Mr. SANDERS. I not only have no objection to that, but I think it is absolutely essential to keep down duplication in expensive agriculture or advice. Mr. LEMKE. And that the irrigation farmers are entitled to the same help as those who are on the outside of the project? Mr. SANDERS. Absolutely, he is an American citizen. Mr. LEMKE. But you do not wish to have either department go in and try to use up the power or the authority of the other? Mr. SANDERS. That would be very unfortunate. Indeed, I think that good administration would dictate that when it comes to paying for an irrigation project or administering the payment of it that one department be strictly in the authority of the administrative phases of it. But the point we emphasize here is that the great mass of technical, scientific assistance that is in the Department already, and which is primarily set up for that, should be used by assigned personnel and reimbursed out of reclamation funds. We believe that great economies would result, and not only economies, but better advice, and advice fitted into the over-all Agricultural program of the Nation. Mr. LEMKE (presiding). I think most of us agree with you on that. Speaking for myself, that is true. I wish to thank you. This meeting will be adjourned until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning. At that time, if Mr. Wright is here, I presume we can give him some time to be heard. (Thereupon, at 11:35 a. m., the subcommittee was adjourned to reconvene at 10 a. m., Friday, April 18, 1947.) TO AMEND THE RECLAMATION PROJECT ACT OF 1939 FRIDAY, APRIL 18, 1947 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION AND RECLAMATION OF THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC LANDS, Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to adjournment, in the committee room 1536 in the new House Office Building, the Honorable Robert F. Rockwell (chairman of the subcommittee), presiding. Mr. ROCKWELL. Gentlemen, will you please come to order. First, I have to make a very regrettable announcement. One of the men, who was in the office yesterday, and who was responsible for bringing these men here from the Northwest, Congressman Fred Norman, died last night. It is a great shock to everyone. We did not apparently finish with the men who had come in here from the Northwest. I believe Mr. Bohlke has another committee which he has to go to, so I will call on him first. STATEMENT OF HARRIE D. BOHLKE, DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, CITY OF SEATTLE, WASH. Mr. BOHLKE. My name is Harrie D. Bohlke, I am director of industrial relations of the Industrial Commission of the city of Seattle in the State of Washington. This industrial commission was created in February 1946 by Seattle City Ordinance No. 74691. The purpose of the commission is to act as liaison between the city government and industry and any or all organizations interested in the development of Seattle, the State of Washington, and the Pacific Northwest. The people of the city of Seattle are naturally interested in any proposed legislation which can have an effect on the development of the West and, particularly, the Pacific Northwest; for the city of Seattle is a port, the welfare of which depends to a great extent upon the welfare and the growth of the whole West and, particularly, the Pacific Northwest. We appreciate withdrawal of H. R. 1886-a most complex and controversial measure. Of the bills now before you-if you are determined to enact one-we favor H. R. 1977, Mr. Lemke's bill, as it more adequately provides the machinery for comprehensive development of the West and protects the power rates. There is only one suggestion I would offer: to give Congress an opportunity to consider a feasibility report of a given project where the interest component is concerned-60 to 90 days. The reduction of interest and time extension for amortization, we understand, will assist in making some projects feasible which are now classified as doubtful. The actions of this committee in withdrawing H. R. 1886 and the fair consideration being given present bills lead me to say-we will be satisfied to accept your final decision. I appreciate very much the opportunity of appearing before this committee. We had planned on a more aggressive opposition to 1886, but when that was withdrawn you did a fine stroke of business and the people out in the West appreciate it very much. Mr. ROCKWELL. Thank you, Mr. Bohlke. Are there any questions! Mr. LEMKE. Since he endorsed my bill, I will not ask any questions. Mr. ROCKWELL. Next is Mr. Carl C. Moore, director of Northwest Public Power Association. Is he here? (No response.) Mr. Moore does not seem to be here at this time. We will hear from Mr. Wright, then. STATEMENT OF EDGAR WRIGHT, MASTER, WASHINGTON STATE GRANGE, SEATTLE, WASH. Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appre ciate the courtesy shown us by allowing us to present our case. We have a written statement, but if I had to write the statement now, after having met some of the gentlemen, I would perhaps change it a little. I represent the Washington State Grange, an aggregation of some 54,000 farmers in the State of Washington. The deputy master of the Grange, Mr. Carstensen, asked me to appear here in his stead. Since. coming to Washington, I have had occasion to change my mind about a lot of things.. There has been a lot of propaganda spread in the Northwest with regard to the private power trust and with regard to the antagonism of the East to the reclamation program, which I personally feel is unjustified. I came here prepared to see Mr. Rockwell as a slick, Wall Street lawyer, and find he is nothing more than a common cattleman, so I feel more assured about this whole deal. I am here this morning rather to listen to Judge Stone, to find out just what are the motives of what you call your short bill, Mr. Rockwell. I would like to report to our people just what changes or improvements will be made in the reclamation law by this bill. Mr. LEMKE. May I suggest there, again, that that is not the only bill there, and it may be the other bill. Mr. WRIGHT. I have read your bill through, Mr. Lemke, two or three times, and as far as I can see we have no word of objection to it. As far as the short Rockwell bill is concerned, I have the assurance of Judge Stone that it cannot under any circumstances raise the power rates in our country if we are interested in that. The farmers are interested primarily in cheap power rates. They are apple men and poultrymen and dairymen who need it. I also want to endorse the statement made here yesterday by Dr. Sanders for the National Grange. He was here yesterday. I read his statement. Our problem is a very simple one. The census shows that approximately 20 percent of the farm population has left the farms in the last 25 years and gone to the city. We know that you cannot get those farmers back there, and they will not stay there unless farm life is made more attractive and more prosperous. Cheap power is one of the principal answers to that problem. Farmers are not going to stay on the farms unless the wives stay there, and the wives are not going to stay there unless they have modern conveniences and opportunities for their children. Fifty or sixty years ago the West was populated by people who had one ambition and that was economic independence, a home that they could call their own. The present generation is not interested in that any more. They want a modern standard of living. They want it on a farm just as well as in town. We feel that not only is that our problem, but it is your problem, and it is going to be more and more your problem if we take into consideration the defense to the atomic bomb. We have to keep the people out of big centers. We feel that the Reclamation Service in making these opportunities is doing a grand work. I want to say now that I feel that our case is pretty safe in your hands, Mr. Rockwell. Mr. LEMKE. May I ask a few questions, Mr. Chairman? Mr. LEMKE. I agree with you that the farmer is entitled to light and power and that he has been altogether too long neglected. I think you will agree with me that he should get it at the cheapest possible rate he can. Mr. WRIGHT. Cheapest practical rate he can get it at. Mr. LEMKE. That is what I mean. I also think that you and I would agree that private power, or distributors of power are not and will not be put out of business if they will be somewhat reasonable and cooperative with some of the public production which will undoubtedly result from irrigation as a byproduct. I know of no instance where private-power companies are not and have not been permitted to go ahead and, where they do not get surplus power from some of these propositions. Do you know of any? Mr. WRIGHT. The Puget Sound Electric Co. in the State of Washington, our largest company, which is now proposing to sell out its business to public authorities, has made the statement that it cannot compete against the Bonneville rates and that it is going to take its stockholders out of that business, just like it took its stockholders out of the business of electric interurban transportation some 25 or 30 years ago. Mr. LEMKE. You get your power from Bonneville, do you not? Mr. WRIGHT. They buy a portion of their power from Bonneville, but they also generate a large portion of it. Mr. LEMKE. What do they use for generating purposes, oil or coal? Mr. WRIGHT. They use oil, and they have a hydroelectric plant on the Columbia River. Mr. LEMKE. If I understand it right, Seattle has for years had a municipal plant competing with this? Mr. WRIGHT. That is right. |