OCR Text |
Show P. in WASHINGTON 1 " A' t ,'By Walter Shead ' WNU Correspondent L ";;,,, i PPWC Washngfon Bureau, 1616 Ere St.. N. W. Utility Lobby Can Handle Congress, but Not the People HpHE powerful utility lobby iD -- Washington has been quite successful suc-cessful in bottling up measures which they consider inimical to the interests of the private utilities. 01 course the most important of these are the bills which would set up regional authorities In the Missouri river basin and other rivers of the nation. Several of these bills have been bottled up in committee for months. But hearings reveal that out in the country where the utilities come up against the rank and file of the American people close to home, their batting average is almost nil. During the past year 100 cities and towns have changed from private to municipal ownership. We now have 3,371 incorporated towns in the nation served by publicly owned electric systems. Of this number, and this is important, im-portant, 2,827 towns are in the population popu-lation class of 5,000 and under, the Home Towns of the country. On top of this there are more than 800 Rural Ru-ral Electric Co-pperatives operating outside incorporated towns and congress con-gress has appropriated $550,000,000 to be spent m two years for the organization of new and extension of the lines of existing REA cooperatives. co-operatives. Moreover, during this past year there is not one city or town on record which has gone back to private utility ownership. These figures put the utility lobby in the bush-league class, making strange indeed the influence they have upon the elected representatives representa-tives of these same people in the small towns and rural areas of the nation. Cost of Current Lower Why are the people looking toward to-ward municipal ownership instead of private ownership of utilities? The simple fact is that the records show every city with a municipal utility has a lower tax rate than cities of comparable size with private utilities utili-ties . . . that they have lower electric elec-tric rates, that they can afford to make more use of electricity as a result, for as the price of electricity has been reduced by municipal ownership, own-ership, its use has been multiplied. Wider use of current permits further fur-ther rate reductions and consequently consequent-ly still more use of electricity. According to the testimony in these hearings, however, the folks in our small towns and even in our cities have only scratched the surface sur-face in the use of electricity as a means of better living. For instance, in-stance, in 1945 the national average of electric consumption in the country coun-try was 1,225 kilowatt hours per resident res-ident consumer, while in Canada where municipal ownership has been in vogue for many, many years, the consumption runs more than 5,000 kilowatt hours per consumer. Contained in the testimony is acrid denunciation of the Tennessee Valley authority, and yet the same testimony shows that when private utilities have lowered their rates to meet municipal competition they have invariably shown higher net earnings. This was true when the Georgia Power company lowered its rates to meet TVA competition and experienced the highest net income the following year in the history of their company. Many samples were given where this same condition condi-tion held true. Twice National Average Down in Mississippi at Tupelo, for mstance, the first town to get TVA power, folks there are using more than 2,000 kilowatt hours per consumer, almost twice the national average. These higher averages are true all through the TVA area, and at lower rates than ever were dreamed of in the days of private monopoly of electric utilities. In many sections of the country, private utilities are now attempting attempt-ing to choke off or eliminate REA co-operatives by building spite lines and cutting rates for consumers who were refused private service until REA promised to serve them. Claude Wickard, REA administrator administra-tor here in Washington, warned that "We are facing a bolder and perhaps per-haps a more desperate opposition from private utilities at this time than REA has ever before experienced. experi-enced. This opposition extends from cream-skimming spite line activities in areas laid out for development by co-operatives, to the maintaining of a strong lobby in Washington. A national advertising campaign in the weekly and daily press, in nationally na-tionally circulated magazines and on the radio networks is being carried out. State legislatures and regulatory regula-tory bodies are being flooded with utility proposals for various restrictive restric-tive measures to be applied to the REA program," Mr. Wickard continued. con-tinued. It would seem, however, that with growth of municipal utilities and the REA in the home towns and rural areas, this lobby is only affecting members of congress, not the people peo-ple who elected them. |