, CALIF., March 23, 1955. Chairman, Subcommittee on Public Roads: Your telegram March 8 concerning Senate bills 1048, 1160, and other measures re highway program is acknowledged. California is now collecting sufficient highway revenue to permit matching of Federal funds under any of the plans being discussed. Some changes in our State laws might be required as to apportionments among various areas of the State. Intensive study now being made by both the California Legislature and my administration of the entire field with particular regard to effect on California of various proposals. It is hoped recommendations can be made in the near future. Cordially, GOODWIN J. KNIGHT, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, Hon. ALBERT GORE, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR: In answer to your inquiry of recent date, this is to advise that as far as the State of Connecticut is concerned, we prefer S. 1160 to S. 1048. Sincerely, ABE RIBICOFF, Governor. MARCH 21, 1955. Hon. ABRAHAM RIBICOFF, Governor of Connecticut, Hartford, Conn. DEAR ABE: In the telegram which I addressed to you on March 7 on behalf of the Roads Subcommittee, I inquired specifically as to the ability and present inclination of Connecticut to raise the additional funds to match and implement S. 1048 and S. 1160. At that time I was unable to supply you with an official estimate of the amount which Connecticut and local governmental units within the State would be expected to spend on highways during the next 10 years by the Clay report. I now have that estimate. It is $1,398,000,000. In view of the specific information now available with respect to the Clay plan, the committee would appreciate it if you would be so kind as to advise us of the ability and present inclination of the State of Connecticut to raise funds to match the additional funds provided in S. 1048 or to implement the plan proposed in the report of Gen. Lucius D. Clay. As you must know, we are earnestly trying to develop a sound program and the information here requested will be very helpful. Sincerely, ALBERT GORE. Hon. ALBERT GORE, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. STATE OF CONNECTICUT, DEAR AL: Thank you for your letter of March 21. I am turning your letter over to the State highway commissioner for answers to the questions you have asked. Sincerely, [Signed] Abe. [Typed] ABRAHAM RIBICOFF, Governor. Hon. ALBERT GORE, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. STATE OF CONNECTICUT, DEAR SENATOR GORE: Because the questions which you have raised directly affect the highway department, your letter of March 21, 1955, to Governor Ribicoff has been referred to me. It is believed that an expanded highway program is essential in the interest of safer and more economical transportation, civil defense, and the economic development of the entire Nation. The chief interest of the Federal Government is in the improvement of the Interstate System and therefore the Federal Government should bear a greater share of the cost of improving this system of highways than it has in the past. However, it is recognized that the individual States and local communities will be benefited substantially by the improvement of this system and therefore should contribute to the cost of the program. Connecticut favors an expanded program of federally financed interstate highway construction which will make available to the State the largest possible Federal grant obtainable within the ability of the State to furnish its share of matching funds without the necessity of reducing its program of other highway improvements or increasing current taxes. It is also desirable that the Federal Government continue the Federal-aid program, other than that for the Interstate System, substantially as constituted under the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1954. Connecticut would not be able to match with present revenue the Federal-aid funds to be apportioned under S. 1048, but could meet the matching requirements set forth under S. 1160. It is our understanding of S. 1160 that Connecticut's matching requirement would be approximately $61 million over the 10-year period. It is realized that this $61 million would not be the total required to construct Connecticut's needed highway improvements and additional State and local funds will be necessary to finance the program. Connecticut's general assembly is currently considering the budget for the next biennium together with legislation proposed for financing improvements to the highway system. Pending determination of such financial legislation, it is not possible to indicate the availability of funds to implement an accelerated highway program in Connecticut. Because of Senator Bush's interest in this Federal highway legislation, I am taking the liberty of sending a copy of this letter to him. Very truly yours, NEWMAN E. ARGRAVES, STATE OF DELAWARE, Hon. ALBERT GORE, Chairman, Subcommittee on Public Roads, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SENATOR GORE: In reply to your telegram request concerning the highway bill now pending before the Congress, I wish to endorse President Eisenhower's highway recommendations as spelled out in more detail by the Clay committee report. It appears to me that President Eisenhower's recommendations fully visualize the importance and need of the interstate comprehensive road program and also by such program more adequately permit the States to meet their local road requirements. It is my belief that the State of Delaware has the ability and present inclination to meet this problem in matching funds and implementing legislation necessary to carry out an overall adequate far-reaching highway-improvement program. In fact, our present planning and long-range proposal before the general assembly of the State recognize the need and the ability of our State to meet this need in cooperation with the Federal Government. For your information, I am enclosing a copy of the plan for Delaware highways which has been submitted to the general assembly. Again, I want to strongly endorse President Eisenhower's recommendations as covered by the Clay study and report. Sincerely yours, J. CALEB BOGGS, Governor. [Telegram] Hon. ALBERT GORE: TALLAHASSEE, FLA., March 18, 1955. Reference your telegram Florida needs accelerated highway-construction program but needs are most pressing in interstate, primary, and urban systems. Due to present unfavorable fiscal position created by liabilities incurred last year in excess of State revenues we would be unable to match increased Federal funds that may be made available this year. However, we will take the fullest possible advantage of any program enacted by the Congress. Our observation in Florida and other Southern States indicates Federal Government should take prime responsibility for construction of Interstate System with States assuming prime responsibility for secondary system. Such development of the Interstate System will give impetus to expanding industrialization of the South and would particularly benefit Florida. LEROY COLLINS, Governor, State of Florida. MARCH 21, 1955. DEAR GOVERNOR COLLINS: In the telegram which I addressed to you on March 7 on behalf of the Roads Subcommittee, I inquired specifically as to "the ability and present inclination" of Florida to "raise the additional funds to match and implement" S. 1048 and S. 1160. At that time I was unable to supply you with an official estimate of the amount which Florida and local governmental units within the State would be expected to spend on highways during the next 10 years by the Clay report. I now have that estimate. It is $1,391,384,000. In view of the specific information now available with respect to the Clay plan, the committee would appreciate it if you would be so kind as to advise us of the ability and present inclination of the State of Florida to raise funds to match the additional funds provided in S. 1048 or to implement the plan proposed in the report of Gen. Lucius D. Clay. As you must know, we are earnestly trying to develop a sound program and the information here requested will be very helpful. Sincerely, ALBERT GORE. STATE OF FLORIDA, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, Tallahassee, April 11, 1955. DEAR SENATOR GORE: I regret my delay in replying to your letter of March 21, but the Florida Legislature convened on Tuesday of last week and for some time prior to that I was, of course, engaged in the preparation of my message. I am pleased to have the additional information you supplied with reference to the amount which Florida and local governmental units within the State could expect under the Clay report. I am calling your letter to the attention of the chairman of our State road department, Hon. Wilbur E. Jones, and trust he will be able to supply facts regarding Florida's position beyond those outlined in my telegram of March 18. With appreciation for your continued interest, and warmest personal regards, I am Sincerely, LEROY COLLINS, Governor. STATE ROAD DEPARTMENT OF FLORIDA, DEAR SENATOR GORE: Hon. LeRoy Collins, Governor, has directed my attention to your letter of March 21 requesting information on Florida's ability to match and to implement Federal-aid funds under the provisions of S. 1048 and S. 1160. We have made an estimate of our revenue for the fiscal years 1956 and 1957. This forecast indicates that approximately $16 million annually will be available to implement or match a Federal-aid program. It is our understanding that under bill S. 1160 Florida would be required to put up $11.8 million annually in matching funds, and under bill S. 1048 the requirement would be $22.5 million annually. Therefore, in reply to your |