1041 



"Second, to pay off similar bonds under Section 306 previously approved by 

 the Secretary of Commerce." 



You state in your letter, *'* * * the retirement legerdemain gives a state a 

 grant only if it cannot borrow money" and referring to the language inserted by 

 the conterees, '* * * because of the unavailability of our adequate financing 

 under any other subsection,' "the automatic formula grants are no longer auto- 

 matic." It is obvious from the record that rather than legerdemain, the language 

 of the bill is clear and the added language by the conferees only emphasizes 

 what we stated last July time and again that the grants were not automatic 

 to begin with, that they had to retire loans for adverse impacts and any left over 

 had to go back to the Federal Treasury. There is one exception. One that you 

 proposed in your original bill, S. 521, and one which was adhered to by the con- 

 ferees and that is grants for environmental impact. 



Now let me refer to your language, "The change in the formula, with its two- 

 thirds emphasis on new and expanded production and new OCS jobs, would 

 virtually write Louisiana out of much of the funds." Totally false. First, as is 

 stated above, the almost total emphasis in the Senate last year other than envii'on- 

 mental, was on new and expanded production. The criteria of new OCS jobs was 

 added by the House in Committee prior to reporting the bill to the House on 

 October 8, 1975. It was not added by the conferees but rather supported by the 

 House when it passed the bill including the Louisiana delegation and supported 

 by all of us on the conference. It was never in issue because it only emphasized 

 the original Senate intent. Moreover, rather than writing Louisiana out of funds, 

 it is interesting to note the survey made by the Department of Commerce and 

 0MB for Louisiana's share under the conference report. They project that of 

 the total $400 million over the eight year period, Louisiana will receive $188 

 million. One state receiving almost half of a Federal fund cannot be referred 

 to as an "unmitigated disaster." I only wish such a "disaster" would be visited 

 on South Carolina. 



Finally, let me say that I am sorry for any misunderstanding. I try to avoid 

 diffeernces with colleagues and it is particularly regrettable when it involves 

 good friends. I have made a sincere endeavor to reconcile what you now pay 

 for in accordance with the record. When you refer in the background section of 

 your letter to your race for the Senate, I am only constrained to remind that 

 your race came on the tail end of a three year endeavor by me and others for 

 a coastal zone management act. We were supported by the State Ports Authority, 

 by the Council of State Governments, the Association of Counties, the Municipal 

 Association and many officials and citizens of Louisiana. We finally succeeded in 

 the summer of 1972 and prior to your election this bill was signed into law in 

 October of 1972, giving Commerce original jurisdiction of coastal zone develop- 

 ment. We have maintained this with our friends fi-oni Interior and, of course, 

 I reject your idea of "raiding" for what the law already provides, for the 

 jurisdiction already determined l)y the Congress. To ask me to go back now to 

 conference would be totally inifair and would totally violate "our previous agree- 

 ments," those made between you and me and those made by me with the Senate. 

 The truth ip that after a year's work with four months in conference, we have 

 finally got an excellent bill which the Administration will accept. We have pro- 

 vided an orderly way for the state to receive front-end money to prepare for 

 the net adverse impact of OCS activity. We can't at this late date and shouldn't 

 turn this into a revenue-sharing measure. I quote Senator Jackson. Chairman of 

 the Interior Committee, at S12817 : 



"Once actual production takes place, automatic aid will become available to 

 repay loans or retire the bonds. I am pleased that the compromise requires that 

 the automatic grants must be extended for the purpose of reducing or ameliorat- 

 ing adverse impacts. This requirement should eliminate any possibility that any 

 state will receive a windfall." 

 Sincerely, 



Ernest F. Hollings. 



Mr. Hollings. Mr. President, while I understand the concerns stated 

 here, I hope the colloquy between myself and the Senator from Louisi- 

 ana about certain interpretations of the conference report has cleared 

 some of that up. I cannot yield to the idea that the conferees did not 

 live up to the intent of the Senate in the ao'reements made between 



