WHY THE PUBLIC INTEREST RE-QUIRES STATE RATHER THAN FEDERAL REGULATION OF ELECTRIC PUBLIC UTILITIES - An Address By Herbert Hoover - October 14, 1925

Sep 21, 2026

Upload by Aurelia

A formal address argues against substituting centralized Federal control for State regulation of electric public utilities. It emphasizes that State authorities and commissions are best positioned to judge regulation’s implications and risks, preserve State sovereignty, and protect citizens from injustice and exploitation. The address credits 30 years of State-led “experimental laboratories” with rate regulation, valuation methods, and service oversight. It also claims current outcomes—stable pre-war pricing, moderate dividend distribution, and rapid industry expansion—demonstrate effective regulation and warn that further Federal centralization would sap self-government and responsibility.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryReligion & Spirituality

FormatPDF

Pages12

Reading Time30 min

AccessFree to download

WHY THE PUBLIC INTEREST RE-QUIRES STATE RATHER THAN FEDERAL REGULATION OF ELECTRIC PUBLIC UTILITIES

The Practical Results of State Regulation

Public Danger in Further Federal Centralization

97-84074-24Hoover,Herbert Why the public interestrequires state rather..Washington,D.C. 1925 # COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIESPRESERVATION DIVISION BIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARGET ORIGINAL MATERIAL AS FILMED-EXISTING BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD 308ZBox 273Hoover,Herbert Glark,pree.U..,1.87L1-1961.Why the public interest requires state ratherthan federal regulation of electric publicntilities;an address by Herbert Hoover,secretary of commerce,delivered before thethirty-seventh annua]convention of theNational association of railroad and t3litiescommissioners.Washington,D.C.,October 1,1925. Washington,1925,15 p.20¹cm.):9 Roproducions may not be mado without permislon hom Columbia UniversityLbraries ## RESTRICTIONS ON USE: # TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA FILM SIZE: 3mmREDUCTION RATIO: 9:/ MAGE PLACEMENT:IA IA IIB IB I DATE FILMED: 517197 INITIALS: TLM TRACKING\#: 24019 FILMED BY PRESERVATION RESOURCES,BETHLEHEM,PA. Why the PublicInterest RequiresState Rather ThanFederal Regulationof Electric Public308Utilities Z 3o×273 An Address By HERBERT HOOVER Secretary of Commerce Delivered Before the THIRTY-SEVENTH ANNUALCONVENTION of the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF RAILROADAND UTILITIES COMMISSIONERS WASHINGTON,D.C. OCTOBER 14,I925 41 oEb1, # WHY THE PUBLIC INTEREST RE-QUIRES STATE RATHER THANFEDERAL REGULATION OF ELEC-TRIC PUBLIC UTILITIES I have been asked to address you uponthe proposals recently made that weshould abandon our present method ofregulating electrical public utilitiesthrough local State authorities and sub-stitute a system of centralized Federalcontrol. There is no body of men so able asyourselves to realize its implications andits dangers,and none more able to de-termine its advisability,for you repre-sent the authority of 48 States,you arethe experts upon this question and yourknowledge,experience,and judgmentare the most vital in all the nation.Ifyou believe the authority of your Statescan not protect your citizens from injus-tice or exploitation;can not secure theservice they need,you should be readyto step aside and let someone else as-sume the burden too weighty for Stateshoulders.For myself,I do not so be-lieve.I can imagine no more profoundinvasion of State sovereignty than thesubstitution of Federal for State Controlof electric utilities. I am proud of the progress both in thetheory and practice of utility regulationmade in the last 30 years.It had muchof its original inspiration from TheodoreRoosevelt,and a large_proportion of itsprogress is due to the State commissions.It has brought great economie values tothe nation and an assurance of_justiceand protection to our citizens.I wouldnot have that progress cease. 48 Laboratories Regulation of the rates and service ofutilities in that fine balance of judgmentso as to maintain the initiative of theindustry to growth and development onone hand,and upon the other to protectthe public from exploitation,is a sciencein itself.We have by State regulation48 different experimental laboratorieswhich,over these 30 years,have grad-ually developed ideas and methods.Noone of them,nor any single Federal au-thority,could ever have evolved theprogress we have so far made.Ideassuch as rate regulation,methods of val-uation,the principle of public conveni-ence which has limited wasteful com-petition,the regulation of security is-sues,the regulation of service—have allbeen first tried out by some one State andthen seen gradual adoption.Many thingshave been tried and found wanting.Ifthese failures had been made on a nationalscale,with the difficulty of reversing ob-solete national policies,we should havegreatly stifled progress in the whole Na-tion.And many successful ideas wouldnever have been born in central authority.There is yet much to do,and many newideas will be required to meet th

FAQs

Why does the address oppose replacing State control with Federal control for electric utilities?

It warns that substituting Federal for State control would be a profound invasion of State sovereignty and would not adequately protect citizens from injustice or exploitation.

What reasons are given for believing State regulation works effectively?

The address credits State commissions for progress in utility regulation, describing them as different experimental laboratories that developed practical ideas through local trial and error.

What concerns does the address raise about further Federal centralization?

It argues Federal authority is ill-designed to carry the heavier burdens of economic services, and that extending Federal control would dull citizens’ initiative and stop progress by weakening self-government.

Sep 21, 2026

Upload by Aurelia