Speech by Representative Dole to the Kansas Electric Cooperative

Transcription (Scripto)

Read Full Text Only (TXT)

Extent (Dublin Core)

8 Minutes, 5 Seconds

File Name (Dublin Core)

c031_035

Title (Dublin Core)

Speech by Representative Dole to the Kansas Electric Cooperative

Description (Dublin Core)

In this address to the Kansas Electric Cooperative, Congressman Bob Dole discusses the challenges and prospects for passing rural electric legislation. He discusses the past difficulties and the competing interests of rural electric cooperatives and larger power companies, as well as three of the bills that have been proposed (the McMillan Bill, the Poage Bill, and Dole’s proposed compromise).

Date (Dublin Core)

1963-04-12

Date Created (Dublin Core)

1963-04-13

Congress (Dublin Core)

88th (1963-1965)

Topics (Dublin Core)

See all items with this value Rural electrification--United States

Policy Area (Curation)

Energy

Creator (Dublin Core)

Dole, Robert J., 1923-2021

Record Type (Dublin Core)

radio programs

Rights (Dublin Core)

http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/CNE/1.0/

Language (Dublin Core)

eng

Collection Finding Aid (Dublin Core)

https://dolearchivecollections.ku.edu/index.php?p=collections/findingaid&id=84&q=

Physical Collection (Dublin Core)

Collection 031, Box 1

Institution (Dublin Core)

Robert J. Dole Institute of Politics, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS

Archival Collection (Dublin Core)

Dole Audio Reels Collection, 1960-1979

Full Text (Extract Text)

This is Congressman Bob Dole, and let me say, first of all, that I regret very much not being with you today. When I was first invited last year, I think as Irving Walker remembers, it was necessary that I take a trip to England with a Government Operations Committee, and then again, this year, I cannot come because we're in the midst of REA (Rural Electrification Administration) hearings. And I certainly want to make it clear that I hope to be able to attend one of your annual meetings, though frankly, when they come during the week, it's rather difficult because I believe our first obligation is to be in Washington — to be attending committee hearings, and to be voting on measures that come before the floor.

Before I say anything, I want to thank my friend, Mr. Walker, for the invitation, and I thank the members of the Western Cooperative Electric Association of WaKeeney, and I do trust that what I say may shed some light on the present status of REA supplemental financing bills.

Now perhaps as most of you know, I was privileged to address the 25th National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA) annual meeting in San Francisco, California, on Wednesday, February 22nd. Now that was on Washington's birthday, and as I told some of the members of the NRECA, of course, I couldn't tell a lie on that date, so I did attempt to set forth briefly, what I felt must be done to get a bill passed, and then I briefly summarized what happened last year.

And if we look back at the 89th Congress — in other words, last year's hearings — there were several factors which contributed to the deadlock on supplemental financing. As far as I'm concerned, there just wasn’t enough time. It was the first time in 17 years, really, that our committee, the House Committee on Agriculture, had taken a look at rural electric legislation. In fact, it hadn't been since the rural telephone program was enacted in 1949 that we've really done anything from a legislative standpoint. And of course, there were other factors: not all the members of rural electric co-ops agreed upon the bill submitted to us; not all the members of the committee agreed on various bills; there was some foot dragging, I think on the part of the administration; and then the chairman of our committee at that time, Mr. Harold Cooley, had some serious reservations about the bill, but I might add, other members also had reservations.

But at any rate, last August the Subcommittee on Conservation and Credit finished the hearings — and there were weeks and weeks and weeks of hearings. We finally voted on August 18th, but the bill lost by 5-to-5 vote. In other words, we didn't have enough votes to report the bill from the subcommittee to the full committee. I was one of the five voting in favor of that bill after I had succeeded in getting a number of amendments added. Well, that's all I'll say on the 89th Congress; this is history as far as I'm concerned.

Now, we're in a new Congress, we're in, what I would say, is a new ball game. We're starting all over again, and on our Committee on Agriculture we have 35 members. Seventeen of these members are brand new this year, they're freshman members of the Congress for the most part. They didn't have a chance to hear the testimony last year about the need for supplemental financing. They didn't have a chance or an opportunity to hear the REA’s [testimony], to hear the private power companies’ [testimony], to hear those who might be for or against. We have a new chairman in Congressman Bob Poage of Texas — he's the new chairman of the House committee. And I might add he's very interested in REA legislation, as is Congressman Page Belcher, the ranking Republican — he’s taken a great interest in getting some bill enacted. So, I believe we have to consider, first of all, that we have a new committee, and, of course, every committee member represents thousands of people, and he's entitled to have as much information as he would like to have. So, I would guess today being the 12th of April, that we might be voting on this bill by next week.

Now, when I was in San Francisco, I made a number of general statements, but I did say, specifically, that if we're going to pass a bill this year — and I said this back in February and I can say it again in April — we must have four or five factors present. First of all, we must have support in Congress from both political parties, in other words, it must be a bipartisan approach, and I think we have it at this time. Secondly, we're not going to get a bill through this Congress, which is dominated by urban members, if we have 100% opposition from commercial power companies. And, I frankly believe that many of the power companies now are taking a different attitude. I might say at this point, that as far as I know, there's been no serious opposition from private power companies in the state of Kansas. Thirdly, we must have broad support from groups of citizens — and I mean not just REA co-op members or telephone users, but others in rural communities and in urban areas who understand the need for REAs and are willing to support such legislation. And I told the National Association in San Francisco that the Association must adopt a flexible policy. In other words, the National Association can’t expect to get a bill passed if they're going to pass a resolution saying that we will not support a bill unless it has just what we want in it. So, I think if we have these four things — and I am convinced that we have them at the moment — that we can pass a bill.

Right now, we've been considering H.R. 1400, which is the so-called ‘Poage Bill.’ I frankly don't believe the Poage Bill will pass in its present form. We also have a bill advanced by the investor-owned utilities companies, H.R. 7390, introduced first of all by Congressman McMillan of South Carolina, and I don't believe this bill will receive favorable action in our committee. So, on the Wednesday before the Easter recess — in fact about two and a half weeks ago — I introduced what has become known as H.R. 7698. I introduced this as a compromise between what may be an H.R. 1400 — the Poage Bill — and what may be an H.R. 7390 — the McMillan Bill. And I frankly feel that if things go as they are now, there's a good chance our committee will favorably act upon a bill — whether it's my bill or the Poage Bill as amended — but it will act on a bill which contains many of the provisions I have in H.R. 7698.

And let me just state very briefly because I think I've talked about long enough: my bill would provide intermediate credit loans. In other words, we would eliminate the intermediate credit loans, and we would provide a single interest rate in H.R. 7698. In order to overcome some of the fears from the power companies and others who oppose the bill — and I might add I think their opposition in some areas is very influential — no acquisition or expansion would be permitted, and bank loans would be made only for serving borrowers in rural areas, as defined in the present act. Now my bill would provide more capital: under the Poage Bill, its $50 million for 15 years; mine would be $75 million per year for ten years. We would also have a transferable certificate of ownership, we would reduce the size of the board of directors, and we would also have the REAs pay at least 2% interest on government capital, and finally we would delete what they call the treasury back up of electric bank expenditures.

Now, these are technical things, and I think perhaps when you consider that the bill itself has some 48 to 50 pages in it, you recognize it would not be possible in the time allotted to really explain these in depth.

Thank you and let me hear from you if you have questions.

Speech by Representative Dole to the Kansas Electric Cooperative

Item