Executive Order 12372

Executive Order 12372
Name	Executive Order 12372
Signedby	President Ronald Reagan
Date signed	July 14, 1982
Purpose	Intergovernmental review of federal programs and activities
Preceded by	Executive Order 12291
Succeeded by	Executive Order 12866

Contents

Executive Order 12372 was a 1982 presidential directive issued during the administration of Ronald Reagan that established an intergovernmental review process for federal financial assistance and direct federal development. It sought to coordinate programmatic decisions among federal agencies such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Health and Human Services, and Department of Transportation with state and local entities including National Governors Association and United States Conference of Mayors to reduce duplication and promote strategic planning. The order intersected with statutory frameworks shaped by the Administrative Procedure Act, the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, and oversight bodies like the Government Accountability Office.

Background and Purpose

The inception of the order occurred against a backdrop of reform initiatives advanced by figures such as James A. Baker III and policy debates involving the Office of Management and Budget, Congress of the United States, and proponents including New Federalism advocates. Administrations from Richard Nixon through Jimmy Carter had grappled with intergovernmental coordination challenges exemplified in programs administered by the Social Security Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, and Department of Education. The order responded to criticisms voiced in reports by the National Academy of Public Administration and hearings held by the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs and the House Committee on Government Operations about fragmentation in federal aid distributed through mechanisms tracked in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.

The directive required participating federal agencies such as the Department of Commerce, Department of Agriculture, and Department of Labor to submit proposed discretionary assistance to designated state single points of contact often coordinated through the National Governors Association and regional offices of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. It outlined timelines and review periods influenced by precedents set in directives like Executive Order 11988 and Executive Order 11990, and invoked procedural norms related to the Administrative Procedure Act and reporting standards used by the Government Accountability Office. The order specified that agencies should provide notifications, funding descriptions, and environmental or community impact information consistent with standards from the Environmental Protection Agency and programmatic definitions found in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.

Implementation involved operational guidance from the Office of Management and Budget and coordination among agencies including the Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Transportation, and Department of Housing and Urban Development. State-level execution required engagement by officials associated with the National Governors Association, United States Conference of Mayors, and state planning agencies, as well as local entities such as county administrations and metropolitan planning organizations linked to the Federal Transit Administration. Interagency dispute resolution and technical assistance drew on expertise within the General Services Administration and oversight from the Government Accountability Office.

The order altered intergovernmental dynamics between the United States federal apparatus and state executives, influencing relationships among governors affiliated with parties like the Republican Party and Democratic Party. It prompted state legislatures and municipal governments, represented by organizations like the National League of Cities and American Public Works Association, to adapt planning cycles and grant application procedures. The initiative affected program delivery for recipients served by agencies such as the Social Security Administration and sectors overseen by the Environmental Protection Agency and reshaped interactions in areas previously guided by statutes like the Interstate Commerce Act and programs cataloged in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.

Legal scrutiny arose through litigation in federal courts, including cases considered in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and opinions referencing the Administrative Procedure Act and constitutional principles adjudicated by the Supreme Court of the United States. Challenges questioned preemption, notice-and-comment requirements, and the interplay with congressional appropriations overseen by committees such as the House Committee on Appropriations and the Senate Committee on Appropriations. Subsequent administrations adjusted the policy via guidance from the Office of Management and Budget and through later executive actions influenced by debates during the Clinton administration and the George W. Bush administration.

The order's legacy persisted in shaping federal grant coordination practices used by agencies like the Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Transportation, and Department of Housing and Urban Development, and informed reforms reflected in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance and federal grant modernization efforts undertaken by the Office of Management and Budget and Government Accountability Office. Its principles influenced intergovernmental review models adopted in state planning offices, municipal grantmaking by bodies such as the United States Conference of Mayors, and administrative guidance that later connected with initiatives like Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133 and performance measurement frameworks promoted by the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993.

Category:United States executive orders