One Hundred Days, part 3

The week of January 21st and I will government and the House debates obscenity the Senate studded snow tires and the Commerce Commission Chairman reflects on transportation. It is week 3 of 100 days. First of it is by the gentleman from Pottawatomie Mr. Schroeder.

See in the chamber the issue in the house the obscenity law in the Senate studded snow tires. Here's d. Good evening. The House of Representatives took up two bills this past week both of which had been passed last session by the Senate. One of those bills written to permit minors to be treated for a venereal disease without having their parents notified had shot through the Senate last year 43 to nothing. But some members of the holocaust took exception to a section of the bill which would require physicians to notify the parents in the cases where the disease could be transmitted to other members of the family. Republican to amend the bill and leave that decision up to the doctor in those cases and that touched off debate. As one who worked rather extensively with young people for two years I can tell you. That the epidemic of venereal disease has in fact extended down to the junior high school level. It is so

cold. That if children this age know that their parents are going to be informed. They won't seek treatment. Except in the most rare instances. Perhaps it's out of naivete about the horrible ravaging effects of venereal disease. Perhaps it's simply out of fear of what their parents will do to them for whatever reason they think if they think that their parents are going to be informed and in almost every case under this bill as it is now they would be. Then they won't seek treatment. So we really have to make a decision don't we. What our primary goal is. And if you put it in those terms then I think that the answer is obvious and has to be we have to eradicate the disease. What the bill says has a clause in it. If the disease can be communicated to another member of the family. No one could make the argument that that refers only to

possible in such tourist relationships. But ladies and gentleman almost every venereal disease can be communicated There's always that possibility. And all I'm saying is that what we should do is the principle that should octane in this case is that the physician ought to use his discretion. In other words rather than writing it into law and saying that the physician has to notify the parents it really should be left up to the physician if he thinks that is as it is a clear and present danger overriding the possible treatment of the child and so be it. But please let's not just let us not put that into the law. I urge you to support the Schroeder a month and then Nigella from Mr Hill. Mr Speaker ladies and gentlemen of the house. This particular amendment was offered in committee and after that

committee meeting I discussed the amendment with a doctor who treats venereal disease patients and he has been a what the forefront nationally and various groups for the Prevention of venereal disease. I happen to agree with a lot of the things that have been said by Mr. Schroeder Mr. Hagan's and some of the others that we want to encourage people to go to physicians to be treated. Now the way this particular law is now use with the treatment of 16 and 17 year olds is that doctors feel that the provision in the provision that is now in the bill gives the doctor discretion not to tell the parent unless the doctor is convinced that the

circumstances are such the child will communicate the disease to other members of the family. The doctors are very much concerned that if the Schroeder amendment were to pass. That they would then be in the position of having nothing to hang their hats on. When an irate parent comes after him because they failed to disclose what went on to the parent and he's concerned at the doctors who will. Do it there will be less doctors willing to treat venereal disease as a result of them. Now it's sort of hard to understand and I've never really understood a lot of the things the way the medical profession looks at it. But this is from a person who is actively working every day and the treatment of venereal disease. And they feel this particular

person feels and represents the thinking of other doctors who served on the governor's task force to prevent venereal disease. The bill as it passed the Senate is the way they'd like it to pass the House. Mr. Speaker of the house I too was intrigued by the report of Mr. Hill on the testimony of the doctor it seemed somewhat illogical to me. Consequently I missed two or three minutes of the debate and went to the phone and just talked to a clinic in my general area of the state that has about a 10 doctor clinic. Treats a number of these cases the doctor I talked to substantiated the position of the doctor Mr. Hill talked to in the first case. That is it is a present practice of most doctors not to report to the parents unless the child approves of that sort of thing. The report however this doctor did not continue the logic as reported by Representative Hill. He said the doctors he was acquainted with in their area

of the state would like to see this removed from the code. I would like to leave it up to the doctors and their good judgment as to when this notification of the parents is necessary. So apparently we have a conflict of opinion even among the medical profession but it seems to me this is an area we can leave up to the doctor's good judgment as to when notification of the parents is necessary. I'll vote for the shorter men. The shorter Amendment was adopted permitting physicians to use their discretion but not requiring them to notify the parents if danger exists to other family members. The entire appeal then went on to pass the House on a vote of 85 9 of the amended bill went to the Senate and they brought it 44 to nothing before going home on Friday. The House then went on to debate a somewhat related bill another one that the Senate had approved last session that would permit the advertising and sale of contraceptive devices in places other than drugstores and physicians offices the only places where they are available

