1 nterstate Cooperation: esurgence of Mu...1 nterstate Cooperation: esurgence of Mu More states are working together on a regional basis to solve tough problems and many are saving

1 nterstate Cooperation:

esurgence of M u

More states are working together on a regional basis to solve tough problems and many are saving tax dollars as a result.

Multistate regionalism, a persistent phenome- non of the American political tradition, is re- emerging as a viable strategy to deal with a multitude of state problems, ranging from economic development and social services to environment and education. The resurgence of regionalism is due in part to tho gradual devolu- tion of federal responsibilities, states’ mutual interest in better planning and communication, and the desire to improve state management and programs.

Trends in Regionalism The history of multistate regionalism is as old

as the nation itself. Regionalism has been used over the years as a geographic, economic, plan- ning, administrative and political concept. Since the creation ofthe Tennessee Valley Authority in 1933, the federal government has continuously used regional mechanisms to provide selected public services. And during the 1960s region- alism gained prominence with the creation of multistate commissions such as the Appalachian Regional Commission. In the past few years, state policy-makers have taken the lead in creating mechanisms for regional cooperation.

The resurgence of regionalism posits several significant trends. First, despite federal pre-emp- tion of state programs and uniform state laws, “nationalization of American politics has not proceeded so far as to obliterate the regions,” as political scientist Ira Sharkansky says. Regional differences persist and are sharper than ever in some respects. Also, state interests in regional activities remain strong. Record attendance at recent regional conferences of The Council of

Keon 5 Chi, Ph D, is a senior policy analyst at The Council of State Governments

State Governments, for example, may be attribut- ed to state policy-makers’ interest in regional ap- proaches to problems.

Second, unlike multistate regional mechanisms initiated and administered by the federal govern- ment during the 1960s and 1970s, states are de- veloping regional strategies to tackle common problems without federal mandate or involvement. Moreover, some regional programs have been initiated by states without creating additional layers of bureaucracy.

Third, although the number of interstate com- pacts has declined to less than 10 in the 1980s compared to 50 in the 1960s and 20 in the 1970s, recent compacts tend to be more regional in scope. This is evidenced in the Great Lakes Interstate Sales Compact, Middle Atlantic Governors’ Com- pact on Alcohol and Drug Abuse, Northeast In- terstate Low-level Radioactive Waste Compact and proposed compacts such as the Northwest compact for the Pacific Marine Resources Com- mission and the Midwestern Higher Education Compact.

Fourth, states are initiating regional innova- tions in policy and management areas without using the traditional form of interstate compact. These interstate regional innovations do not re- quire congressional approval and can be imple- mented more easily. Over the years, individual states have been management and policy innova- tors within the American federalism system. Today states are contemplating regional innova- tions as well.

And, fifth, developments in multistate region- alism extend beyond national borders. States and provinces in the US.-Canadian and US.-Mexican border areas have initiated regional approaches. One example of such “borderless” cooperation is the Pacific Northwest Legislative Leadership

The Council of State Governments Page 59

Forum, established to explore greater regional unity for economic development. The forum con- sists of representatives from Alaska, Idaho, Mon- tana, Oregon, Washington, Alberta and British Columbia. CSG’s Eastern and Midwestern re- gional conferences also have begun cooperative programs with several Canadian provinces.

child support collections,

Regional Innovations

Southern Leeislative Conference conducte much publicyzed Southern Regional Proj Infant Mortalitv in an effort to imurove i

em shares information ces, corrections system

parents in three of ev

on Network, the first of its state and regional drugpr

eering committee of the Mid-Atlanti

followed suit by ado act on Drug Abuse.

efforts, increased impact from a more presence ofthe states when operating i nation, increasin

and an effective presence for West Washington and overseas.”

The Pacific Northwest Legislative Forum, another Western regional in a fresh approach for bord more effectively in the world market, es in the Pacific Rim and the European Co ty. The forum was sponsored by the Was Legislature and the Northwest Policy C the University of Washingt Public Affairs to explore regional econ In 1990, delegates to the forum agre fied regional actions are state or province is too small to compe ly in the changing market. They als appoint two delegates e to coordinate activities.

The creation of the Center

gional economic coop

The Southern Governors’ Association and t

In addition, the environment is the focus of several regional efforts. The Council of State Gov- ernments’ Eastern Regional Conference created the Northeast Recycling Council in 1988 to share information on ideas and provide for policy im- plementation. Composed of the state recycling directors from 10 Northeastern states, the council focuses on the development and stimulation of markets for recycled products. The council recent- ly sponsored forums with the region’s newspaper publishers and state purchasing officials to pro- mote purchase of recycled papers for newsprint. (See article page 64).

An interstate agreement for hazardous waste management became effective in 1990 in the Southern region. Alabama, Kentucky, South Carolina and Tennessee agreed to use regional facilities to treat and dispose wastes generated by industry within their borders. Other Southern states, including Florida, Georgia, Mississippi and North Carolina, are expected to join the regional agreement. Eastern states are consider- ing an interstate compact on radioactive vaste. (See article page 80).

The Chesapeake Bay is being restored through a cooperative effort involving the District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Following the success of the 1983 agreement, a more detailed agreement was signed in Decem- ber 1987. The agreement has led to the return of rockfish and an upsurge in osprey and eagles, as well as cleaner Bay waters. The regional program is used as a model for protecting other bays and

Regional cooperation in higher education has proved advantageous in the Southern, New En- gland and Western regions. The Western lnter- state Commission for Higher Education, the

ated by the Western Regional Educa- et, is regarded as a model for regional in strengthening higher education.

