ADVAM 11) ENERGY Tl < ll\< H.OGIES 



909 



provisions. McCormack's membership on the Joint Committee as well 

 as the Science Committee also helped cement the relationship between 

 the two committees, even though many younger members like Harkin 

 and Blouin repeatedly decried the overemphasis on nuclear spending in 

 the ERDA bill. 



When the bill was debated on the floor starting June 19, Goldwater 

 came to terms with the sharp increases: 



Now, many of my colleagues in this Chamber may be startled to hear Barry 

 Goldwater, Jr., rising so strongly in support of such massive and accelerated Federal 

 expenditures of any kind, even in energy R. & D. * * * While I may disagree on 

 some of the specific elements or subprogram levels, overall I am convinced that this 

 program is a reasonable balance of accelerated energy R. & D. and fiscal responsibility. 

 Each increase was well considered and was finalized in a fiscally responsible and 

 technically prudent way. 



Winn was not quite as enthused about the magnum increases, observing : 



We should temper our enthusiasm with some realism, and not engage in trying 

 to "outbid" one another in funding increases. Our energy program should result in 

 fueling our homes and cars but not in fueling inflation. 



HOUSE ADDS $50 MILLION POR SOLAR ENERGY 



A surprise amendment by Representative Frederick W. Richmond 

 (Democrat of New York) hiked the authorization for solar energy up 

 to $194 million — an increase of over $50 million above what the 

 committee had voted. Lively support was immediately generated for 

 the Richmond amendment, including strong statements by Harkin and 

 Emery. In vain did McCormack point out to the House that "the 

 ERDA organization is still having trouble getting organized, and they 

 are still coming to us and saying there is no way they can spend that 

 money we are authorizing." But the forward momentum by those on 

 the floor was strong enough to carry the Richmond amendment by a 

 standing vote, 43 to 31. All but $25 million of the increase voted in 

 the Richmond amendment survived in the conference committee. The 

 House geothermal energy figure was sustained by the conference com- 

 mittee, which also voted an additional $21 million for conservation. 



Because of the battle over loan guarantees, which extended into 

 December 1975, a great deal of the 1975 effort of the McCormack 

 subcommittee was diverted to this struggle. In the late summer and 

 fall of 1975, the subcommittee held hearings to probe the use of loan 

 guarantees for solar, geothermal, and conservation projects, as well as 

 capital formation. Even though the major fight occurred over synthetic 

 fuels, the interest of the Congress in the use of loan guarantees for 

 renewable resources enhanced the value of the subcommittee's hearings. 