right now. The bill would also give the Iowa Department of Health authority to regulate the sale a couple locked in vending machines that wear you some questions because under the version passed by the Senate the Agriculture Department which is responsible for inspecting vending machines in Iowa would continue that overall responsibility. The Agriculture Department would present samples from the proper vending machines to the health department for their study. Republican Representative William Monroe a pharmacist didn't like that he proposed an amendment to permit the Iowa health department to do its own inspecting. The amendment last that raises some interesting questions during the debate. Would you like to elaborate. For the members of the House as to why we went to the department of health rather than the Department of Agriculture essentially my eyes my thinking as we discussed at that time was the Department of Health is the more proper department of state government to concern itself with health matters and the absence or presence of VD and the

devices for the prevention thereof tend to relate to health rather than to agriculture. Now I do have here the statistics for the increase in gonorrhea etc. And unfortunately they're all we seem to be concerned with humans it doesn't seem to be a horse or a cattle problem. Would you give us a rundown on all what you consider to be quality control. Now age seems to have some bearing. What else is there anything. You mean is generally prescribed by the manufacturer under or under. I'm not familiar with this product but I suppose that one word Mr. Brake you might refer to the term leak each lot for the bill to permit more points of sale for contraceptive devices really ran into deep controversy was in its relation to Iowa's obscenity laws. Representative George to Nokia Council Bluffs attorney argued that if the bill becomes law it would conflict with obscenity statutes now on the Iowa law books. But in his opinion the aisle

obscenity law was unconstitutional anyway. So he offered an amendment repealing that section and his fellow representatives agreed. What specific problems are arising in society today and in the past that would cause you to want to strike this section from the code. It's unconstitutional as decided based upon not as decided but based upon the opinions of the Iowa Supreme Court opinion the United States Supreme Court. I heard your opening remarks but could you attempt to answer the question I just asked. I personally do not feel that an individual. Who is an adult should be able to be told what or what he cannot read. I think this when you go that first step that when you tell a man that he cannot read or cannot read a certain piece of

literature or whether it even be not literature and one person's opinion that you are opening the door to the possibility at least a totalitarian totalitarian form of government which I do not approve. Are you saying Mr. Canady that this section cannot be enforced at the present time. Yes and it is not being enforced. That's yes that's what I'm saying. Yes it is not. Yes it is not being enforced. And you think I mean I don't know. I don't know that has ever been enforced I do not recall a single case on which I was referred and forced by I may be wrong on that. Are there any other reasons possibly in the back of your mind that you might want to bring out as far as why you want this section repealed. If you could give me a hint maybe I could come up with some.

Thank you Mr. King to recognize the gentleman from Polk Mr Kramer. Mr. Speaker members of the house. Perhaps this will be a surprise to some of you. But I think that you ought to give clear attention to what Mr. Kochi is saying because I think he has told you what the whether you agree or wish it weren't. It is I think what the clearer letter of the law is as of now it says facts a life really that you're dealing with. It's just a matter of time to somebody deals with this particular section seven twenty five point five because the word obscene has no legal meaning without defining what obscene is to. Also give intent. And as a result of those voting I 55 nay 37 absent are not voting. 8. The ayes appear to have it the ayes do have it the amendment is adopted.

The contraceptive sale bill with the repeal of the some of the law attached passed the House then 69 to 20 in the Senate also passed it thirty seven to three and it now goes on to Governor Ray to see what he thinks of it. But the more and Register reporter Louise Wilder had an interview with the chief justice of the I was Supreme Court during the week and actually before the Senate vote was taken and Chief Justice Moore told you of that really doesn't repeal the obscenity statutes entirely doesn't know it doesn't. Actually there's another law on the books which does substantially the same thing as both the House and the Senate repealed. And so the effect is that there is another law which actually governs the sale of obscene literature. So did the chief justice in your interview suggest anything that should be done. Chief Justice Moore in the Supreme Court opinion that was issued in December suggested that the legislature take a look at all of the I was obscenity laws because most of them are so vaguely worded as to be unconstitutional under the recent opinion by the United

States Supreme Court. And at that time you suggested that the legislature take a look at all of those laws and rewrite them and possibly write one law that would govern all of the obscenity laws and repeal everything else to give us an overall view that before the legislature acted this week what was on the books at that time there were 11 obscenity laws on the books with the action this week there will now be 10. And all of those laws according to Judge Moore should be examined and looked at and perhaps maybe want to come up with that specifically defines obscenity and then repeal all the old ones because they do not mean it no these 11 dealt with specific things. We have repealed only one specific. Is what you're saying. We have repealed only one law that dealt with articles supposedly for immoral use and that was where the contraceptive devices came into it because they were under that law. They their use was not permitted.

