Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

The paragraph below is the legislative language concerning Park Service land acquisition. Had the President wanted to veto specific acquisitions, however, there were none available in the legislation to be vetoed.

LAND ACQUISITION AND STATE ASSISTANCE

For expenses necessary to carry out the provisions of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965, as amended (16 U.S.C. 4601-4-11), including administrative expenses, and for acquisition of land or waters, or interest therein, in accordance with statutory authority applicable to the National Park Service, $150,220,000, to be derived from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, to remain available until expended, of which $75,000,000 is for the State Assistance program including $1,681,000 to administer the program: Provided, That State administrative expenses associated with the State grant portion of the State Assistance program shall not exceed 15 percent: Provided further, That none of the State Assistance funds may be used as a contingency fund: Provided further, That of the amounts previously appropriated to the Secretary's contingency fund for grants to States, $318,000 shall be available in 1985 for administrative expenses of the State grant program.

Though the lump sum was not allocated in the legislation, Congress had specific plans in mind when it agreed on the figure of $150 million. The joint explanatory statement of the Committee of Conference on the continuing resolution contains the allocation.42

LAND ACQUISITION AND STATE ASSISTANCE

Appropriates $150,220,000 instead of $175,000,000 as proposed by the House and $151,410,000 as proposed by the Senate. The following table shows the allocation agreed to by the managers.

[blocks in formation]

42 H. Rept. No. 98-1159, 98th Cong., 2nd Sess., October 10, 1984.

[blocks in formation]

Inholdings, emergency, recently authorized, and hardship acquisi

tions........

Total, Federal acquisition....

Total, land acquisition and State assistance......

500,000 8,165,000

200,000

250,000

1,500,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,750,000

5,000,000

75,220,000

.150,220,000

Funds provided for Golden Gate NRA are for areas in Marin County. The managers agree that the reduction from the House level for Cuyahoga Valley NRA is made without prejudice. Approximately $3,800,000 remains available from prior year appropriations which, when combined with the $2,000,000 provided herein, will be sufficient to maintain the acquisition schedule for fiscal year 1985.

The managers have deleted language proposed by the Senate changing acquisition priorities at Channel Islands NP, California, and agree that the Santa Rosa Island acquisition project shall receive priority.

The status of allocations not included in legislation but found in reports accompanying legislation will be discussed below. The point to be noticed here is that the allocation is not available in the bill and specific projects could not be vetoed.

State and Federal appropriations for roads

The Illinois bill providing funds for various activities of the Department of Transportation during fiscal year 1985 43 makes appropriations for several specific road improvement projects:

Section 8.01. The sum of $4.1 million, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is appropriated from the Road Fund to the Department of Transportation for road improvements on Rte. 9 from Canton to Banner and Rte. 34 from Banner to Kingston Mines in Fulton County.

Section 8.02. The sum of $1,059,000 or so much thereof as may be necessary, is appropriated from the Road Fund to the Department of Transportation for road improvements on U.S. Business Route 20 in Rockford.

Section 8.03. The sum of $400,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is appropriated from the Road Fund to the Department of Transportation for the reconstruction of Riverside Boulevard from Milford Road to Interstate 90 between Loves Park and Rockford in Winnebago County.

Section 8.04. The following named sum, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is appropriated from the Road Fund to the Department of Transportation for repair, rehabilitation and any necessary work on the Riverside Boulevard Bridge over the Rock River in Winnebago County-$300,000.

Section 8.05. The sum of $5,800,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is appropriated from the Road Fund to the Department of Transportation for the repair and reconstruction of 183rd Street in Cook County from Illinois to Morris, Sacramento to Western and Kedzie to Crawford.

Section 8.06. The following named sum, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is appropriated from the Road Fund to the Department of Transportation as a grant to the University of Illinois for road work or reimbursement for road work pursuant to any agreement between the University of Illinois and any unit of local government-$150,000.

Section 8.07. The following named sums, or so much thereof as may be necessary, are appropriated from the Road Fund to the Department of Transportation for left turn lanes, traffic signal modernization and any other improvements to Illinois Route 54 (South Grand Avenue) between State Street and Whittier Avenue in

43 Illinois House Bill Number 2649, final passage, July 13, 1984.

Springfield, Sangamon County: Payable from the Road Fund, $1.00; Payable from the Construction Account Fund, $1.00.

