WITHOUT A GRANT OF CAPACITY IN THE CONSTITUTION TO CREATE A CORPORATION,
CONGRESS INCORPORATED IN MAY, 1933, THE TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY, WHICH
MANUFACTURES, ON THE MONEY OF THE TAXPAYERS, ELECTRIC POWER FOR SALE IN
COMPETITION WITH PRIVATE CAPITAL
It might be argued that, under the coefficient or
Sweeping Clause of the Constitution, quoted in the preceding chapter, as
applied by the Supreme Court respecting a banking corporation for the needs of
the Government, Congress could create a corporation deemed "necessary and
proper" to aid its lawful activity in the control of floods of an
interstate river and the promotion of navigation thereon.
But it certainly has no authority to create a corporation for the
manufacture and sale of electric power in competition with private industry.
Making electric power not for United States Government
That was conceded by counsel for the United States before the Supreme Court
in the case to be examined, and was pointed out by Chief Justice Hughes.
However, the Tennessee Valley Authority is manufacturing and selling
electric power in large volume, and many persons and newspapers passing as
among the thinking classes are charmed with the results.
Of course, the schools, colleges, and universities left those classes
without understanding of what is more important than any valley made lovely
with other people's money, namely, that "departure from the lines there
laid down," as President Cleveland said of the Constitution, "is
People easily misled by easy getting
Thus, what seems to some a great success in the development of a valley may
be in reality a failure in government, tending to destroy free enterprise,
property rights, and the liberty which the Constitution was designed to protect
There has been great rejoicing in the Northwest also and among Socialists
throughout the country over the construction by the Government of the
Bonneville and the Grand Coulee dams in the Columbia River, about 400 miles
apart. But the question raised regarding the achievements in the Tennessee
Valley presents itself as to those projects: can "departure from the
lines" laid down in the Constitution be compensated for by all such
As valleys from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and the wide plains between,
have been developed without breach of the Constitution, why should disregard of
the limitations which it prescribes be advocated and practiced now? In the
development of the United States, unprecedented in the activities of men,
prosperity in each valley and each region has been achieved by the brains,
labor, and money of the dwellers. The residents of no area have thought of
asking the people of the rest of the country to provide the money for bringing
development to their locality!
Development of valleys not function of Government
Neither did the people of the Tennessee Valley ask for this project. The
idea originated in the minds of Socialists, Fascists, and political adventurers
far away. The idea was not so much to develop this particular valley,
industrially, as it was to "grab off" this promising location as a
means of demonstrating in the United States the beauty and utility of an alien
belief at variance with our constitutional system. And, as before said, many
who should know better think the demonstration has been a charmer.
It is the money of the people in all the States that paid for and is
continuing to support "the wonderful works" in Tennessee. The doings
are unfair as well as unconstitutional.
The propagandizing activity of the Tennessee Valley Authority in carrying
the beauties of this Socialism and Fascism to the public has been so persistent
(and expensive) as to draw criticism in Congress. It has had its effect on
Did General Eisenhower speak of power projects of T.V.A.?
It may be that those unconstitutional power projects were in the mind of
General Dwight D. Eisenhower when, as President of Columbia University, he
spoke on February 10, 1949, to a group of students about "a creeping
paralysis of thought" which leads to dictatorship. Addressing 130 leaders
of students in preparatory and high schools, the General, who had opportunity
to learn all about the way things go in Washington, said:
"There is a kind of dictatorship which can come about through a
creeping paralysis of thought, readiness to accept paternalistic measures of
Government, and along with those paternalistic measures coming a surrender of
our own responsibilities and, therefore, a surrender of our own thought over
our own lives and our own right to exercise our vote indicating the policies of
Revelations respecting extraordinary growth of bureaus
General Eisenhower may have had in mind too the report of the Committee on
Organization of the Executive Branch of the Government, headed by former
President Hoover, that "billions — not millions — but
billions" could be saved by reshaping and reducing the 1,800 bureaus
running at large and employing 2,200,000 civilian workers, increased from
580,000 twenty years ago. The pay of those employees increased from
$1,000,000,000 to $6,500,000,000 a year. They, with the voting members of their
families, can control the election of the President.
On May 13, 1933, Congress created the Tennessee Valley Authority as a body
corporate "for the purpose of maintaining and operating the properties now
owned by the United States in the vicinity of Muscle Shoals, Alabama, in the
interest of national defense and for agricultural and industrial development,
and to improve navigation in the Tennessee River and to control the destructive
flood waters in the Tennessee River and Mississippi River Basins."
