Vice President Richard M. Nixon and Senator John F. Kennedy, the Republican and Democratic candidates for President of the United States, give their answers to questions presented to them by Highway Highlights. In this exclusive written interview, the candidates disclose what their respective policies would be toward the highway program and highway transportation.

     Question: What importance do you attach, to the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways?

     Vice President NIXON. The National System of Interstate and Defense Highways will be - in fact, it already is becoming - the backbone of our highway transportation network. Because I was convinced of this even before the program was authorized by law, I was proud to present President Eisenhower's original highway proposals to the 1954 Governors' Conference at Bolton Landing, N.Y. The present program stems from these proposals.
     While the 41,000 miles of the Interstate Highway System will be a relatively small portion of our 3.5 million miles of roads and streets the completed system will be expected to carry 20 percent of our total motor vehicle traffic. Obviously, the system is of vital importance in terms of traffic safety, for the continued growth of our economy, and for possible emergency transit of essential defense materials.
     Senator KENNEDY. Our highway system is important because of our needs of defense, safety, and economic growth. In case of defense emergency, a good system of highways would be necessary for quick movement of goods and munitions. Meanwhile, some 40,000 people a year lose their lives in automobile accidents, partially because of inadequate highways, and we must act to reduce this loss of life. In addition, we must have a highway system adequate for our needs if the United States is to have a strong and expanding economy. Poor highways increase the cost of transportation, and all Americans benefit from better roads.

     Question: What would be your policy in carrying forward this 41,000-mile construction, project?

     Senator KENNEDY. I would carry it forward in accordance with the principles and schedules of the Highway Act of 1956. We have already fallen behind this schedule and should get back to it.
     Vice President NIXON. It should be done, as it is now, through the cooperative efforts of the States and the Federal Government, with appropriate recognition of State and local as well as interstate requirements. The program should proceed on a pay-as-you-build basis, and in accordance with the principles set forth in the basic 1956 legislation. All Federal-aid highways built as portions of the Interstate System should be toll free.

     Question: Do you have any position on when this Interstate System should be completed and open to full use?

     Vice President NIXON. By 1972, as originally planned.
     Senator KENNEDY. Our original plan was to complete the program by 1972 which would be adequate for our needs in 1975. We have fallen behind, but I would hope that we could complete the system by 1975.

     Question: Would you expect to make changes in any phase of this program? If so, what might they be?

     Senator KENNEDY. I am in general agreement with the aims of the program. It may be that needs will become evident as we proceed with its operation. We should review the program periodically.
     Vice President NIXON. I believe the Federal-aid highway program is proceeding on a sound basis and that both the Interstate System and the other federally aided highways are being designed and constructed to achieve the desired results. We must, of course, continue to scrutinize the program, as has been done under President Eisenhower, to insure continued sound design and full value from expenditure of public funds, and we must be prepared should future developments indicate a need for program changes.

     Question: How do you feel about the way this Federal-State road building program has been carried out to date? Are you satisfied with the rate of progress?

     Vice President NIXON. It has progressed with good speed. The Eisenhower administration has invested as much Federal money in our Nation's highways in the past 4 years as was spent on highways in the previous 40 years. Never before has such a tremendous public works building program advanced so successfully in such a short time.
     In the last 4 years, a total of 6,400 miles of express highways in the Interstate System have been completed. Construction is underway now on another 5,000 miles. In addition, construction of more than 100,000 miles of urban and rural highways other than interstate has been completed, and an additional 25,600 miles are underway on the so-called Federal-aid ABC systems
     Anyone who travels to any extent can see for himself the physical evidence of the tremendous progress we have made on this entire program.
     One further point is that we must, of course, be on the constant guard against unwise or improper expenditure of highway funds. In a program of such magnitude as the Interstate Highway System, improper use of funds is an ever-present threat necessitating the most diligent, watchful care.
     Senator KENNEDY. No; I am not satisfied. We have fallen behind in the construction schedule.

     Question: During the fast few years of this program, it has experienced some financing problems. Do you have any views on this?

     Senator KENNEDY. In accordance with section 210 of the Highway Act of 1956, we can expect a Department of Commerce report early next year. This report is to include recommendations based on a thorough study of equitable financing of the highway program and we should review these recommendations before taking action.
     Vice President NIXON. Means should be found to complete the Interstate System within the time schedule originally planned and on the sound pay-as-you-build basis originally planned. Two reports are to be submitted by the Bureau of Public Roads to the next Congress in January. One will be a revised estimate of the cost of completing the Interstate System and the other a highway cost allocation study showing highway benefits to road users and nonusers. These reports will furnish a sound factual basis upon which Congress and the administration can develop a long-range financing plan that will make possible an equitable distribution of the program's cost.

     Question: What would be your idea of the best way to fnance this program to insure orderly progress toward completion of the Interstate System? Many highway users feel that, because the entire Nation will benefit from the Interstate System in various ways, that they should not bear the entire cost burden - that part of the cost should be paid out of general funds. Would you comment on this?

     Vice President NIXON. I do not believe we should prejudge the solution to the financing problem before the two reports mentioned in the answer to question 6 are submitted. I believe it would be better to wait until the experts complete their studies. As a general rule, however, I believe it is a sound principle that users should pay a substantial part of the cost of a facility. In our overall economy, of course, facilities such as electricity, water, and telephones have effects beyond the direct benefits to users and perhaps this is even more true in connection with highways. Actually, of the entire highway construction and operating cost, about 70 percent is paid by users with the remaining 30 percent paid by nonusers. This nonuser support is applied primarily to non-Federal-aid streets and roads. But our entire roads and highways network is an integrated system, so I believe that, pending new evidence in the report now being prepared, the present ratio is equitable.
     Senator KENNEDY. While much of the burden must fall inevitably on the highway users, as is now the case, we should remember that good highways benefit all Americans. Thus, I believe the highway program should be financed on a shared basis between taxes on the users and general revenues.

