Suchergebnisse

What did the U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (ACIR) accomplish before it was disbanded in 1996? Were its accomplishments sufficiently valuable to justify reestablishing the organization? This article reviews the commission's origins, history, and accomplishments, and addresses future intergovernmental needs. The ACIR's accomplishments were substantial, but are largely unavailable today. Lessons learned from the ACIR suggest the need to (1) recreate a network of intergovernmental advocates within the legislative and executive branches of the federal government; (2) restart the information flows and high‐level federal, state, and local policy dialogues that withered after the ACIR's demise; (3) strengthen boundary‐crossing institutions capable of addressing metropolitan and multistate problems; and (4) develop new opportunities to achieve public policy outcomes that can be attained only by the cumulative efforts of federal, state, and local governments working together—often with private parties as well.

McDowell reviews 'Making Governments Plan: State Experiments in Managing Land Use' by Raymond J. Burby and Peter J. May et al.

ON 24 FEBRUARY 1988, THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT SUBMITTED ITS FINAL REPORT ON THE NATION'S PUBLIC WORKS TO THE PRESIDENT AND THE CONGRESS. THE REPORT CONCLUDED THAT AMERICA'S INFRASTRUCTURE IS NOT IN RUINS, AS CHARGED BY THE LANDMARK BOOK ENTITLED AMERICA IN RUINS. THE REPORT DID SAY, HOWEVER, THAT THE NATION'S INFRASTRUCTURE IS ONLY BARELY ADEQUATE AND GETTING WORSE. THE COUNCIL URGED THE NATION TO REVERSE COURSE AND GIVE GREATER ATTENTION TO INFRASTRUCTURE RENEWAL AND EXPANSION. IN THE COUNCIL'S VIEW, FEDERALISM WILL BE A MAJOR FACTOR IN THE SUCCESS OF THE NEEDED TURNAROUND. SUCH CHANGE WILL REQUIRE SHARED RESPONSIBILITIES INVOLVING THE FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PLUS THE PRIVATE SECTOR. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN THE RELATIONSHIPS AMONG THESE ACTORS HAVE MADE THE 1980S A DECADE OF TRANSITION, DIMINISHING FEDERAL INFLUENCE ON INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES.

Examines federal, state, and local government relations in surface transportation programs; US, chiefly, with some comparisons with Canada; 9 articles. Contents: Surface-transportation funding in a new century, by Sheldon Edner, Bruce D. McDowell; Reforming the U.S. Department of Transportation: challenges and opportunities of the Government Performance and Results Act for federal-state relations, by Teresa Curristine; Intergovernmental lobbying for the passage of TEA-21, by Joseph R. Marback, J. Wesley Leckrone; State and local government officials' perspectives on intergovernmental relationships in surface transportation policy: 1987 and 2001, by Robert Jay Dilger; Metropolitan planning organizations, by Andrew R. Goetz et al.; Metropolitan planning organizations and the new regionalism: the case of Louisville, by Ronald K. Vogel, Norman Nezelkewicz; Variations in the use of grant discretion: the case of ISTEA, by Patrick Fisher, David Nice; Rail mergers, trade, and federal regulations in the United States and Canada, by Daniel Madar; The provision of highways in Canada and the federal government, by Mathieu Turgeon, François Vaillancourt.