1034 



Mr. President, I think I have said enough. I just want my disap- 

 pointment in and my opposition to this measure to be recorded. 



Mr. Hansen. Mr. President, will the distinguished Senator from 

 Louisiana yield to me for a couple of minutes ? 



Mr. Johnston. I yield to the distinguished Senator from Wyoming. 



Mr. Hansen. Mr. President, I can empathize, as not everyone in 

 this Chamber can, with the distinguished Senator from Louisiana. 

 It was the language in the bills to which he has referred that encour- 

 aged me to adopt the same identical language which finally was passed 

 by the action of the Senate in adopting the amendments to a bill that 

 came back as S. 391. 



I know what it means to have great developments taking place that 

 are given encouragement by the Federal Government and to have 

 people come in and suddenly descend upon a city or a town and bring 

 with them immediate demands for all kinds of extra services. 



AVe have gone through that experience in several instances in my 

 State of Wyoming — in Rock Springs, in Green River, in Gillette. We 

 are going through it now in the city of Douglas, Wyo., east of Casper, 

 We know what it means in Hanna, Wyo. 



It is not easy when you find the population of a town doubling or 

 tripling in just a few years. It is always difficult, because invariably 

 the people come before any of the increased valuation which eventu- 

 ally may appear on the tax rolls is able to make any contribution at 

 all to minimize or mitigate the impact of these social and economic 

 problems that invariably follow the presence of many new people in 

 town. 



I undei*stand full well what the Senator from Louisiana is saying. I 

 want to make just one point, though, that I did not know that the 

 White House or an Under Secretary of Commerce carried as much 

 clout with a Democratically controlled Congress as my good friend 

 from South Carolina and othei'S would have us believe was the case. 

 I am surprised that they would not have gone ahead and said, let the 

 President veto it if he wants to. He would have had the support, I 

 think, of a number of Republicans in trying to do what we think is 

 right for the country. So I am not going to come down on my analysis 

 of who is to blame b}^ saying that we are going to point the finger at 

 the White House and say they are to blame. That is not where I put 

 the blame. 



I think that the conferees had a clear signal from the Senate of the 

 United States. The need was there, a good case was made. There can 

 be no controverting at all the substantiation of the facts that were 

 presented under the skillful chairmanship of my good friend from 

 Louisiana when hearings were held on this subject. As I say, I sympa- 

 thize with him and I emphasize with him because things turned out as 

 they did. 



We heard the same statement made about the mineral royalty bill on 

 S. 391. I do not know yet what the President may do. All I can say is 

 that I have great concern for the problems that will be visited upon 

 coastal States following the installation of offshore installations which 

 will bring many new people in town, with no better way of coping 

 with those problems than we presently have. 



I do regret, in this case, that the conferees did not stand firm, did not 

 give the White House a chance to look at all of the facts when they 