Council of State Governments’ Midwestern dative Conference is exploring regional co-

peration in higher education through a similar ompact. (See article page 84).

administrators in several states have d multistate management programs to state business more efficiently. One area

tracted attention is purchasing. In 989 an interstate agreement was reached among

Minnesota and Wisconsin to jointly pharmaceutical products. The DEL-

perative was formed in June 1989 by Maryland and Virginia to purchase

items such as pursuit vehicles, road salt, light fix- tures and insecticide. States also have discussed purchase of heavy equipment on a multistate

basis. The cooperative has approached other states, including North Carolina, South Caro- lina, Pennsylvania and West Virginia. Western states also have considered a similar multistate cooperative to purchase recycled paper. In 1990, the National Association of State Telecommuni- cations Directors formed a Joint Procurement Committee to evaluate purchases of telecommu- nications equipment.

State treasurers in four Southern states have acted to improve financial management. In Oc- tober 1990, treasurers of Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee held their first Quad State Treasurers’ Conference to discuss improv- ing cash and debt management and investment policies in an attempt to establish regional coop- erative efforts.

The South and West are known for regional arts efforts. The Southern Arts Federation, which con- sists of nine state art agencies, recently adopted “The Southern Arts Agenda” with specific goals for states. The arts organization focuses on the relationship between culture and economic de- velopment.

The Rural Public Transit Consortium provides technical support services to transit systems in nine Southern states. Since 1984, the consortium has coordinated services among social service transportation agencies and local public transit operators. No other region has such a multistate rural consortium in public transit.

Individual states are taking a look at how regional, national and global events affect them. The Washington Legislature in 1989 launched an initiative to inject long-range thinking into the legislative process. The Washington 2000 project calls for long-range goals and objectives before legislation is drafted.

The Southern Growth Policies Board and The Council of State Governments’ Western Legis- lative Conference are known for their regional trends analysis projects. The SGPB has conducted regional futures projects by creating futures com- missions with the help of members of the com- mittees on Southern Trends. Participants in the futures projects have included governors, legisla- tors, private sector representatives and academics. The widely publicized strategic plan for economic development, “Halfway Home and a Long Way to Go,” was adopted by the Commission on the Future of the South in November 1986. The docu- ment is seen as a blueprint for action for the Southern states.

In 1989, the Western Legislative Conference released its Westrends group’s first report, “The Dynamic West: A Region in Transition.” It iden- tified 10 trends shaping the West as the 1980s drew to a close. Those trends defined ways in

The Council of State Governments Page 61

that assist state policy-makers in jor forces in the Western region which these forces influence ea

As a result of the Westrends projec

state.

Regional Mechanisms and Prospe

vidual states through interstate co agreements. State policy-makers can n mechanisms as well as new vehicles for re cooperation.

Major regional organizations of sta are listed in 'hble 1. In addition, there

in state agencies. These organizat used to launch and administer new

terstate child supp

als participating in have reported sav

and fiscal questions. Some questions relate to the authority, jurisdiction and accountability of re- gional mechanisms. Whether reaonal approaches should be based on a permanent or ad hoc basis also is an issue. Moreover, sources of interstate conflict must be dealt with to launch an effective regional approach. Interstate conflicts stem from policy differences, poor communication, compe- tition for jobs and investment, and in-state poli- tics. The success ofregional approaches depends on policy and program initiatives by state policy- makers who are determined to look beyond short. term interests of individual states in favor of cooperative solutions to area problems on a long- term basis.

e~eren~es Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental

Relations (1972). Multistate Regionalism. Wash- ington, D.C.: US. Government Printing Office.

Daniel J. Elazar (1972). American Federalism A View f o m the States. Second Edition. New York Thomas Y. Crowell Company.

David 6. Nice (1987). Federalism: The Politics of Intergovernmental Relations. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Ira Sharkansky (1970). Regionalism in Ameri- can Politics. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill. - (1972). Maligned States: Policy Accom-

plishments, Problems, and Opportunities. New York McGraw-Hill Company.

e a r State Government News is the nation's leading monthly magazine devoted to news and information from and

about the states. The News puts readers in touch with policies, programs and personalities from around the nation. For state leaders, it is a window on the issues that matter to states and approaches to emerging problems. Regular features are personality profiles of state leaders, reviews of innovative state laws and programs, a pointkounter- point on controversial topics, brief news reports on state developments and capitol conversation's lively look at topics of personal interest to state policy-makers. A Conference Calendar lists meetings of interest to state officials. Subscribe today for your own copy. Annual subscription is $35 , per issue is $6. Write: Order Dept.. The Council of State Governments, Iron Works Pike, PO. Box 11910, Lexington, K Y 40578-1910. Or order by calling toll-free: 1-800-800-1910. For more information, call: (606) 231-1850.

JANUARY - Environment andEnergy. Energy options. Gas price ripoffs. Supreme court and the states. Innova- tions 1991: The best state ideas for tough problems. PointiCounterpoint: Can states refuse out-of-state waste?

FEBRUARY - State Personnel Picture. Fair Labor Standards Act and the states. Cultural diversity in government. Attracting and keeping state workers.

MARCH - Legislating Personal Morals.

APRIL - judicial Relations.

MAY - Rules of the Road. Drunk drivers. Speed limits. Safety,

JUNE - lnfrasfructure Repairs and Investment.

JULY - Telecommunications and Technology.

AUGUST - Developing State Leaders.

SEPTEMBER - Managing Education Reform.

OCTOBER - Foresight and Futures Analysis.

NOVEMBER - Fiscal Federalism.

DECEMBER - ClobalEconomic Changes. EC '92. Trade offices. Regional alliances.

The Council of State Governments Page 63