My 65 year old Father uses the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 as an example of why we need a Federal Government that gets involved in state and local issues. He argues that without this act the electric companies would only have provided the electrical infrastructure and electricity to cities and the wealthy, because that is where the money (the profit) is at. How would Dr. Paul respond to this?
Well, since you are a new poster and are seeking information, I will at least give you my thoughts. I cannot speak for Dr. Paul, but I can guess he would not approve of this act. And, I would also question whether you father had actually read the act, since he would have been 7 years old when it passed, or was it something taught to him by his parents? This question would really involve a lot of in-depth historical study to properly answer, as I was not alive at the time, and am not aware of this particular act.
I can only hazard a guess that your father is a Democrat, because he, like all of our older generation, were taught to worship FDR because of the New Deal. Well, when one digs into the New Deal, and the causes of the horrible conditions of the time, one opens another can of worms. Suffice it to say, the stock market crash of 29 ruined the economy and millions were in trouble. This was a real depression, nothing like we have ever seen in our lifetimes. After several years of this, I would suppose the people would be grateful to have a job, and believe the government was supposed to fix everything, so they were grateful for the New Deal. It is understandable how they would feel this way.
This apparent act had something to do with the Tennessee Valley Authority Act of 1933. Again, since I have not had time to study this, I cannot say. I only know that the same powers that own the Federal Reserve Bank today, were relatives of the people who owned it then, and it has been suggested that the stock market was manipulated to fall by the tightening of credit from the Fed at that time. So, one could easily start to figure this out by digging really deeply and verifying facts and reading these bills.
I would imagine that before this time, the rural parts of the country had electricity, or were working on getting it, just like the larger areas did. With the collapse of the economy, of course there would not have been money necessary to run the infrastructure to the rural areas. Your father is right in his thinking on this. But, without the manipulation of the market, perhaps the collapse would not have happened. The free market would have produced the electricity to the rural areas in due time, as the people would have found a way to do it.
But, that did not happen, because of the depression. So, who knows? Perhaps this was a way to start to get the states and local governments beholden to the federal government, and in debt? I do not know, but I do know if you dig deep, you will find things out about FDR that your father will not want to know. You do not have to tell him what you learn, you only have to find out the truth of the history of the time. I am only thinking off of the top of my head here, so you need to research this for yourself. Good luck, and welcome to the forum.