Agricultural and industrial development by Congress not authorized
What clause of the Constitution authorizes Congress to concern itself with
"agricultural and industrial development"? None. That part of the Act
By implication, the Commerce Clause empowers Congress "to improve
navigation" of waters carrying interstate commerce and to control
"destructive floods" in such streams.
But it receives from the Constitution no authority respecting
"agricultural and industrial development." Then, why were those words
employed by the nonelected persons who drafted the Act? Were they ignorant of
the Constitution, or contemptuous of it?
"The properties now owned by the United States in the vicinity of
Muscle Shoals" referred to the Wilson Dam, which was begun in 1917 and
completed in 1926 under authority of the National Defense Act of June 31, 1916,
which empowered the President to have investigation made as to "the best,
cheapest and most available means for the production of nitrates and other
products for munitions of war." That provided also for the designation of
exclusive sites upon navigable or nonnavigable rivers or the public lands for
carrying out the purposes of the Act; and it authorized the President "to
construct, maintain, and operate" on any such sites "dams, locks,
improvements to navigation, power houses and other plants and equipment ... for
the generation of electrical or other power and for the production of nitrates
or other products needed for munitions of war and useful in the manufacture
of fertilizers and other useful products." (The foregoing italics are
The National Defense Act of 1916 was passed in expectation of the war which
we declared on Germany ten months later.
But why did the draftsmen of that act bring in with "munitions" of
war "the manufacture of fertilizers and other useful products"?
Fascist corporation planned before election of 1932
That the Act creating the Tennessee Valley Authority, which is long enough
to fill ten columns of a newspaper, and which is of almost infinite and very
difficult detail, could have been put through Congress two months after
inauguration, means that it had been worked out long before the election of
November, 1932. It had been kept in the dark from the writers of the platform
and it never was revealed from the stump to the people. Alien-minded persons
outside Government had probably prepared the Fascist creature for the incoming
In 1946 the Tennessee Valley Authority, besides producing electric power,
was engaged in the manufacture of agricultural implements, of fertilizer for
agriculture, and of the instruments of sanitation. It was engaged in mineral
development, in providing means of recreation, in the care and promotion of
wild life, in demonstrations, in farm management assistance, and in many other
activities. On these, it lost for the year the money of the taxpayers to the
amount of $3,600,000.
Heavy losses to taxpayers maintaining T.V.A.
Its losses on the manufacture of power and all other activities amount to
$8,041,000 for the year 1946. From its beginning in 1934 it has cost the
taxpayers almost $100,000,000. These figures are from an analysis of the
financial statements of the corporation by the Edison Electric Institute —
a trade association representing about 75 per cent of the private electric
light and power industry.
An analysis of the records of Tennessee Valley Authority for the United
States Chamber of Commerce was made by C. J. Green, formerly accountant for the
Federal Power Commission, and given to the Press in October, 1948. He found
that from May, 1933, to June, 1946, funds of the Treasury — of the
taxpayers — invested in all Tennessee Valley Authority activities totaled
$742,386,524. From that he subtracted $74,525,261 in Treasury investments not
connected with river power, and added $44,394,436 for power investments
"omitted" by Tennessee Valley Authority in its accounting system,
arriving at a net power investment of public funds of $712,255,699.
T.V.A. has advantages over private investors
He found that if Tennessee Valley Authority had paid taxes on the basis on
which private power companies paid, it would have returned to governments
$155,237,363 for their support.
Had Tennessee Valley Authority been obliged to pay interest on the funds
which the Treasury provided from the pockets of the taxpayers, the money would
have cost it $78,309,109.
How can private investors in electric power companies compete with a set-up
And yet many commentators and propagandists have severely condemned the
"selfish" and "anti-social" spirit of private investors who
have complained of and offered opposition to such competition from the
corporations of Fascism! Thus, we have almost reached in our Republic the
equivalent of lese majesty. It may be with us tomorrow.
Congress apparently tiring of no returns
The Appropriations Committee of the House of Representatives has proposed
that the Tennessee Valley Authority be required to repay within forty years the
funds of the Treasury establishing and enlarging it.
But how can that be done unless the Authority has income? And how can it
derive income from dams and reservoirs merely controlling floods?
"Flood control" is the disguise in which the Fascists wrapped
themselves when they "put across" within two months after
inauguration in 1933 a complicated bill of more than 10,000 words which must
have been in preparation long before the election in November. The
constitutional enemy from Europe was waiting to come in.
