Page images
PDF
EPUB

question pertaining to Florida's ability to meet the Federal requirement for matching funds under the proposed bill S. 1048, our reply is necessarily in the negative. This is particularly true in view of the fact that we do not expect to be provided with any increased rates or new sources of continuing State revenues for highway construction. Sincerely,

WILBUR E. JONES, Chairman.

OFFICE OF THE Governor,
Atlanta, March 16, 1955.

My DEAR SENATOR: Thank you for your telegram of the 8th inviting my comment with respect to the ability and present inclination of the State of Georgia to raise additional funds to match and implement proposed Federal highway legislation now pending before your committee.

I believe that the people of Georgia want this administration to go just as far as possible and practical within the scope of our resources in matching all Federal highway funds to improve our primary road system. We shall exert every effort to see that no matching Federal funds are left unused. With kind personal regards and best wishes, I am

Sincerely yours,

[Telegram]

MARVIN GRIFFIN, Governor.

Hon. ALBERT GORE:

SPRINGFIELD, ILL., March 9, 1955.

Gov. William G. Stratton has discussed with me your telegram requesting his views concerning Senate bill 1048 and Senate bill 1160, and has instructed me to give you his reply as follows:

Illinois will not be able to provide matching funds required in Senate bill 1048, from current State revenues. We believe that the general provisions incorporated in Senate bill 1160 recommending greatly increased expenditures on the interstate roads are most desirable. These additional funds for the Interstate System supplementing our normal construction program which in 1954 amounted to $98 million, plus positive plans for the immediate construction of a $400 million toll-road system will within the 10-year period solve our highway deficiency problem.

R. R. BARTELSMEYER, Chief Highway Engineer, Illinois Division of Highways.

[Telegram]

Senator ALBERT GORE:

DES MOINES, Iowa, March 21, 1955.

The additional Federal funds proposed for the primary, urban, and secondary systems under Senate bill 1048 could be used to advantage by Iowa. Additional State funds to match the proposed Federal increases will be necessary if we are to maintain our planned accelerated road program.

Iowa has 4,523 miles of obsolete 18-foot wide pavement, 1,456 miles of gravel surfacing, 228 miles of low-type oil surfacing, and approximately 1,000 bridges that are a traffic hazard, on the Federal primary system. The Federal primary system carries 65 percent of Iowa's traffic. Until the obsolescence of the Federal primary system is corrected, I cannot justify expending $5,065,000 per year of State funds, as proposed under Senate file 1048, to build high-type highways on the 700 miles of interstate roads in Iowa that carry only 10 percent of Iowa's traffic.

I consider construction of the Interstate System a national responsibility which should be largely financed by the Federal Government. I expect a toll road to be constructed across our State at an estimated cost of $180 million. I am anxious to receive for Iowa's roads the reimbursement provided under section 207 of H. R. 4261. This reimbursement would stimulate construction of our primary, urban, and secondary systems.

Summarizing: I favor H. R. 4261 for financing a large part of construction of the Interstate System, but recommend that it be amended to provide additional funds for the other three systems.

LEO A. HOEGH,
Governor of Iowa.

[Telegram]

Hon. ALBERT GORE:

TOPEKA, KANS., March 14, 1955.

Please forgive my delay in answering your telegram of March 8 in regard to the State of Kansas on highway proposals before Congress. I am most anxious to cooperate with the subcommittee on this matter, but due to the press of legislative business I have been unable to do so. I shall send you these views as soon as possible. FRED HALL, Governor of Kansas.

[Telegram]

Hon. ALBERT GORE:

BATON ROUGE, LA., March 15, 1955.

Reference telegram March 8 have given considerable study to your bill which shows a very thorough understanding of problems confronting highway departments in several States. Your bill while an improvement would not, in my belief. result in materially increased construction in many States especially on the National System. Our Interstate System requires immediate attention and adequate construction thereon will not result except in accordance with plaus of Governors' Conference wherein Federal Government should take primary financial responsibility for this National System. Unless such course is followed will be unable to complete Interstate System in foreseeable future to necessary highway standards. The Governors believe there is urgent strategic and economic necessity for completion of the transcontinental trunklines and national roads included in the Interstate System. Please express my thanks to your committee.

