Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1935-07-15
UTILITY LOBBYING
|SDECLARED LEGAL
Held Legitimate Exercise Of
Right of Petition to
Protect Selves.
BY DAVID LAWRENCE.

WIN committees Ol DOtli l1Ouoco
OF Congress intent on finding out who
"lobbied" for or against the utility
holding company bill. it becomes per-
tinent to know exactly what Is meant
by lobbying.
To some people. lobbying" is
synonymous with bribery" or influ-
encing votes by offering some form
Of compensation.
To others-particularly those head
line-seekers in Congress who want to
make a sensation irrespective of
whether the facts justify it-lobbying
Is never the exercise of the constitu-
tional right of petition" when it is
done by any interest or group which
happens to feel a responsibility to
protect its investors against the con-
flscation of their property,
Legitimate to Fair Minded"
To most disinterested and fair
minded observers, lobbying" is an
effort to persuade by legitimate means
those legislators who are. willing to
listen to an argument from persons
interested in the passage or defeat of
pending legislation.
It is important to know what the
taxpayers money is going to be
spent for in the current Investigations
because nearly 100000 has been
appropriated to find out what ought
not cost more than $4,000 to $4,000
to learn. and that sum mostly for the
making of a stenographic record Of
testimony.
Already We know from the witnesses
that the utilities spent about 0,000
in direct expenses, and that sum of
about 100000 more is estimated to
have been spent in the time and
travelling expenses Of utility executives
who came from almost every State in
the Union to attempt to persuade
members from their districts that the
death sentence" ought not to be
executed.
Improper Lobbying.
Was any of this money spent to
bride members of Congress, or were
any promises made of campaign con-
tributions? This would be improper
lobbying and should be exposed.
Did anybody in the executive branch
of the Government offer any Federal
appointments, such as judgeships, to
members of Congress if they voted for
the death sentence? What public
works projects or appropriations from
the 100000 900 fund or any other
fund were promised to members Of
Congress, or what threats to withhold
appropriations from their States were
made if they didn't vote with the ad-
ministration9
These are the pertinent queries
which the public Is anxious to know
and which. If probed to the bottom,
would make any lobby investigation
worth while.
Searchlight on Administration.
But this means turning the search
light on the administration itself and
the lobbyists it sent to the Capitol,
and, of course. members of Congress
consider conversation about appoint
ments to be privileged and private, so
the chances of knowing what methods
the administration used to influence
legislation are very slim indeed.
AS for the utilities. it is doubtful IL
any Of their lobbyists were stupid
enough or so unskilled in the art of
improper lobbying to offer campaign
contributions or direct brides, and. If
this Is charged, 1t will take conf1rma-
ton from the members Of Congress to
make it convincing.
What, then, will the lobby inquiry
do? 1t will attempt to show that all
the utility men are rascals, that they
had no right to spend any money to
defend their industry and that, be-
cause the utility men are supposed to
be terrible ogres of finance and ma
nipulation. the death sentence"
which is in conference between both
houses, should be adopted. This Is a
lobby IN itself. While the DAYS of
mud-slinging may not be over, there
Is no doubt that public opinion Is Just
as interested in a fair deal for anv
affected industry as it Is for any Con-
gresham whose name is mentioned
in the inquiry.
$4,000. 100000 Industry at Stake.
To spend money in printing and
mailing and travelling expenses. in
legal advice, in publicity counsel and
IN the preparation Of economic and
legal data is legitimate transaction
Tor any industry. II the utilities did
spend s1,o0o,o00, they spent a small
traction OF what they have at stake
a $4,000, 100000 industry-and they
spent only their own stockholders
money. Any charge that a million
dollars would have meant a consid-
cradle reduction in electric light costs
is absurd, because the total electric
light bill Of the residences and homes
OF the American people is only about
$65o,000,000 year and there are
perhaps 100000 homes, so the
Imaginary reduction automatically
figures out to little more than 8
cents year per home.
Actually, however, Congress isn't
really interested in reducing electric
light rates, but in increasing them.
The burden 1t is about to put on cleo
trio light operating companies means
increased expenses. The ultimate
alternative Is public ownership, where
the costs do not go down but merely
are transferred by bookkeeping to the
general budgets of the cities and
towns, and. therefore, are borne by
the taxpayers generally. Thus, in the
T. V. A., it is frankly admitted that
the Government will sell to the people
in the Tennessee Valley electricity
below cost while the taxpayers from
Maine to Oregon will foot the bill.
The lobby" inquiry is just another
smoke screen to divert public atten-
ton from the enormous expenditures
of Government and the threat to the
purchasing power of the working
mans dollar.
Copyright. 1880
NAnRlFI TT rnRnHlI IMITv