President Roosevelt's argumentation for Fascism
When the Government's entry into this business was under discussion,
President Roosevelt argued that it was necessary to provide a
"yardstick" for the prices which the manufacturers of electricity
should charge the public, the contention being that those prices were then out
of all reason.
Still, if that were true — and it was not, for the States had power to
prescribe and regulate rates and were doing so — that was none of the
business of the United States.
As private power companies pay Federal, State, and local taxes, it was
determined that the Authority (probably to appear "fair") should not
be entirely tax free, so it and its distributors contributed as a donative
about 4.5 per cent of their combined gross power income to State and local
treasuries. The Georgia Power, a competitor, contributed 5.5 per cent of its
gross intake to State and local taxes.
Private investors support government
But the Authority paid (1946) no Federal taxes, while the Georgia Power paid
17.5 per cent of its gross to the United States. To Federal, State, and local
taxation combined, the private owner thus paid 23 per cent of its gross income,
while the Authority paid 4.5 per cent of the gross of itself and its
That is a mathematical demonstration of the purpose of the Government of the
United States to drive private power companies out of business and become to
that extent a corporative state of Fascism. In a dissenting opinion in the case
arising out of this Tennessee Valley activity on the part of the native aliens
in Washington, Justice McReynolds showed from the record that the purpose was
to drive private investors out.
Competition by government destructive to private investors
And in March, 1947, a press dispatch from Boston said that the President of
the Puget Sound Power and Light Company recommended the sale of the properties
of the company "to public power agencies, the Grand Coulee Dam, the
Bonneville Dam, and others, as the only way to protect the stockholders'
interest." In a speech at a meeting of stockholders he "charged
unfair competition from government-owned utilities" which "makes it
impossible for public and private power distributors to operate side by
side." A power company of the Government would, he said, "escape
about $2,600,000 annually in Federal taxes and 1 million in State and local
taxes paid by this company." He said, further, that
"Government-subsidized competition has cut rates and earnings to the point
where the company cannot expect to attract private investment capital."
All that sort of advantage to the monopoly of Government was shown of record
in the case of the Tennessee Valley Authority, which case (297 U. S. 288) arose
out of the attempt of the common stockholders of a private power company to
sell part of its property to the Tennessee Valley Authority in order to save
themselves from a competition which they knew would finish them. The preferred
stockholders resisted, and lost in the Supreme Court.
The President's "yardstick" becomes a bludgeon
The Federal power companies are using as a bludgeon the
"yardstick" of which President Roosevelt talked so much as a means of
doing "justice." The Tenth Amendment forbids the United States to
interfere thus in the field of local law. And, precedent to that, the
Constitution forbids — by not authorizing — Congress to create a
corporation for manufacturing and selling electric power, or doing any other
In the dissenting opinion in the case now to be examined, Justice McReynolds
stated the purpose of the Socialists and Fascists who had "put over"
the Tennessee Valley Authority:
"Public service corporations were to be brought to terms or put out of
It is manifest from the foregoing figures that they could not compete with a
corporation which pays comparatively no taxes, and which operates on taxpayers'
money, for which it pays no interest yearly. The Annual Report of the Secretary
of the Treasury for 1945 shows that the United States (taxpayers) pays that
interest for the money which it furnishes to the Authority.
When competing private power companies borrow money, they must pay interest
at current rates, as they pay full taxes.
T.V.A. for power, not flood control
The analysis by the Edison Electric Institute of the reports of the
Tennessee Valley Authority for 1946 shows these expenses for production:
for Electric Power $6,198,023
for Navigation 2,309,548
for Flood Control 2,020,740
Those figures show that this corporation was created chiefly to manufacture
and sell electric power. The pretense that it was primarily to control floods
and develop navigation in an interstate river was pretense only.
On January 4, 1934, the Tennessee Valley Authority entered into an agreement
with the Alabama Power Company for the purchase at more than $1,000,000 of some
of its transmission lines and substations, for the purchase of some of its real
estate, for the sale to the Power Company of "surplus power" of the
Authority, and for (what used to be reprehensible) the division of territory
Stockholders resisted entry of T.V.A.
Holders of preferred stock in the Alabama Power Company, believing the
contract to be injurious to the company and also invalid, because beyond the
power of the Federal Government, brought suit to have the performance of the
contract enjoined, and thus save their property.
The United States District Court which heard the case granted an injunction
on the ground that Congress had no constitutional power to engage in a
permanent utility system.
The Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that decision. On appeal by the
stockholders to the Supreme Court of the United States the latter decision was
affirmed (297 U. S. 288) on February 17, 1936, Justice McReynolds writing a
Very pertinent to the holding of the trial court that the action of Congress
was unconstitutional is this language of the opinion of the Supreme Court,
written by Chief Justice Hughes:
"And the Government rightly conceded at the bar, in substance, that it
was without constitutional authority to acquire or dispose of such energy
except as it comes into being in the operation of works constructed in the
exercise of some power delegated to the United States."
Case against T.V.A. perfectly clear
That is, it could not, independently of flood control or improvement of
navigation in the interstate river, use the dam and the machinery connected
with it for the sole purpose of manufacturing electric power for sale. In the
control of floods and in improving navigation, the machinery might generate
more power than was needed for the purposes stated. It would be unreasonable to
let that go to waste. It could be legally sold, as the general purpose of the
operations was not to manufacture power for commercial sale.
But the act of 1916, the beginning of the Wilson Dam, contemplated not only
the manufacture of nitrates for war, a constitutional activity, but also the
production of things "useful in the manufacture of fertilizers and other
useful products," an unconstitutional activity. And the act of 1933,
creating the Authority to take over the Wilson Dam, said that it was for
"national defense," a constitutional activity, and also "for
agricultural and industrial development," an unconstitutional activity.
The Supreme Court viewed the case through a narrow slit and treated it as
though it stood alone, whereas the record, as exhibited by Justice McReynolds,
quoting from the pronouncements of the promoters, showed "no less a goal
than the electrification of America," Since then the "goal" has
been considerably attained.
In a dissenting opinion Justice McReynolds said that on the record the Court
should have considered the truth of petitioner's charge that, while pretending
to act within its powers to improve navigation, the United States, through
corporate agencies, was really seeking to accomplish what it had no right to
undertake — "the business of developing, distributing and selling
Justice McReynolds saw through the fraud
Justice McReynolds said, "Public service corporations were to be
brought to terms or put out of business."
The Justice quoted from the report of the Authority for 1934:
"'When we carry this program into every town and city and village, and
every farm throughout the country, we will have written the greatest chapter in
the economic, industrial, and social development of America.'"
That made plain how little were flood control and navigation involved in the
adventure. Of course, that development was not the business of the United
States, any more than the development of the country in the past has been.
On the findings of fact made by the trial court, which Justice McReynolds
said were not controverted, he called the act of the Government "a
deliberate step into a forbidden field, taken with definite purpose to continue
President Roosevelt later confirmed view of Justice McReynolds
Precisely what Justice McReynolds stated of the purpose to continue a
trespass in a forbidden field was admitted by President Roosevelt in a Press
conference on November 14, 1944, shortly after he had been elected for the
fourth time. This came in the dispatches from Washington (italics inserted):
"Of his seven water shed developments, Mr. Roosevelt said that the
areas would center about a basic stream for each district. Water control
would be a minor phase of activity compared to power development."
The need for secrecy and deception having passed, seemingly, the President
let the cat out of the bag.
But there had been no cat in a bag except to the majority of the justices of
the Supreme Court.
And on May 11, 1948, the House of Representatives of the 80th Congress
killed by a vote of 192 to 152 a bill of the bureau for the construction of a
steam power plant in the Tennessee Valley to cost ultimately 84 million
Flood control and navigation superseded by steam
Those facts go even further than President Roosevelt did when he admitted
that the whole scheme was from the beginning for the manufacture of power by
Fascist corporations aided by the money of the taxpayers. Of course, a steam
plant manufacturing electric power is absolutely unrelated to flood control and
the promotion of interstate navigation.
And the Supreme Court, notwithstanding what Justice McReynolds disclosed
from the record, permitted itself to be taken in by the fraudulent pretenses of
the promoters of Fascism!
In addition to that stupendous nongovernmental project, which has cost the
taxpayers heavily every year — $41,839,062 in 1939, for instance —
there are the Grand Coulee Dam Project of August 30, 1935, the Bonneville
Project of August 20, 1937, on the Columbia River; the Fort Peck Project of May
18,1938, on the Missouri River, and numerous other projects covering the map
— all illegal power projects.
We were suffering from what General Eisenhower called "creeping
paralysis" when those projects were pushed through!
Flood control fraudulent pretense of Fascism
The Federal Power Act of August 26, 1935, for the acquisition of power
sites, plainly evidenced a comprehensive purpose of Government to manufacture
and sell electric power, through Fascist corporations and with the money of the
taxpayers, in competition with private investors and manufacturers and in
violation of the Constitution.
