The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1945-05-18

| spoke a while ago of savings t.
residential consumers that would re
suit In Montana from IVA plans o.
electric generation and distribution
Some time ago the head of the Rura
Electrification concern that serves
Beaverhead, Madison and Jefferson
coutnies, told in public meeting that
while that concern was paying out
by buying it's power from the Montana
Power company, 1t would pay out nine
years quicker If 1t were on the IVA
rate. One of the things that the IVA
has stressed above all others is the
introduction of rural identification.
In 1886, about the time that the
valley authority made its influence felt
on rural identification, while $3.50 of
the farms in Austria were electrified,
900 of the farms in Japan were cleo
trified, 98%o of the farms in France
were electrified, only 11%o of the farms
in the United States, the richest farm
ing country in the world, were cleo
trified. l am glad to say that due
to the work mostly of the IVA, now
1870 of the farms of the United States
are electrified
Many of you may be interested to
know how the rates to commercial
consumers compare, and whether small
business would profit by the eva.
In Montana last year commercial con-
sumers paid $3,140,000. Under the
Tennessee rate they would have paid
81 500, 000-slightly less than one-half
But our power company drives great
railway, and hoists the ores of Butte,
by electric process smelts much of
this ore. | think you would like to
know the comparison between the
total electric sales in Montana under
the two rates Last year the total
paid for all forms of electricity in
Montana was $16,223,000. Under IVA
rates, the cost would have been slight
ly over S11,000000 "a difference of
above $5,100,00O, and this is our annual
sacrifice on the Altar of rugged in
dividualism and private enterprise.
There are less than 100000 people in
Montana, men, women and children
Each one of them contributes $40 a
year for our lack of progress from an
artificial to natural system of econ
omy.
But l am told by the Press that our
water rights are in jeopardy. l own
an interest in a water right on the
Big Hole river, tributary of the
Missouri; my land, without that water
right, would be almost worthless. |
About seven years ago the Montana
Power Company began suit in the
U. S. Circuit Court to enjoin the Town |
send farmers from diverting waters of
the Missouri for an irrigation project. |
Had the power company won that suit, |
they would probably have the right to
tell me, 200 miles away as the river |
flows, just when we might irrigate, |
and when we must allow the water |
to flow down the river. Fortunately,
they were stopped in their war of
aggression against every water right
on the Missouri river, or its tribu-
taries, by the United States govern
ment speaking through the Circuit |
Court of Appeals, and my water right |
was saved by the United States and |
the Federal Power Commission inter-
vening in that lawsuit, and stopping |
this act of arrogance.
AS a ranch owner, | tell you that |
prefer that my right to use the |
waters Of the Big Hole be decided by
the United States government, its bu-
reaus, its commissions, its courts, to
having them decided by the Montana
Power Company, or its holding COM
pany, the Electric Bond and Share, or
4 holding company of that company,
the American Power and Light, or the
board of directors of the American
Power and Light sitting in some New
York office. To you farmers in the
Columbia valley watershed, where the
Washington Water, Power and Light
Company Is making the same fight,
advise you that your water rights
lad better be controlled by the honest
ind fearless administration of federal
government than by the Electric Bond
md Share, a holding company of the
Power, or American Pow
sr and Light, holding company of
he Electric Bond and Share, or by |
he board of directors sitting in New
York
Concluded in next weeks issue.)