Page 24


ter of the entire country,” and it ients to send a Mailgram to the rs. As a little incentive, the comvites the shareholders to charge t of the Mailgram to At lantic iving them ARCO’s Western unt number to use. Not to be e, Exxon has also jumped on the onservationist measure, enclosing in its August bill to company cardholders a not-so-subtle flyer titled “Will a law lock up Alaska?” Who’ll own Alaska? A major conservationist battle is bubbling in the U.S. Senate, and the issue has seeped into the political contest between Sen. John Tower and his Democratic challenger, Bob Krueger. At stake are 110 million acres of federal land in Alaska. Oil, timber, mining and construction interests want the land available for development; assorted conservation groups want it set aside as national parks, wildlife refuges, wild and scenic rivers and wilderness forests. Unsurprisingly, Tower stands withhe industrial interests. Somewhat risingly, Krueger has sided with the nservationists. Sen. Lloyd Bentsen is sitting on the fence, though leaning toward those who would preserve the land. Dozens of environmental and other groups from all across the country*ve formed the “Alaska Coalition” to baa bill, the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, and they have made it their number one legislative priority this year. A Lone Star delegation, calling itself Texans for Alaska, is part of the coalition. Leading the opposition to the coalition are most commercial interests Alaska, major oil refiners an Alaska’s politician s…4%a line of argument is that these lands are needed for the state’s economic health, that untold energy and minerals within this land must be extracted lest all America go bankrupt, and that Alaska is sick and By God tired of being told what to do by the Lower 48. One newspaper editor in Anchorage even warns that one result of this bill could be that “children begin freezing in the dark in Chicago.” Those for preservation counter that not only do these happen to be ecologically unique areas of pristine beauty, but also the acreage. little in the way of commercially exploitable, resources. “This’ bill is simply not a question of energy and mineral resources versuf4 preservation,” says Nancy Juck of Tex ans. for Alaska, adding that “95 percent of the oil land in the state and 70 percent , ”of the mineral lands are not at all touche by the bill.” The House passed the Alaskan conservation bill last May by a nine-to-one Texas congressmen were in the minority while an uncommon alignment of 11, Texans supported the measure: Archer Brooks, de la Garza, Gammage, Gon zalez, Jordan, Kazen, Mahon, Mattox,k 4,..-Piekle and Wibon. Rep. Krueger was absent for the vete but he had an:= 4.4,1 nounced his siliatiort of the bill before he departed. TheMaska Coalition consid ers the Hpuse-passed version an adequate” -bill, but the group is not at all pleased with what the Senate energy and natural resources committee is doing to it: “They’re catering to developers,” a source in Washington said, adding that “the bill that comes to the Senate floor will be crummy, so the test for Bentsen and Tower will be whether they support the strengthening amendments that will be offered.” Tower has said he doesn’t want anything like the House version to get through the Senate, predictably mouthing the industry line about fuzzy-thinking conservationists thwarting the national need for energy independence. Bentsen says that he will oppose any filibuster effort \(Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel has will not take a position on the measure until it is reported from committee, which should be later this month. The Chamber of Commerce of the U.S. is lobbying against the measure in Washington, and a couple of oil companies are using their resources to generate opposition from their shareholders and customers. ARCO has mounted the most sophisticated campaign, sending a notice of the bill to its shareholders in the home states of senators who serve on the committee. The ARCO mailer terms the Hous’e-passed bill “too allencompassing” and “not in the best The rich are different It may be lonely at the top of the business world, but being there does have its compensations. For its September issue, Texas Business magazine pored through proxy statements, SEC documents and other financial materials to piece together the total remuneration paid to chief executives of Texas’ largest corporations, and they found that the 50 highest paid made off with an average of $325,000 in 1977, ranging from the relatively meager $172,000 taken home by Texas Oil & Gas’s William Hutchison to the cool $816,000 pocketed by Charles Tandy of Tandy Corporation. The chiefs of oil and gas firms, the very ones carping that Jimmy Carter’s energy policies just don’t provide them enough incentives to produce, are the best-paid bunch of all-17 of the big 50 are with oil and gat production companies, and fully half of those listed are directly allied with that industry. Bankers comprise the next fattest group seven of their rank make the best-paid list, and, not incidentally, they head our seven largest bankholding companies. Nor is it just a matter of the top dog of each firm hauling off the riches; strictly within the confines of the executive suite, there’s a certain sharing of the wealth. For example, Tenneco’s was the second highest paid corporate chief last year, making $496,000 in salary alone \(he had nearly $300,000 in other executives also had salaries that averaged $320,000. These pay levels reflect more than your normal cost-of-living increases. For example, American General Insurance’s Benjamin Woods’on’s pay was up 16 percent this year over last; John Bookout, head of Shell Oil, was 28 percent better off this year; First City Bancorporation hiked J. A. Elkin’s remuneration by 38 percent; and George Mitchell, of Mitchell Energy & Development, was the big winner, gaining on Old Man Inflation with a 122 percent boost in his pay. Corporate executives generally have been enjoying pay increases of at least 10 percent for each of the last several years, and there is no real evidence of a slowdown, despite federal inflation czar Bob Strauss’s personal request to some company heads that they limit their appetites this year as a symbolic gesture. Business managers measure their status in terms of gross compensation, and you’ll be hard-pressed to find any who will admit to being overpaid or undeserving of another big raise. In unintended irony, another article in the same issue of Texas Business decried two inflationary “sore points” in Texas’ otherwise bullish economic prospects for social security payments. It all depends on where you sit. 12 SEPTEMBER 22, 1978 404.,-.0104*.makraraWiN ,1111**Stre.40,yz. ..litpkaprfpvwsloo