The record raising the question whether the Government of the United States
was bent on controlling floods in navigable rivers and promoting navigation in
them, or whether it was in reality on an adventure in Socialism should have
given pause to the Supreme Court.
Question should not have been decided by the Supreme Court
The question was for the Ultimate Court. It was for the Constituent
Assembly, the people acting in their capacity as constitution makers, to say
whether that business, stopped by the sound injunctive order of the United
States District Court, should go further. It was the right of the people,
passing on a proposal to amend the Constitution, to say whether they wanted
their Government in the business of manufacturing and selling electric power,
or in any other business. The departure from the law respecting the carrying on
of business since the time of Magna Carta, 721 years before, was so radical
that it was the duty of the Judiciary to stop it, as the trial court did, until
the question could be carried to the people for decision.
That is what the court of Chief Justice Fuller did in 1895 with an
income-tax law in disregard of a limitation stated in the Constitution. It told
the proponents of the income-tax idea to take it to the people, as the Court
would not try to rewrite the Fundamental Law.
In later case Chief Justice stated principle correctly
And in a concurring opinion holding (298 U. S. 238) the Bituminous Coal Act
of 1935 in conflict with the Constitution, this was said by Chief Justice
"If the people desire to give Congress the power to regulate industries
within the State, and the relation of employers and employees in those
industries, they are at liberty to declare their will in the appropriate
manner; but it is not for the Court to amend the Constitution by judicial
It is lamentable that that principle was not applied by the Supreme Court
respecting the Tennessee Valley Authority. For the time must come when the
people will refuse to submit to taxation for money to be used in such ways. And
it is fully as important that the tremendous and malign influences of such
bureaus in the Government as propagandists be brought to an end.
With such forces pouring out "information" to the public all the
time in torrents, it is, of course, impossible for the public to be
T.V.A. persistent danger to public opinion
The Tennessee Valley Authority has been a powerful and dangerous
propagandist. The United States Government Printing Office put out
"Progress in the Valley: T V A, 1947" — an 82-page book printed
on heavy paper, with 7 costly pictures of the wonders accomplished for man,
woman, and child in the Valley, and for invention, manufacture, and recreation.
On page 74 the book says that the average rate paid by "large
industrial consumers" during the past year was 0.64 cents per kilowatt
hour, in comparison with "0.93 paid by industrial consumers throughout the
First, why should "large industrial consumers" be cared for by the
Promptly upon the turning of machinery by the Tennessee Valley Authority,
the Aluminum Company of America and the Monsanto Chemical Company, two of the
largest manufacturers in the country, went down from the North and began
business in the Valley under long-time contracts for cheap power at the cost of
the taxpayers! They recognized a golden "yardstick" when it
Mathematics proves private capital cannot meet taxpayers' money
Second, it is manifest that a rate by Government of 0.64 must drive out of
business companies charging 0.93. Justice McReynolds found that to be the grand
On page 79 the book reveals that through the fiscal year 1945 the Authority
purchased "facilities totaling $125,000,000." Those acquisitions
brought in "some 345,000 consumers, or about half of those now
If that is not swallowing competitors alive, what expression would describe
The Supreme Court held that as the Constitution provides (Art. IV, Sec. 3)
that "the Congress shall have power to dispose of ... the territory or
other property belonging to the United States," it could convert the water
of the River into power and sell it as it disposes of coal or other minerals in
the lands which it owns. But it does not own the water in the river. Besides,
it sells from the public lands the coal or other mineral in its natural state.
It does not, in competition with other manufacturers, convert potential into
actual power. On that, Justice McReynolds said that the ownership of an iron
mine by the United States would not "permit the construction of smelting
works followed by entry into the business of manufacturing and selling
hardware, albeit the ore could be thus disposed of, private dealers
discomfited, and artificial prices publicized."
A great prophetic lawyer foresaw these cases
This decision upholding the Act of Congress creating the Tennessee Valley
Authority, and the decision sustaining the National Labor Relations Act, and
the decision sanctioning the Packers and Stockyards Act, bring to mind a
passage from one of the lectures fifty years ago to the law students at Yale by
John F. Dillon, who had sat on the Supreme Court of Iowa and on a Federal
Bench, a great figure of that day. Dealing with the barriers set in the
Constitution to keep Congress in its place — to keep it out of "a
boundless field of power no longer susceptible of any definition" —
with the barriers to keep a vaulting Chief Executive in his place, that great
"The value, however, of these constitutional guarantees wholly depends
upon whether they are fairly interpreted, and justly and with even hand fully
and fearlessly enforced by the courts. . . .