ROBERT F. KENNON, Governor of Louisiana.

MARCH 21, 1955.

Hon. ROBERT F. KENNON,

Governor of Louisiana, Baton Rouge, La.

DEAR GOVERNOR KENNON: 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 Louisiana 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 Louisiana and local governmental units within the State would be expected to spend on highways during the next 10 years by the Clap report. I now have that estimate. It is $929,216,000.

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 Louisiana 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,

Hon. ALBERT GORE,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

ALBERT GORE.

STATE OF LOUISIANA,
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT,
Baton Rouge, April 15, 1955.

DEAR SENATOR GORE: Reference is made to your letter of March 21, 1955, requesting advice as to the ability and present inclination of the State of Louisiana to raise funds to match the additional funds provided in S. 1048 or to implement the plan proposed in S. 1160.

After maintenance expense, interest and bond redemption, and other recurring expenses are deducted from the recurring revenues available to the department of highways, a balance of approximately $10 million remains annually for construction on State and Federal systems. The department has a large bonded debt and approximately $10 million annually will be required for the next 10 years to service same. Louisiana has a 7-cent-per-gallon gasoline tax, which

is equalled by 4 states, but exceeded by none. In the past war years the legislature has provided the department an average of more than $20 million per year by special appropriations of non-highway-user revenues. These appropriations have provided funds for matching Federal aid and construction on non-Federalaid highways.

A special session of the legislature in January appropriated $50 million from the State general fund from non-highway-user tax sources for highway purposes for use in the 2 fiscal years 1954-55 and 1955-56.

With an existing 7-cent gasoline tax in Louisiana, it is doubtful that the electorate would support any increase in this tax.

In summary, the State cannot under the present tax structure meet the requirements of S. 1048, but can implement S. 1160. In past years the legislature has made large appropriations from the State general fund for highways. To date the State has never failed to match its Federal-aid apportionment. It is my firm belief that Louisiana has the ability to match the additional funds proposed under S. 1048, but the final decision of increasing the present tax rate rests with the electorate of the State.

To obtain an increase in taxes by constitutional amendment would entail delay of approximately 2 years. The urgency of the improvement of the Interstate System makes it mandatory that the Federal Government participate along the lines of S. 1160.

We therefore favor S. 1160 because we can meet its requirements under our existing tax structure, and because it places added emphasis on the Interstate System and its early completion is so essential to the defense and economy of this State and our country.

Sincerely,

ROBERT F. KENNON.
STATE OF MAINE,
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR,
Augusta, March 28, 1955.

DEAR SENATOR GORE: This is in response to your inquiry relative to Maine's highway needs and Maine's ability to raise the additional funds to match and implement various proposals now before your committee.

The State of Maine is a comparatively large State from a geographical standpoint. For this reason it has many miles of road. The following table indicates the number of miles of road and the systems in which it is located in this State:

Type of highway:

State highways__

State-aid highways..

Town ways (including third class).

Total mileage..

16,808 miles improved State-aid highway and 1,170 unimproved. NOTE.-Above mileages as of Mar. 1, 1954.

[blocks in formation]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

NOTE.-445 miles of State highway are not on either the Federal primary or secondary systems.

The State has the full responsibility for the reconstruction of all State highways (3,165 miles) and all secondary roads known as State-aid highway on the Federal secondary system (1,160 miles, or a total for which the State is responsible of 4,325 miles).

Maine has found it difficult to match Federal funds now available. In order to do so, the State gasoline tax was increased to 6 cents in 1947 and in 1951 a substantial bond issue was authorized. The proceeds of this bond issue will be used up on July 1, 1957, and thereafter we will again have a problem of matching Federal funds even if the Federal program is not increased above the present level. The legislature is now considering another increase in the gasoline tax and another bond issue for this purpose. In the light of these difficulties, if Federal matching funds are increased to the level recommended in your proposal, there is considerable doubt that we could find the necessary State funds.

