Government Dam Power Rates

Senate Roll Call Vote 569

1984 Scorecard Vote

Pro-environment vote

No

Votes For

56

Votes Against

38

Not Voting

6

The federal government constructed several huge dams in the West in the 1930s and has been selling the water and electrical power generated by these dams at depression era prices ever since. Now the 50 year contracts for this incredibly cheap water and power are starting to expire. The prices charged in the future will have a tremendous impact on energy and wind conservation practices in the West. Artificially low electrical rates for federal power will discourage energy conservation and create pressure for more fossil fuel and nuclear power plants and power generating dams. The combination of cheap prices for water and for electricity also makes irrigation unrealistically cheap and encourages the waste of precious western water resources by agribusiness.

The Senate debated a bill to extend the current low price of power from the Hoover Dam for another 30 years. Senator Metzenbaum offered an amendment to extend these pricing policies for only 18 months, to allow time for hearings and a study as to what the price of this federal power should be and which customers should have access to it.

The vote is on the Cranston motion to kill the Metzenbaum amendment. Motion agreed to 56-38; July 26, 1984. NO is the pro-environmental vote. (Cranston motion to table Metzenbaum amendment to Hoover Dam Power Allocation Authorization, S. 268.) The Reagan Administration supported the Cranston motion, and Congress passed a 30 year extension for power rates at the Hoover Dam. Decisions on other federal dams must be made by Congress in the next few years.

Votes

Show
Show
Export data (CSV)
  • Pro-environment vote
  • Anti-environment Vote
  • Missed Vote
  • Excused
  • Not Applicable

Vote Key

Sort by
Alabama
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Alaska
2025 State Scorecard Average

11%

Arizona
2025 State Scorecard Average

89%

Arkansas
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

California
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

Colorado
2025 State Scorecard Average

93%

Connecticut
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

Delaware
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Florida
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Georgia
2025 State Scorecard Average

93%

Hawaii
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Idaho
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Illinois
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Indiana
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Iowa
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Kansas
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Kentucky
2025 State Scorecard Average

6%

Louisiana
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Maine
2025 State Scorecard Average

63%

Maryland
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Massachusetts
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Michigan
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

Minnesota
2025 State Scorecard Average

94%

Mississippi
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Missouri
2025 State Scorecard Average

4%

Montana
2025 State Scorecard Average

6%

Nebraska
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Nevada
2025 State Scorecard Average

94%

New Hampshire
2025 State Scorecard Average

93%

New Jersey
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

New Mexico
2025 State Scorecard Average

94%

New York
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

North Carolina
2025 State Scorecard Average

6%

North Dakota
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Ohio
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Oklahoma
2025 State Scorecard Average

1%

Oregon
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Pennsylvania
2025 State Scorecard Average

40%

Rhode Island
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

South Carolina
2025 State Scorecard Average

1%

South Dakota
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Tennessee
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Texas
2025 State Scorecard Average

1%

Utah
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Vermont
2025 State Scorecard Average

96%

Virginia
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

Washington
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

West Virginia
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Wisconsin
2025 State Scorecard Average

49%

Wyoming
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%