716 HISTORY OF THE COMMITTEE ON SCIEN( I AND TECHNOLOGY 



contribute to the confusion which had prompted the reform itself 

 when all energy R. & D. was concentrated in the Science Committee, 

 he contended. It was a hard sell, and an impressive one. 



There were arguments on the other side, some of which Swigert 

 had summarized in the options he presented to Teague. In terms of 

 work load distribution among the subcommittees, it was fairly obvious 

 that there would be a disproportionately large concentration in a single 

 energy subcommittee. Also, if every committee member got a chance 

 to serve on his first choice subcommittee, a single energy committee 

 would have been overloaded with applicants. 



When it came time for Flowers to speak, he came as close as he 

 could without discourtesy in denouncing his host, Teague, for the 

 brutal fashion in which the task force on energy and especially the 

 Subcommittee on Energy had been created by passing over Flowers in 

 1971 and 1973. Everybody spoke very freely that night. Nobody 

 minded at all what anybody else said. It was all done with the high 

 good humor of old friends and drinking buddies. 



McCormack had set a target to shoot at. Pretty soon, a lot of the 

 discussion seemed to center around the issue McCormack had pre- 

 sented. Teague bluntly interrupted and inquired: "All right, do you 

 want two energy subcommittees or one energy subcommittee?" There 

 was a babble of voices. Members started to line up in two camps: It 

 was them or us. 



we'll just take a vote 



Finally, Teague surprised everybody by suddenly announcing: 

 "If you guys can't reach a decision, we'll just take a vote on it." 

 The babble of conversational argument stopped. He was serious. This 

 wasn't all cut and dried. He really wanted to decide this in a democratic 

 fashion. There were a couple of jibes about a "secret ballot." There 

 were other remarks about "open meetings" and "sunshine laws." 

 It was finally decided, by nobody in particular, to resolve this burning 

 issue by a show of hands. By a very slim margin — nobody remembers 

 exactly how much — the Members voted for two energy subcommittees. 

 McCormack had all the strength of logic on his side, but he had one 

 handicap: Nobody was very sure who might opt for the second energy 

 subcommittee, and it is likely that several of the aspirants lined up 

 in favor of two subcommittees. Because of West Virginia's role among 

 the leading coal producers in the Nation, it was assumed that Hechler 

 as second-ranked member of the committee would have a strong in- 

 terest in heading up the Fossil Subcommittee. He soon let it be known 

 that he would bid for that subcommittee. Flowers bided his time until 

 1977, because in 1975 he preferred to retain his Judiciary Committee 

 subcommittee chairmanship. 