Because of these considerations, the administration bill, as contrasted to the Clay report, would appear to fit our needs more closely. As I understand it, it would provide more Federal dollars and require a lower level of State matching funds than the present program.

You will note that the State shares responsibility with our municipalities for the construction and maintenance of thousands of miles of road for which Federal matching funds are not available. These are our farm-to-market roads and as such they are tremendously important to our economy. We would be interested in any Federal program which would relieve the burden on the State in connection with construction on the Federal system inasmuch as State funds would then be available to a greater extent for use on these farm-to-market roads.

With all good wishes, I am
Sincerely yours,

EDMUND S. MUSKIE.

[Telegram]

Senator GORE:

BOSTON, MASS., March 17, 1955.

Regards telegram pertaining to Senate bill 1048 and Clay committee report, please be advised that Massachusetts strongly favors the program proposed by the Clay committee.

Our major problems are in the urban areas on routes which are or can be on the Interstate System. The proposed arrangements for financing the interstate route improvements in urban areas is especially appealing to us.

As regards no increase in Federal-aid primary of farm-to-market funds, this does not concern us greatly. In the last 4 years, we have raised $550 million by bond issues which has been used for improvements both in the urban and rural areas.

The proposed appropriations for the Interstate System by the Clay committee will allow us to continue our large urban program while at the same time use more of our own funds on the primary system and farm-to-market roads with the continuing Federal aid to be provided.

CHRISTIAN A. HERTER, Governor, Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

MARCH 21, 1955.

Hon. CHRISTIAN A. HERTER

Governor of Massachusetts, Boston, Mass. DEAR CHRIS: 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 Massachusetts 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 Massachusetts 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 $1,444,669,000.

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 Massachusetts 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.

THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUETTS,
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT,
Statehouse, Boston, March 24, 1955.

DEAR ALBERT: Your request of March 21 for further figures in connection with your bill and the Clay report has been received.

I am sending the letter on to Commissioner Volpe of our department of public works as he is far better qualified to give you the exact information which you desire.

With kindest regards,
Most sincerely yours,

[blocks in formation]

DEAR AL.: Thanks for your letter of March 21, 1955. Relative to our ability and inclination to match the additional Federal funds which would be made available by Senate bill 1048 (Gore bill) or Senate bill 1160, as proposed by the Clay report, please be advised as follows:

Under the current 1954 Federal-air Highway Act, we now receive $16.3 million and are required to match it with $15.1 million.

In analyzing the bills now being considered, we arrive at the following figures for Massachusetts as an annual program:

[blocks in formation]

The approval of S. 1160 would greatly assist us in completing a program which is already well advanced for the improvement of our major highways and streets throughout the Commonwealth, i. e., in both rural and urban areas, and we, therefore, greatly favor the passage of this bill.

Please be assured that Massachusetts can and will match any additional funds which either of these bills will require.

You have indicated a figure of $1,444,669,000 that would be required of Massachusetts and local governmental units as matching funds and cost of construction it would have to undertake with its own resources over the next ten years. It is not our interpretation of the administration bill that the funds made available to our State under the Interstate System and on the other federal-aid systems would be contingent upon the completion of our overall needs within the 10-year period.

It is to be hoped, of course, that through the example set on the Interstate System that our own other needs, as well as the programs of the cities and towns will be accelerated to the end that a substantial part of our total job will be completed within a 10-year yeriod.

At any rate, we believe that the Interstate System is the essential part of the program that must be compelted, and Massachusetts is prepared and willing to match this program or any other program within reasonable limits.

With warmest personal regards.

As ever,

(Signed) CHRIS,

(Typed) CHRISTIAN A. HERTER,

Governor.

« PreviousContinue »