     Question: Last year Congress, in an emergency measure, increased the Federal gasoline tax by 1 cent, but promised to eliminate this increase as of June 30, 1961. Do you agree that this tax increase of 1 cent should be ended at that time?

     Senator KENNEDY. I would want to review the Department of Commerce report early next year before making a final decision on this matter. As I have said, the expense of highway construction should be shared by general revenues. It may be that we would want to end the tax in 1961, but it might also be necessary to continue the tag in order to keep up a high level of highway construction.
     Vice President NIXON. The 1-cent gas tax increase enacted last year should be eliminated on June 30, 1961, in accordance with existing law. However, the whole financing problem must be reevaluated after reviewing the reports on the new Interstate System cost estimates and highway cost allocations.

     Question: Highway users are unanimous in their position that any further increase in the Federal gasoline tax would be completely unjustified. Do you agree with this position?

     Vice President NIXON. Most motorists are willing to pay reasonable taxes for better roads. A majority of them now are glad to use toll roads across the country where they pay the equivalent of 15 to 30 cents a gallon of gasoline, in addition to the present gas tax, as a premium for the privilege of enjoying the safety, comfort, speed, and motor vehicle economy these excellent roads offer. The question of reasonableness and justification must be decided after study of the two forthcoming reports referred to in question 6.
     Furthermore, I think most highway users would be less opposed to Federal gasoline taxes if they realized that those taxes would result in better roads. Under the Republican administration, they have had this assurance. Under the previous Democratic administrations, an average of only 52 cents of every highway user tax dollar was spent on Federal highway construction; under the Eisenhower administration, this figure has been almost 80 cents.
     Senator KENNEDY. I agree with the position now, but as in the case of all tax rates, I believe our revenue picture might be subject to periodic review.

     Question: Do you believe in protecting the highway trust fund from "raids" by any other agencies of Government - in other words, keeping it solely for highway purposes?

     Senator KENNEDY. Yes.
     Vice President NIXON. To the greatest extent possible, and as Congress designates, the highway trust fund should be used solely for highway purposes, including necessary administrative costs.

     Question: Do you think there is any chance of removing any of the Federal excise taxes paid by highway users in the near future?

     Vice President NIXON. The possibility of removing or reducing excise and other Federal taxes is dependent on many factors, including the amount of revenue necessary to keep income and outgo in balance. In addition to the two reports to be presented to Congress in January, other studies of the entire tax structure are underway, particularly by the Ways and Means Committee of the House of Representatives. I would not make a prediction at this time as to the possibility of removing or reducing the excise taxes about which you ask.
     Senator KENNEDY. We should review these taxes from time to time as a part of an overall tax reform program.

     Question: Do you have any plans for taking further action to solve the growing problem of city traffic congestion?  If so, by what means?

     Senator KENNEDY. I do not know of any magic plans for ending city traffic congestion other than better roads. It is a subject which the Federal, State, and local governments must constantly study and work for new solutions.
     Vice President NIXON. The amazing population growth of many of our urban areas puts increasing emphasis on the need for more comprehensive planning in those areas to take full advantage of all means of transportation. This does not mean either emphasizing roads and highways to the exclusion of mass transit systems or the reverse; rather, it means establishing the best balanced overall transportation system to perform the function of moving vast numbers of people and vast amounts of goods. The primary responsibility rests on States, cities, and counties; the Bureau of Public Roads encourages them to adopt comprehensive plans that will eliminate or minimize congestion, supplies them with technical advice, and is glad to approve State plans that will accomplish this end.

     Question: Do you have any plans for taking steps to promote tragc safety?

     Vice President NIXON. This is one of the major aims of the overall Federal highway program. Construction standards for the Interstate System, developed by the American Association of State Highway Officials and approved by the Secretary of Commerce, are set so as to yield the maximum in safety as well as efficiency. Control of access is a notable provision in both these regards.
     The Bureau of Public Roads conducts continuing research in the safety field, and has submitted a comprehensive study to Congress on the Federal role. Pursuant to one of its suggestions, and as authorized by Congress, the Bureau will maintain a driver register to identify for the States those motor vehicle drivers whose licenses have been revoked in other States because of driving while intoxicated or conviction of a traffic violation resulting in loss of life.
     In association with the Bureau, the President's Committee for Traffic Safety is developing a program to promote effective traffic safety organization in every community.
     Increased effort should be, and will be, made by all concerned agencies of the Federal Government to foster driver education, eliminate highway hazards, and generally promote traffic safety. In doing this these agencies will cooperate with the States for they bear primary responsibility in this area.
     Senator KENNEDY. Basically I consider traffic safety a matter for State and local jurisdiction. The Federal Government should cooperate, but not control.

     Question: How would you sum up your attitude toward highways and highway transportation?

     Senator KENNEDY. I would repeat that all Americans have a stake in a good system of highways and when we build them we must build for the future rather than merely for the present.
     Vice President NIXON. Historically, and even before the day of motor driven vehicles, highways and highway transportation have been a major factor in developing our American way of life. One of our basic American privileges is our freedom to move about. It has been a major factor in the development of our entire economy, and has contributed substantially to our cultural development and our recreation.
     Our present highway network is strained by the needs of today. It will be totally inadequate for the enormous increases in population and traffic volume foreseen for the years ahead. An inadequate highway system would bring a loss of life and a burden of property damage and high  transportation costs that our Nation cannot afford.
     We must complete the Interstate Highway System and bring the country's other roads to a level where they will support the increased production and distribution, and the individual convenience and comfort, that our country's future welfare demands.