What do you think. Is that the mood in the legislature know to follow that suggestion. Currently there is only one law that one bill that has been proposed that I know of that would do the sort of thing that Chief Justice Moore has suggested that bill was filed last year and it was put in subcommittee and that's where it stands and nothing new has been filed this year. And that law from a very quick reading of it would probably do some of the things that Justice Moore says needs to be done because it does give specifics and it does define what is supposed to be obscene. Now the bill which passed the legislature this week now goes to Governor Ray. Have you had any feeling from him on whether he wants it done in a piecemeal way or repeal or change of the definition maybe is a better word of the Senate the statute as it should be in the future in one bill. I think he probably is backing my Judge Moore wants him would prefer to see one law. In the Senate this week the long awaited debate on the future of studded snow tires. And

after three and a half hours of debate in the Senate we still don't know for sure how the Senate feels about that. A dozen or more amendments were offered on that Studded snow tire bill and in frustration the Senate finally decided to put off the whole thing until next week. Pay As You Go. That's the amendment. Let us you know let the people that need them or feel we need a. Comenius purposes use them pay their way. Like try to get this amendment on this particular bill. And essentially what it does if you want to take a second to read it it says emergency commercial vehicles would be exempt from the. Band provision of this bill. Yes to all five six exclusive inlets vehicles operated by veterinarians in the course of their profession allow them to use studded snow tires if they wish.

I've changed the word medical doctor just crossed that out and put physician in which covers it all the way down about who we're trying to handle and it takes care of the past or anybody else in there and the way I have filed my amendment it does not apply to the paraplegics because we assume that whenever they drive their car they've got same problem. So I am limiting the use of the studded snow tires on the emergency vehicles too. Those people. While they are engaged in emergency work while they are on their route the amendment's attacked the studded snow tire bill on three fronts one area for exemptions in certain cases veterinarians paraplegics mailmen emergency vehicles to name a few. Another amendment consideration would tax those who insist on using studded snow tires and another area would permit the tires to be used only when snow or ice covers the road surfaces. People I've talked to are in favor of paying paying for the use of them

but they feel that they really need it. And all this talk about not being safe this people just don't believe this. They've driven on for several years now and they feel that they are safe and that they just don't believe these reports put out by the Highway Commission. You know it's funny. It's a fault of security for their average should assume. Where in the bill were alone the ban on emergency far mail occurred so for now either they're no good for. Any of us. Or else are good for all of us. We must agree half way if you're looking at the fact. That studded snow tires just are not safe. They do not provide a measure of safeness for individuals driving normally day after day. So this is a position I'm in and I'm going to vote in favor of what my area wants me to do. And so I'm going to. Be against

banning studded tires and I'm going to be for putting a tax on it either the Cali Amendment or the proposal by Senator Hi. It makes sense to these people and I think that it's up to me to support what they want. Sure did what the folks wanted. But I think if the folks. Were queue again on the condition of our road tax fund. The acuity in our what this bill does so far as possibility of across the state boundary purchase of tires as to what it does to those of of lesser means and their ability to have studded snow tires. You know what it does as an. Engineering problem to the condition of our highways. Then I don't know what the people. Would say under those circumstances. Coming up this week in the legislature two bills of major interest to motor vehicle

drivers of course back on the grill in the Senate. The studded snow tires build and in the house the representatives again considering that proposed 55 mile an hour speed limit. Oh. CROSSFIRE. And opinion feature with John McCormack editor and publisher of the Burlington Hawkeye and Bill someone who's associate editor of the Waterloo courier and writes the column the iron do. Hi what do you think is wrong with this legislature. Well I think one of the problem is that there's excess save domination of the legislative branch by Executive Department. A I think what we need is a little more independent thinking up on the part of the individual senators and representatives. Well what do you mean by domination. You think the governor influences the handling of bills. Well I'm quite sure it does and I

am not saying this particular being critical of the governor. I think every governor tries to exert as much pressure as he can on the legislature to carry out his program. I think the problem is. There's too much collusion on the part of they for citing offers of both houses. And these people have tremendous power in their ability to appoint committees and determine what committees bills will be assigned to. You know you can kill a bill by assigning it to an unfriendly Committee. Well I know right now of course this one of the reasons I supported Billy Gannon for lieutenant governor while supporting way for governor I thought it be a healthy thing to have the presiding officer of the Senate from the other party. Well that might be John weigh that situation before and what usually happens then is that a majority of the Senate take away from the minority lieutenant governor the power to appoint committees I think to prevent a majority the Senate now from taking away from the pain lieutenant governor.

