avoid Sears’ 18%, but under this bill he won’t be able to. The rates provided on on loans up to $5000 are “ridiculous,” he said. Ligarde said again the banks charge 20% now. “If the banks are doing this now why do you want to do something else? You’re just giving ’em another goody,” Evans said. He noted there are no criminal penalties for overcharging in the bill. “If you’re gonna enact a usurious interest rate there oughta be some kind of penalties,” he said. Haines, the sponsor, said, “The banks could get along without it. It’s not the banks that need it, I think the people need another avenue of credit.” Garrison asked Haines, “Is this the main reason for the bill?” Haines said “Yes.” “How much more money would this turn to the banks” a year? asked Rep. Bob Bass, DeKalb. “I’d say not any more,” Haines answered. Finney tried to amend Townsend’s final version of the bill to cut out savings and loan”This is a bankers’ bill,” Finney saidbut only Finney and Bass voted for this. Then the bill was reported to the House with the recommendation “that it do pass.!’ R.D. THE RECORD VOTES 1Voting with Quilliam, against the motion to table his motion: Alaniz, Allen, Beckham, Bernal, Birkner, Cahoon, Caldwell, Cherry, Eckhardt, Finney, Fletcher, George, Green, Grover, Hale, Haring, Harris, Hawkins, Haynes, Hightower, Hollowell, Isaacks, Jamison, Johnson of San Antonio, Lack, Lee, Lewis, Longoria, Mcllhany, Markgraf, Miller of Burkeville, Montoya, Neugent, Nugent, Peeler, Pickens, Quil Liam, Richardson, Roberts, Rosson, Stroud, Vale, Ward, and Wilson. Recorded as not voting were Blaine, Carpenter, Hinson, Johnson of Temple, McDonald of Edinburg, McLaughlin, Muniz, Parker, Stewart, and Weldon. The other 95 members voted to table Quilliam’s motion. 2Sen. Charles Herring, Austin, tried to limit the interest charge to 14% up to $1500. This was killed 15-13, with the 15 killing ayes being Aikin, Blanchard, Calhoun, Creighton, Hall, Hardeman, Hazlewood, Hightower, Kennard, Parkhouse, Ratliff, Reagan, Rogers, Snelson, and Word, and the 13 votes with Herring being Cole, Crump, Harrington, Herring, Kazen, Krueger, Moore, Patman, Richter, Schwartz, Spears, Strong, and Watson. Only seven senators asked to be recorded as opposed to passing the bill to final readingthese were Moore, Crump, Spears, Patman, Herring, Blanchard, and Krueger.. On final passage, six voted noCrump, Dies, Herring, Kazen, Moore, and Patman; Hall was absent; Kennard and Spears were “absentexcused”; and the other 22 senators voted aye. 0 On Industrial Safety Last-Minute Razzle-Dazzle Austin The indu -strial safety bill represented as the governor’s own has been dumped by the House of Representatives in favor of a plan supported by the Texas Manufacturers’ Assn. The key vote, made final after a dramatic “verification,” was 69-68 against the plan said to be Governor Connally’s, with the governor’s brother, Rep. Wayne Connally of Floresville, conspicuously failing to vote. With the House sponsors of strong job safety legislation steaming in exceedingly bad temper and suspecting an end-of-the-session fast shuffle, the House passed and sent the T.M.A.-approved bill to the Senate. As the House debate opened, Rep. Neil Caldwell, Alvin, was obviously confident. He and his co-sponsor, Rep. Carl Parker of Port Arthur, were keeping close to their chests their theory that since the governor’s bill placed industrial safety under the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and since the B.L.S. already has authority to inspect business premises, the governor’s bill actually provided inspection authority even though it did not mention it. They had the governor’s specific commitment that he would support the bill his office had writtenbut only that bill, and not any other. They had decided, because of this, to ride with the goverrior. “There’s nothing in here that can force anyone to do anything,” Caldwell told the House. “The board would just be able to advise and counsel so industries that can’t afford a safety program would have guidelines and assistance. . . . “Industrial safety is neither pro-labor r or pro-management,” he said. He read the passage from Connally’s,address to the legislature in which the governor said that Texas really needs a job safety law and that it should be administered by the B.L.S. The bill he was then carrying, Caldwell said, was drafted in the governor’s office. “I have agreed the governor’s bill is a step in the right direction,” he said. “The governor hasn’t asked me to vote for this bill,” Jumbo Atwell of Dallas shot at Caldwell from the back mike. ‘Well,” Caldwell said, “he told me to tell you to vote for it.” “You’re misleading people,” Atwell said. “No, I’m not, this came from his office.” “Did the AFL-CIO want this version?” “The AFL-CIO gave its approval, re luctantly,” Caldwell said. Rep. Gene Fondren, Taylor, was standing by, scowling nervously. He proposed a complete substitute. It places industrial safety under the Industrial Accident Board, which liberals in the House regard as proemployer. Fondren said the CaldwellParker measure was basically Connally’s bill, but inspection was necessary, as all agreed, Fondren said, and his measure provided for it. He said he was convinced Connally would not veto his bill. “My feeling is that the governor’s office will support it.” Rep. Bob Eckhardt, Houston, so angry he was almost incoherent, said: “This House would like to know whether the governor himself feels he will actively support this. We ought to know whether or not the governor will use the influence of his office to pass an industrial safety bill. It would be terrible if the governor said he would support one version and then .. .” Fondren said, “I went to the people in the industry and asked if they would support it, and they said they would.” Parker said, “A lot has been said about which bill the governor would support .. . We know which he would support. For the first time in the history of this legislation, we’ve had some degree of unanimity between labor, industry, the executive office, and both houses, and this would destroy it.” The House sponsors were shocked when the motion to table Fondren’s plan was rejected, 79-62. Caldwell, especially, was angered: he thought he had had many more promises than 62. “I just knew it was too good to last,” he told the House. “Ninetytwo people yesterday assured me they were going to vote for us. The governor’s prestige is on the line. I don’t think he would veto the Fondren substitute, and I don’t think he’ll get a chance. “Maybe I came around to you too early. Maybe I should have waited until last night, when someone else obviously came around. If your word’s worth anything, you will defeat this amendment. You won’t have anything else for another two years, and that’s a lot of blood.” The basic issue, Caldwell said, was that the governor wanted B.L.S. to administer the program, the Texas Manufacturers’ Assn. wanted the I.A.B. “The Industrial Accident Board is so busy it takes six months to get a hearing before it,” Caldwell said. Evidently Caldwell’s challenge to those he said had given him their word had effect; on the direct vote on Fondren’s plan, it was adopted, 71-70. Verification was demanded; two members recorded for it were not present, so the vote became 69-70; then the nays had to be verified. Three members were missing on that sideReps. Otha Birkner, Bay City;, Henry Fletcher, Lockhart: and Ralph Scoggins, El Paso. Sup-, porters of the measure made a feverish search for Birkner while the rest of the roll was called. When it was over Caldwell pulled Scoggins into the House \(everyone still missing, and the final vote was 69-68; Fondren’s plan prevailed.’ Coming around the press table, Caldwell said, “That’s B-i-r-k-n-e-r.” Fletcher wandered back into the House after a while and Caldwell called out, “Welcome back, Henry.” Fondren’s bill was then finally passed. REP. CONNALLY, the governor’s brother, did not vote either on the May 28, 1965 5
You May Also Like
The documentary in Falfurrias is sinister and spiritual.