CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE December 20, 1974

H.R. 17045. An act to amend the Social

Security Act to establish a consolidated program of Federal financial assistance to encourage provisions of services by the States.

On January 8, 1975:

H.R. 510. An act to authorize and direct

the Secretary of Agriculture to convey any

interest held by the United States in certain

property in Jasper County, Ga., to the Jasper

County Board of Education; and

H.R. 12860. An act to amend title 10 of the

United States Code in order to clarify when

claims must be presented for reimbursement

of memorial service expenses in the case of

members of the armed forces whose remains

are not recovered.

BILLS DISAPPROVED AFTER SINE

DIE ADJOURNMENT

The President announced his disapproval of the following bills with memorandums of disapproval as follows:

H.R. 11929

MEMORANDUM OF DISAPPROVAL

I have withheld my approval from H.R.

11929, "To amend section 15d of the

Tennessee Valley Authority Act of 1933

to provide that expenditures for pollution control facilities will be credited

against required power investment re- turn payments and repayments."

This bill would permit TVA to defer

or offset its repayment obligations to the

United States Treasury about $85 million per year for 5 years because of ex- penditures required to install pollution

control equipment-and thereby enable

TVA to postpone some rate increases

otherwise required.

The people who are provided with electric power by the Tennessee Valley Authority have been subjected to substantial increases in power rates in recent

months. I must point out, however, that consumers of electricity throughout the

Nation have experienced similar rate in- creases for essentially the same reasons-the rising prices of fuel and materials, the cost of installing air pollution

control equipment, and the rising cost

of labor.

Nevertheless, TVA customers still pay

among the lowest power rates of any

region in the Nation-about 30 percent

of rates in New York, 64 percent of Chicago, and 78 percent of Louisville, Kentucky.

No one likes to pay higher electric bills.

But we must not allow this simple fact

to result in new legislation which violates the fundamental principle that

electricity should be priced to reflect its

cost of production, including the cost of

pollution abatement and control. My environmental advisers as well as my

economic advisers agree with me that

this principle must be upheld.

I see no basis in equity or in logic for

departing from this principle in the case of the TVA, and for asking the general

taxpayer to make up the difference in

TVA power rates. To do so would be

unfair to power consumers elsewhere in

the Nation who do not have the benefit

of Tennessee Valley Authority power facilities and who are required to bear the

costs attributed to pollution control on their power bills.

H.R. 14214

MEMORANDUM OF DISAPPROVAL

I have withheld my approval from

H.R. 14214, the "Health Revenue Sharing and Health Services Act of 1974."

H.R. 14214 conflicts with my strong

commitment to the American taxpayers

to hold Federal spending to essential

purposes. The bill authorizes appropriations of more than $1 billion over my recommendations and I cannot, in good

conscience, approve it. These appropriation authorizations are almost double

the funding levels I have recommended

for fiscal year 1975 and almost triple

the levels I believe would be appropriate

for 1976.

As part of my effort to see that the

burden upon our taxpayers does not increase, I requested the Congress last

month to exercise restraint in expanding existing Federal responsibilities, and

to resist adding new Federal programs

to our already overloaded and limited

Federal resources. These recommendations reflect my concern with both the

need to hold down the Federal budget

and the need to limit the Federal role

to those activities which can make the

most necessary and significant contributions.

In H.R. 14214, the Congress not only

excessively increased authorizations for

existing programs but also created sev- eral new ones that would result in an unjustified expenditure of Federal taxpay- ers' funds. Although the purposes of

many of the programs authorized in

this bill are certainly worthy, I just can- not approve this legislation because of

its effect upon the economy through increased unwarranted Federal spending.

Finally, it should be pointed out that

the Federal Government will spend almost $20 billion in 1975 through Medi- care and Medicaid for the financing of

health services for priority recipientsaged and low-income persons. These

services are provided on the basis of na- tional eligibility standards in Medicare

and State eligibility standards in Medicaid and therefore are available to individuals in a more equitable and less re- strictive manner than many of the programs authorized in H.R. 14214.

H.R. 8193

MEMORANDUM OF DISAPPROVAL

I am withholding my approval from

H.R. 8193, the Energy Transportation

Security Act of 1974.

The bill would initially require that 20

percent of the oil imported into the

United States be carried on U.S. flag

tankers. The percentage would increase

to 30 percent after June 30, 1977.

This bill would have the most serious

consequences. It would have an adverse

impact on the United States economy

and on our foreign relations. It would

create serious inflationary pressures by

increasing the cost of oil and raising the

prices of all products and services which

depend on oil. It would further stimulate

inflation in the ship construction industry and cut into the industry's ability to

meet ship construction for the U.S. Navy.

In addition, the bill would serve as a precedent for other countries to increase

protection of their industries, resulting

in a serious deterioration in beneficial

international competition and trade.

This is directly contrary to the objectives

of the trade bill which the Congress has

just passed. In addition, it would violate a large number of our treaties of Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation.

Although this bill would undoubtedly

benefit a limited group of our working

population, such benefit would entail disproportionate costs and produce undesirable effects which could extend into

other areas and industries. The waiver

provisions which the Congress included

in an effort to meet a few of my concerns fail to overcome the serious objections I

have to the legislation.

Accordingly, I am not approving this

bill because of the substantial adverse

effect on the Nation's economy and international interest.

I wish to take this opportunity to reiterate my commitment to maintaining a strong U.S. Merchant Marine. I believe

we can and will do this under our existing statutes and programs such as those

administered by the Maritime Administration in the Department of Commerce.

S. 425

MEMORANDUM OF DISAPPROVAL

I am withholding my approval from

S. 425, the Surface Mining Control and

Reclamation Act of 1974.

S. 425 would establish Federal standards for the environmental protection

and reclamation of surface coal mining

operations, including the reclamation of

orphaned lands. Under a complex procedural framework, the bill would encour- age the States to implement and enforce a program for the regulation of surface

coal mining with substitution of a federally administered program if the States

do not act.

The Executive Branch submitted to

both the 92d and 93d Congresses legislation that would have established rea- sonable and effective reclamation and environmental protection requirements for

mining activities. Throughout this period, the Administration made every effort in working with the Congress to

produce a bill that would strike the delicate balance between our desire for reclamation and environmental protection

and our need to increase coal production

ii the United States.

Unfortunately, S. 425, as enrolled,

would have an adverse impact on our domestic coal production which is unac- ceptable. By 1977, the first year after the

Act would take full effect, the Federal

Energy Administration has estimated

that coal production losses would range

from a minimum of 48 million tons to a maximum of 141 million tons. In addition, further losses which cannot be

quantified could result from ambiguities

in the bill, forcing protracted regulatory

disputes and litigation. In my judgment,

tle most significant reasons why such

coal losses cannot be accepted are as follows:

1. Coal is the one abundant energy source over which the United States

has total control. We should not

unduly impair our ability to use it

properly.

41996