912 HISTORY OF THE COMMIT! ri ON SCIENC1 AND TECHNOLOGY 



individuals throughout the Nation. Teague, Mosher, and Goldwater 

 joined in cosponsoring the bill, and before long almost all the Science 

 Committee members had climbed aboard the electric vehicle bill, 

 which carried a price tag of $160 million. 



For McCormack, it was a personal crusade. In announcing hearings 

 by his subcommittee in June, he stated: 



Our ultimate goal is the widespread manufacture and use of electric cars through- 

 out the country. Wc know that electric cars will not compete in the foreseeable 

 future with vehicles driven by internal combustion engines powered by gasoline or 

 alcohol. However, electric cars are good enough today to provide much of the 

 transportation that Americans need, particularl) tor trips to and from work, school 

 and market. 



The importance of this demonstration program cannot be overestimated. In fact, 

 the development of electric cars could do more to decrease our dependence upon 

 foreign supplies of petroleum than any other single thing that we might do. This is 

 clear because electric cars available today can meet the bulk of our personal trans- 

 portation needs, and the amount of petroleum we now consume for automobiles is 

 comparable to a large portion of our total imports. 



OTTINGER JOINS IN 



Ottinger, frequently at loggerheads with McCormack over nuclear 

 fission, enthusiastically endorsed the legislation (along the lines he 

 had himself first sponsored in 1967) and began to use an electric car to 

 advertise his support. He also advocated the encouragement of steam 

 cars, and hybrid autos which could use the electric system up to speeds 

 of 30 miles per hour (which consume the greatest amounts of gasoline) 

 and the internal combustion engine above that speed. Hybrid systems, 

 Ottinger pointed out, would enable the use of your car on gasoline 

 while the batteries were being recharged. Goldwater, Brown, Harkin, 

 Hechler, and Mosher all endorsed the bill enthusiastically. The first 

 negative note came from ERDA, in a faint-praise damnation from 

 ERDA's Assistant Administrator for Conservation, Dr. James S. Kane, 

 who told the McCormack subcommittee on June 3: 



Carrying out a demonstration phase too rapidly may hinder, rather than foster, 

 acceptance of electric vehicles. * * * It disturbs me to take a stand against a bill 

 whose goals are so obviously in the best interest of the Nation. 



McCormack had a ready reply for ERDA's negativism (or no 

 doubt it was OMB-directed negativism): 



Wc very much appreciate your testimony, and I must say I'm not dismayed by 

 it. After all, the entire organizational structure of the executive branch came in and 

 opposed the geothermal bills too, but we ultimately persuaded them to join us, and 

 I propose to do the same thing in this case. 



With the help of the Electric Vehicle Council, McCormack ar- 

 ranged for 20 electric cars to be placed on display in front of the 

 Ruvburn Building. Naturally, all Members of the House and Senate 