"If there is any problem which can be said to be yet unsettled,
it is whether the Bench of this country, State and Federal, is able to bear the
burden of supporting under all circumstances the Fundamental Law against
popular, or supposed popular, demands for enactments in conflict with it."
The Judiciary, respecting which Judge Dillon had misgivings half a century
ago, has certainly not grown stronger.
Whence authority to destroy productive land?
What overpowering necessity called for the drowning of 500,000 acres of
cultivated land which the Farm Bureau of Tennessee found in 1941 to be
producing each year crops valued at $14,415,300? Could the furnishing of cheap
electric power by the President's new "yardstick" to powerful patrons
of the Tennessee Valley Authority justify the destruction of this natural value
of the Earth? When the Salt River Valley had recently been reclaimed by
irrigation from the desert and made immensely fertile and productive, and when
other reclamation projects had been carried out and more were in prospect, by
what line of reasoning could any "planner" have concluded that it was
desirable to submerge forever more than half a million acres of the rich bottom
lands along the Tennessee River?
But that destruction of fertile lands displaced 13,433 families, or 56,000
persons, and sent them adrift, as the war in Europe displaced persons and sent
them wandering. For those in Europe we have expressed much compassion and to
them we have given much help; but there has been no sorrowing over the
displaced persons in the Tennessee Valley. True, those who were displaced in
that Valley were paid for their lands, so far as money can compensate for the
loss of homes sanctified by long living and clustered with the memories of
Irreplaceable loss of production from land
Yet, even if the compensation had been sufficient to cover every element of
value entering into the worth of a long-established home, there still remained,
and will forever remain, unpaid for, the yearly production of $14,415,300 of
foodstuffs and other products given by the land and needed and consumed by the
American people. And even if the displaced persons found employment in the
electric power plants which the Government set up without authority from the
Constitution, who on earth had authority to determine that it was better for
those persons to exchange the independence and security of life on their lands
for the uncertainty of subsistence from a pay roll which is liable to be
suspended at any time without any explanation to them?
Fascism thrust upon Tennessee Valley
As previously indicated, the people of the Tennessee Valley did not ask for
the submergence of their lands.
Those adventures by means of Fascist corporations are probably the worst
aggressions by Congress and the President upon the liberty and the property
rights of the Americans.
All who have become enthusiastic over the "success" of the
Tennessee Valley Authority, and of the other projects of Government for
manufacturing electric power for the commercial market by using the money of
the taxpayers without asking their permission, should think again and carefully
consider the warning given centuries ago by Authority, namely, that men may
gain the whole world and still be heavy losers.
1. An advertisement by the Electric Light and Power
Companies in United States News and World Report of March 3, 1950, shows a map
of the United States in which are stuck 209 pins with white heads and 491 with
black heads, over 44 of the 48 States. The white heads show where electric
power plants are now operated or financed by the Federal Government, and the
black pins mark the places where electric plants are under construction with
taxpayers' money. The map presents a frightening picture. It goes to prove what
Justice McReynolds said the record in this case established, that the Fascists
had "no less a goal than the electrification of America." The United
States is becoming Socialistic at top speed.
2. A dispatch from Washington on April 5, 1949, showed that
"big business" has taken over heavily the benefits of the cheap power
provided by the taxpayers. In the Tennessee Valley are the Aluminum Company of
America, the Monsanto Chemical Company, the Reynolds Metals Company, the
Electro Metallurgical Company, the Victor Chemical Company, the Tennessee
Copper Company, and the Reynolds Alloys, taking over 28 per cent of the total
In the Northwest the power generated at the Bonneville and Grand Coulee dams
on the Columbia River by the taxpayers was taken by the Aluminum Company of
America, the Pemamente Metals Corporation, the Reynolds Company, the Electro
Metallurgical Co., the Pacific Carbide Company, and the Pennsylvania Salt
Manufacturing Company, among others.
The "yardstick" which the President was so desirous of providing
to show what rates to the consumer should be charged was evidently of the
highest satisfaction to large corporations. Now the complaint at Washington is
that the consumers in the homes and other small users are threatened with a
shortage unless Congress will authorize the construction of steam plants —
thus casting off altogether the cloak of navigation and flood control which
Congress wore when it entered on this stage!
Next | Previous |
Contents | Text Version