Yes because he's of the party if you fail the lieutenant governor too much in collusion with the governor and manipulating me the bales in the Senate. And this is no one's fault but the senators they don't have to put up with that. Well I think that's true I'd hate to see them take the drastic step of stripping the Lieutenant-Governor of powers are traditionally wrong to lead office I would rather say the individual senator just engage in a more independent thinking on their own not nominated quite so much. They are thinking of the executive branch. This seems to me like you're getting a little bit into the violation of the constitutional division of powers or how it sounds to me though I'd like you're objecting to the governor's change be running a pretty shrewd operation slipping. Yeah his ideas and his desires past the senators by using the lieutenant governor as his number one spokesman down there. This came out in the campaign when

new is running and it was I get by his opponents that he would be the the alter ego of the governor. Well I think that's turned out to be true and the problem is that the lieutenant governor despite his title is really a member of the legislative branch of government. And there's not a crossfire of features the opinions of John McCormack like editor and publisher of the Burlington Hawkeye and Bill someone who's associate editor of the Waterloo courier and writes the column the irony. Thank. You. Very much. Check if you had an opportunity to air any gripe with the General Assembly. Oh it was a fairly good job with this not just for a.

Ship but we're moving along. I don't want anyone specific. Well you know I see kind of a farce but it's. They are they're doing. Doing some good and they're keeping the state moving and we're not we're not really brokering a read or anything else that I was meant to state one state to come to that hasn't been in the red for quite a few years. Serenity. Apparently they must be done a pretty good job. Yeah and there is no. I don't know my my course my state taxes are high but everybody grows for taxes in their name. They want everything else and they want good police fire protection out here to do it schools just like that now of course I have been setting up my kids there except I always knew I was going to public school. So that's where I came to understand of

taxation by storms twice. You know Santa my and my with kids just popped in Catholic schools and us. But that's what I was one of choice but they do know that schools are so good I don't think I was pretty good just pretty good stayed in gentle tones. I lived in Minnesota Missouri. Yes yes yes yes yes. Then I saw a list of. What is wrong just as I was kind of small small towns just state and I kind of liked best so to speak. It's going to they're going to send you there so I think they're doing the required job censored. They meet once a year just at a rate two years I think that they're really they take care of all of loose ends that people grab on the sessions were further apart. And I just I'm pretty soon right. I think the big the big thing right now is on the national level.

OK our shadows there where that yellow Celeb the cop car station was set up for a white page but just wait you know it's a bad thing. Yeah but I mean that's what protects a president who's YOU THANK YOU. They put it in there because we need it. It's yes it is Nanny. Yeah I mean every any business and this Congress are about to do would have been separated her you know. Following that on my own. The 1854 the legislature the resolution were there within the report. So this put the Capitol into the dwelling area. This particular location was chosen.

We have a standard that needed nine and a half weeks to get to a recent Louis Harris poll indicates that one of the more unnecessary elements comprising American citizenship is any functional knowledge about American government. It is true that 90 percent of the respondents recognize the name of their governor but less than half knew the name of one national senator and one fifth thought the Supreme Court is part of Congress for their good. Seventy five percent knew nothing or next to nothing about state governors. Americans are understandably concerned with more primal needs these days but the last statistic is still fascinating. It suggests several things. First that virtually no one is watching this program right now. Beyond that. If one hundred fifty thousand Iowans could see this man in daylight they would not recognize him. He is Marvin R. Selden Jr..

And carrying the Harris poll to its inner conclusion. It is not difficult to anticipate an answer to the question who is MY been sounding. Name for me ever I can think of is titled. Here's to you. No I don't. Think. I don't know your place by the time the actual figures come down. There. Regularly goes to his office one hour early.

There are other things that make him a remarkable state employee too. For example he was appointed by Norman Ernie. If you are under the age of 15 you never heard of him because he's one of those governors who served before Harold Hughes and Robert Ray. As I was come troller Marman seldom has spanned 13 years. Three governors and both political parties in an appointed office. The press does not provide excessive grist for seldom watchers since a large proportion of the coverage deals with the state budget which is of course indecipherable to everyone. Beyond that there isn't much. His car was stolen about 10 years ago and it was reported in 1961 that three days after Senate confirmation the new comptroller feigning a reaction no doubt to reading about his job in the Iowa Code. It's in there somewhere and simply put fixes him with a responsibility to a con

for every one of the some 2 billion dollars that annually go into or come out of government. To carry out this fairly consummate task Marvin Seldon need only project the state's unemployment rate the price of corn and soybeans the weather the efficiency of 99 county auditors and the actions of the Nixon administration. Not necessarily in that order. Additionally it is highly unlikely that anyone will dip into the public trough without mining seld and knowing about it. Well I worked under three governors The first was when Irby. Their original point with. A senator he was governor a. B there's a difference in the three minutes. Sure wouldn't have to be obvious. IRBY was he. Was the.

One who probably enjoyed an. Administration. As much as more than the other two and a senator he was was a very different type of individual. I think in many ways he did not enjoy sitting behind a desk tackling industry problems the. State enjoyed being out tackling. So. Corrections est was taking or not taking. It's almost the exact opposite as far as. The ministry here but here I think kids will learn to enjoy good weather straight crisis or the ministration press. So you're probably going to wear them in a selective memory of the whole process just kind of scares them. I would need to ensure that

nearly half the national average increased earnings in income are reflected in part of your financial condition. It has been said that the budget is the main instrument of the executive action and the Comptroller's projections are a key ingredient in the development of the gubernatorial budget. Since a politician jumpoff be responsible for raising taxes the fidelity of Mr. Seldon's predictions assume more than passing importance. And if I may inject at this moment praise for some people who have very diligently worked to get the information so that we can put together these budget recommendations that is Marcel then the controller. And his staff until the dollars do. First thing you're saying you want to do away with the existing talent. Why part existing County concept of education so there isn't any county board of education during

the meetings of the Appropriations Committees of the two chambers either Seldon or his representative is responsible for presenting the governor's view as far as budgetary requests are concerned. And over the years since Seldon has been in office especially the practices developed a grant either Seldon or has a representative a great deal of deference I think experience has it. The bulk of the recommendations made by your subcommittees or committees are accepted by the Chamber as a whole Once they get to the once they get to the floor so you can have a significant input back early in the process you can have a tremendous impact upon the outcome of the thing. Keep. Your Ear. To better understand the appropriation process. One must first recognize that all hundred state agencies

underpin their budget requests with one basic assumption that it is this if their requests are not fully met I won't go to hell in a handbasket. This is a governor's budget review with the Board of Regents the agency responsible for the three state universities. It has as many employees as the town of Muscatine as people. And an annual budget larger than the rest of the agencies combined. Aside from the fact that it could see seed from Iowa the Board of Regents is noteworthy in another respect. It is one of only two departments not under complete budgetary control of the comptroller the other being a Highway Commission. When Marvin Stoneham took office there were about 75 separate budget administration. Now there are three the other two. And yes. You're. Right.

We. Want to hear from Wayne. What's truly amazing about it he's been able to survive changes and image in the administration as you know. So I've asked various people around the statehouse how seldom does this and they say well it's partly a function of is his personality. He's a. Very pleasant warm individual who gets along very well with people on both sides of the aisle. He appears to treat Democratic legislators as well as he does Republican legislators in terms of providing them with their information needs and things like that. In addition to that he's very competent professionally. Iowa has made made great strides I think during the last several years as far as setting up or establishing computer data systems from what I hear Marvin

Seldon is mainly responsible for that. Free. Trade to take care of your computers they'll take care of you. This is the fifth floor of the Lucas building and if there is ever a brownout here it will take the stage until the Bicentennial is straight now. There are six to eight thousand separate programs covering some 500 areas of

governmental action. 135 of the Comptroller's 200 employees work with computers as a state run system. I was is as sophisticated as any in the Republic. Suffice it to say the guts of governmental recordkeeping is here including of course traces the crime records. You do not however have to rob a gas station to be on final. For example if you drive a car. Hunt deer or turkey sell insurance. We're born married divorced or immunized and. If you paid or were refunded income tax if you are a pharmacist nurse or are receiving public assistance if you own a boat or a corporation you are here. The computers represent a technological point of no return and it is doubtful that the comptroller indeed the state could function without them. For instance they print on the warrants issued by the state. The typist is needed for this job along with an entire floor of the

Lucasfilm. Computer for extended view revelations like this as just short of baby talk. But was state government toying with areas like land use coordinated transportation and a housing authority. The best is yet to come for I was fairly excited computer system. As for Marvin's self and his electronic sanctum sanctorum. Has brought definitive and pervasive change ministration. A feat that even your average bureaucracy must rank with an appearance of Halley's comet or the birth of a cat. 5 feet down. As you democracy in action. Rest assured your tax buck is in the

capable hands. You might say you own a piece of the computer. This is after the sales tax and you visit the capital. Don't look for mine. He's off the tour trail which is just as well since you wouldn't understand what he's talking about anyway. If you're really interested though he's the one wearing the bow tie. Dialogue perhaps recorded Thursday January 24th with guest Maurice fan the Strand chairman of the Iowa Commerce Commission and the governor's advisor on energy and transportation matters. Newsmen are Larry Spears a

reporter for the Waterloo courier. Larry frilling reporter for The Des Moines Tribune and John McCormack Slate editor and publisher for the Burlington Hawkeye. Moderator is Jim Flensburg reporter for The Des Moines Register. Mr. Van Nostrand. Fuel prices and speed limits of the trucking industry. Would you therefore favor a state subsidy of the trucks. Well I think if it became necessary to keep the transportation system functioning and to keep the products moving we look at today. I see the evidence at this point that that's necessary at all. I mean there's a difference in principle. For a quite different principle because in the first place you look at the energy efficiency of the modes of transportation and the very fact that it takes three point six times as much fuel to move earth freight by truck as it is by a railroad I would point out the necessity of moving as much we can by really wrote.

All of your data facia why they need a subsidy should we be thinking about a subsidy or a really bad private industry without knowing more about like dash air and her running machine property. Well I think you look at the situation as far as islands are concerned. Not the railroad I think if you look at the railroad system in Iowa now you can quickly determine that there are several thousands of miles a lines that are there obviously for the stockholders best interest that regardless of what kind of a program there is those rigs will continue to make a lot of money. By the same token there are thousands of miles which I think are not there for the stockholders best interests that if the stockholders had a voice in the decision that very quickly pull those lines out there they're surviving ones and I think the people of Iowa have to look and see what the alternative the transportation capabilities are. If that was removed and on that basis I think you can consider some alternatives other than letting those lines be pulled out because of their failure to

produce the maybe a last 10 percent of revenue that it takes to make them go. When you look at what the state's alternative is which is to build and maintain more highways grant more truck authority and consume substantially more fuel. Larry for us. What are we talking about as far as state funds to revitalize real roads. What would it cost to bring. I was railroad network up to the level it was at 30 or 35 years ago. Well I think first you have to take it on a case by case basis in my estimation there are real world lines in Iowa where there is not sufficient public interest in them to justify spending any money on them either for railroad upgrade or for in an effort to try to keep the line to serve the communities where it is I think you take those on a case by case basis and figure out what it will take. For example if a line is down as one that in mind right now lacks a 10 cars per mile of the generating sufficient revenue 10 cars or freight per

mile per year generating sufficient revenue to justify its continuance as far as rail was concerned. But that particular line is 72 miles long so that seven hundred twenty cars. I think you'd make every effort to give those communities an opportunity to show that they can generate that sufficient. The freight to a sufficient level so that the river can afford to keep it in. When you look at the alternatives the twenty four cars per mile that it is generating and amount to about 800 cars which converts into fifty four hundred additional truckloads. So I think you go out there and you try to get the communities interested enough to see whether they can generate the traffic if they can't where you you leave it alone. Man are you talking about a piddling amount of money. Yes relatively small amount of money and frankly I don't think the state should take over and operate railroad lines that have no possibility of paying off. But what you've got to remember are we going to nationalize the railroads and I don't think so I think if we have to nationalize it always an alternative losing them.

I think it's something you look at but I don't think we're near that point now but what you have to remember is that 18 months ago we had more rear road cars standing around on sightings in Iowa waiting for someone to ask for their use than we than we had. Times when there was insufficient number we saw a fantastic increase in the green movement. By rail but caused by the export sales of goods of grain and as a consequence the railroads had no lead time they had no idea this kind of a load is going to be thrust upon them frankly they've they perform magnificently under those circumstances I think made the public aware of how impossible it is to move the vast amounts of grain that we now export from the state to move in the other way by rail. So I think you have a whole new ball game you can take the figures in the five years prior to the October 1972 and for all practical purposes junk them. I don't think they're representative of all at all at what the rail road system can do and I wouldn't how important it is to the entire economy of the state. Larry Spears him and a lot of what you're talking about about moving the grain with the

sub subsidies be just for track repair and maintenance or is there anyone in the state considering subsidies for rolling stock to move specialty products. Well I think this Office of Energy Management that the governor took upstairs the other day and the spatial energy and transportation message with had the capability of getting in and looking at see what can be done in a whole broad range of. Suggestions. Some of the railroad lines are impossible for the railroads to function properly on because the there's a lot of ten mile track we have hundreds of miles of track in the state where the train can run more than 10 miles an hour. Now you can go out there and inspect that track and probably find reasons to close it down but that's the last and want to do with whether the railroad again looking after stockholder interest would figure that. That kind of an expenditure that would take to get that railroad track up to the place where they could run those trains at a speed that would make the utilization of the equipment up to standard

is questionable. But a small amount of money in there provide upgrade thereby speed up the trains thereby increase the efficiency of the utilization of the equipment. Brings about an entirely new economic system and I think you just look at the whole broad scope a bit not look at what you're doing for what you brought. You're doing this job. Of Office of managing energy now. You seem to be doing an adequately. Why do you want to set up a new bureaucracy. Why not continue with what you doing up. Well frankly because we're getting tired I think of. It we would have a doctor to heal and I think if we had any idea there was going to call it were as much time as it's taken since October would have asked for additional people to help us make the decisions to keep the thing laid out more than we have it's got to the point that we see no end to it we think frankly there be more effort spent on energy in the state about three years from now than it was this year and it's time that we broaden the scope so that we have more

people in there who understand it who can discuss it on television help us make these decisions. Why does the ray administration say that an ad hoc committee wouldn't work in the area of transportation but that it will work in the area. Of energy management. Well it isn't. There's no conflict there at all they feel if you look at the bill you've not seen a bill of course or in the process of drafting it now but the the council that the governor has to be set up to head this Office of Energy management not only has the authority in the responsibility of doing so good to do some planning but when you see that bill you'll see that they have the authority to carry it out. The problem with trying to coordinate in transportation of some is suggest that there's no authority to make it happen. You go and study a plan you come back in supposedly. Develop some kind of a program bring it back in the legislature and ask for an activist stat. it was just talk to legislators in your briefing yesterday that you simply use the governor's clout the governor's authority.

Yeah but you can use a governor's authority to spend some money to hold a railroad line and the governor's authority doesn't range that far we've been able to use the name of the governor very advantageously in getting rigs to work together in certain instances but that was not to give you know ignore the statutory limitations but you get out in the study the situation some of these lines now and if it's very obvious what ought to at least be tried There's simply no authority to do that. And there would not be in any Coordinating Committee involved transportation in this bill. Which brings into being this Office of Energy Management contains the authority so you not only can study and experiment you can make it go you can try it and it will make errors but it will be an activist organization not a planning organization where you say I will go to your office now or I might have authority to comment I mean to only regulate they are required to perform certain standards to keep track each other a certain standard. You make it sound like were so helpless before they are at your soul. Divine right of way. Bugged me

for years about can I and I wonder. But they've never done it in while but are you comfortable here talking about putting several million dollars of taxpayers money in their hand to their road management. And yet some of the things you describe illustrate the mismanagement of railroads has a lot of them to this point. Airfares like subsidizing Lockheed. Well I'm going to answer the first question first US what authority our commission has. If you look you'll find that we have a rather broad authority over rates and service but you see the ultimate threat. When you have a service complaint is you know close down the track that we go out to we can inspect it there's all kinds of clout in the statutes but what we do is close them down. Unfortunately of 700 miles out here now that I think the railroads would enjoy very much you were the Commerce Commission moving to close them down. We have no authority to make something happen it's a negative authority that we have that we can get on them and we have been very successful in getting them to provide more equipment but we have no way that we know that we can

generate additional business for them that's what needs to be done. Now reverse the thrust just a little bit I'm not interested in helping railroads I'm interested in helping and I want transportation system I can get as mad at the railroads I get as much cause in 24 years of doing business with them as probably anyone who sits in that general assembly. We're not talking about that we're talking about what can we do with the transportation resources and I want to give Iowa the best possible transportation system. And to suggest that because of enemies the railroads have made in the past and frankly a lot of the enemies are made by railroad labor not by railroad management. To suggest that those enemies that have been made are those animosities ought to perpetuate a system where we just kill more and more and more to the public funding of a highway system that to me would just be going in the wrong direction. Why didn't the governor. Decided to go with a direct subsidy approach rather than a tax relief approach on track. Rev.. Well I think you can go both ways I think what we're looking at now and really the reason

for the bringing a program in that he did is we're going to lose we now have on file or about to be filed. I've been in the proceedings before the Interstate Commerce Commission there the Interstate Commerce Commission makes a decision we get a copy. And nine segments are really what you're going to make us lose 400 miles of railroad track very rapidly some of those although there are the revenue generation is down. Obvious there's not enough freight being moved on or they wouldn't be asking to abandon the last of those in my estimation create some terrible problems on down the road and I think we have to buy some time a tax benefit at this point though I think it ought to be considered I think again if you break the railroad up or lines in the state into two categories those which undeniably serve the stockholders and those which have doubtful value to the stockholders but inestimable value to the people on the long those communities then I think you can look at what needs to be done badly with stockholders to be sure they were required to take care of that other segment are used do you have figures at hand that

advance you the need to subject your tax money to put their track each shift in shape. We need again. Well in the first place we have five major areas serving I when you start looking what their needs are there's a great difference because Iraq island is in very deep financial distress and the only thing in my estimation it's going to keep that going is a loan move rather sizable magnitude from the federal government pending the the completion of the rock on UPN merger which has been held up for 10 years by the Interstate Commerce Commission and really responsible for most of the stress there and then you range on up to railroads that are doing very very well. But remember that the railroads. Well we like to talk about the stress we're putting on the need that we now have for them looking at over the past 15 or 16 months the railroads look back over a long period and they've made decisions that they need to remove more and more track and get down to a very streamlined system and I think if we're going to try to step in and say look you know we'd like to have you take another look at that we're going to

have to show them to the people of Iowa are willing to back that up with something more than than a tearful plea. If they want to go that direction and they consider for the long term interests of the success of that business and the stockholders that they should do that then I think you know we have to face the fact that they're going to probably then go ahead and do it unless we give them some other kind of incentive than marry for those subsidies gear and here is the state going to have that service actually is going to improve on railroads. How are you going to. How is the state going to be able to determine if the taxpayers are getting their money's worth out of it. Well that's that's the reason that the the request for authority is going to be so broad it's going to be done on a case by case basis right now we have no real reason to to believe anything about it but right now no one can do anything. I can tell you this though that the local representative one railroad came in my office 10 days ago with a letter from the president and he wants to file with the Interstate Commerce

Commission. Ban the petitions on seven lines or seven different segments Aruba which are eligible for benefit of the 34 car rule in my estimation they would go. We got them to hold off 90 days to see where the legislature really was interested in trying to come up with a program that would put us in a position to evaluate whether or not the loss of those segments or railroad could be could be stopped or at least halted long enough to see whether the offsetting expenditures of funds and why not just go in and take over the lines and put the state in the business y makes a profit for the railroads taxpayers. I mean the stockholders. Well as I say if we have a no if the only alternative to allowing say a fourth of our railroad mileage in this day will be the 600 miles. The only alternative to losing the force of that were state ownership I would god highly recommend it. But I don't think they were at that point I think we can work out by jawboning and by offering incentives and becoming a part of some of the decisions made on railroads in Iowa. We can make a lot of those lines are

more productive the public's attention is now addressed to them. I think it can be done a lot less expensively and with a lot more chance of success and not getting hung up on and keeping lines in for purely political purposes on a case by case basis instead of trying to do something Bayonne with a broad statute saying we're going to take over all the railroads. I just don't think we're dead. Point to all of the railroads a very aggressive one one. A bit of evidence that shows that abandonment is not the only alternative even there's no tax money involved in that. That's the line between hills and Moniz room I believe that private business men have taken over because they were interested in real service themselves and they're running it now. Well that's a little too early or too little our concern about the rail service why can't it be done elsewhere without taxpayers get into it. It's a little too early to evaluate that that particular situation I've been abreast that all the time I had a conference just day before yesterday with the fellow who put that together and I would not want to put any judgment right now on the

success of that but one of the things about that line or any of the line is it will still depend upon the connecting railroads equipment abilities serving in the words you you can have you know all the best kind of intentions but if you can't get the equipment or you can't get it carried away from the from the junction point obvious you're not going anyplace you don't buy a new amount of attention being addressed to the whole the whole system I. I don't about 3 minutes left Mike. Well we talk about tax payers are you satisfied. Taxes to railroads are going away. Well I think it's terribly unjust if you look at the three transportation modes and freight and you look at what the people who use the river which is totally free what the barge people pay for support of public institutions what the railroads have to pay and what the trucks pay I think you have to come to the. Conclusion hard conclusion that for some reason we have a tax system which is a lot more pressing the railroads and anyone else. Yet we've asked them to compete on the same basis. So I think the whole tax thing needs to be looked at

definitely needs to be looked at. Spears do you think the emphasis from the state should be more on the aspect of moving freight than the other aspect of moving people. I think you have to a good look at both of them the thing about moving people we can't delude ourselves. That up till now there's been no indication the public has been willing to desert that private automobile for any for any amassed carrier I think you're talking about an appropriation to encourage mass transit. Only if there's evidence that that's about to happen I would not be in favor myself of spending any money where there is. A good indication a reluctance of the people who have been in that car but I think right now there is no state agency which would be in a position to move to help anyone to plan the council. I think a state their governor asked for four and a half million dollars you know it's been magnified as a lot of money but a state that spends almost a quarter of a billion dollars a year on roads certainly ought to be willing to spend four and a half million dollars to consider a more energy efficient modes of transportation that we're now using then quickly are we going to

have gasoline rationing. I think we'll have guesting rationing in the summer. I hope not until then we'll have some pretty tough shortages before the end of this month and spots will you people be administering it the way the program calls for another contingency plan would put the state in complete control of the of the distribution of coupons. Do you forsee this even with the Arabs possibly lifting the embargo. Yes I really don't think it'll make much difference I don't think the Arabs will ever again sell us as much oil as they sold us in August and September 973 because they've learned if you raise a price you don't have to sell as much. I don't think there's any incentive for those people to pull those worlds any harder than they pulled in last summer I don't think they'll ever sell us any more oil than that.