Among other items, the Governor vetoed eight of the road projects mentioned in the legislation.44

I hereby return the items set forth below from House Bill 2649 entitled, “AN ACT making appropriations."

ITEM VETOES

Pursuant to Article IV, Section 9(d) of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, I hereby veto and return the following items:

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Federal legislation concerning construction or maintenance of roads rarely mentions specific roads. Indeed, the Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives 45 provide that general legislation in relation to roads shall not contain a provision for any specific road and no bill in relation to a specific road shall embrace a provision in relation to any other specific road. Funds for a specific demonstration project may be provided, from time to time, in a general appropriation bill or continuing resolution. These are the exceptions, however. As a general rule, federal funds for highway-related projects are allowed on the basis of formulae established in law. Here again, if the President objects to a particular project, the item veto cannot be used to eliminate it.

State and Federal appropriations for education

The Texas general appropriation act for fiscal years 1985 includes funds for public higher education.46 Texas has five major public university systems with several campuses for each system. Higher education appropriations are organized by university system, subdivided by campus, and further apportioned by various purposes. The purposes include "special items" such as an energy laboratory, a medical library, special graduate programs, and a radio-astronomy project.

44 The Illinois Governor's Veto Message (July 19, 1984), Public Law 83-1219. The Governor's item vetoes were overridden. The Senate, the second body to act, voted 57-0 to override on December 12, 1984.

45 Clause 1(p)(3), Rule X, The Rules of the House of Representatives, 99th Cong.

46 Text of Conference Committee Report, Texas Senate Bill Number 179, adopted May 26, 1983.

THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SYSTEM-THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN

[blocks in formation]

Each item is available for the Governor's item veto. The Governor chose to veto one item from the University of Houston system funds. 47

In addition, Senate Bill 179 creates the feasibility study for a new university in the immediate area of Prairie View A&M University. A new univerity in the service area would not be in the best interest of our commitment to upgrade the programs at Prairie View A&M University.

Therefore, for these reasons, pursuant to Article IV, Section 14 of the Texas Constitution, I am vetoing the following item of appropriation, financed with general revenue funding, in order to fully keep the commitments made under the Texas Equal Education Opportunity Plan for Higher Education.

[blocks in formation]

The higher education needs of the residents of the rapidly growing Woodlands area are diverse and complex. A study of those educational needs would be very appropriate. However, the Woodlands Campus Planning project would be a first step toward appropriated or adequately address the higher education needs in this area. In addition, funding such planning would be inconsistent with our commitment under the Texas Equal Educational Opportunity Plan for Higher Education.

In Indiana, the Governor does not have the authority to veto items. By contrast, Indiana's general appropriation act making appropriations for fiscal years 1984-1985 does not include as much detail as is found in other state appropriation bills.48 Indiana's ap

47 Proclamation by the Governor of the State of Texas, Number 41-1909 (June 19, 1983). 48 Indiana House Bill Number 1002, Public Law 380-1983, adopted April 21, 1983.

propriation bill still provides more detail than recent federal appropriations. The section providing funds for education is divided by campus but it is not further subdivided by special purposes within each campus. Special items are not separated out, as in the Texas and other state appropriation bills. Instead, each campus receives a total operating allocation, a fee replacement allocation and an interim financing allocation.

[blocks in formation]

Indiana's appropriation bills are less itemized than Texas's but federal funds for higher education are hardly itemized at all. Lump-sum federal appropriations for education are the norm. In fact, higher education funds are so rarely allocated to specific universities or colleges in federal appropriation bills that when it occurs, the principle of earmarking has been the subject of heated debate. The urgent supplemental appropriation for fiscal year 1986 earmarked nine universities to receive a total of $55.6 million to engage in various defense research projects. The legislative history of these items illustrates the point that lump sums are typical.

The continuing resolution for fiscal year 1986, P.L. 99-190, was enacted on December 19, 1985. The measure included lump sums for research, development, test, and evaluation, for the Army, for the Air Force, and for defense agencies. There are few items earmarked in the legislation. The legislative language is shown below.

TITLE IV

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION, ARMY

For expenses necessary for basic and applied scientific research, development, test, and evaluation, including maintenance, rehabilitation, lease, and operation of facilities and equipment, as authorized by law; $4,798,172,000, of which $17,000,000 is available only for completing development, transitioning into low-rate initial production, and initial procurement of shipsets required to arm UH-60 Blackhawk heli

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »