New-York tribune., 1918-06-01
New Cloture Rule Is Pro.
posed to Aid in Speed
ing Legislation
May Be Opposed
By Older Members
Underwood Resolution to
Limit Senator'S to Hours
Talk ON a Measure
By C. w. Gilbert

WASHINGTON, May 31.-The Senate
Is likely to speed up its part in war
making by adopting cloture for all de-
bate during the remainder of the war.
Inc proposal came in the form of a.
resolution by Senator Underwood. re-
ported by the Committee on Rules. 1t
Will come up for consideration on
Monday, and Senators on both sides Of
the chamber express the belief that it
Will be adopted before the end of the
present session, though the vote has
not been canvassed.
The limitation proposed upon debate
is moderate. A gag rule is not sug-
gested. The resolution provides that
while the war lasts no member shall
occupy more than one hour in debate
upon bill or resolution unless with
the unanimous consent of the Senate.
Upon amendments members may not
speak more than twenty minutes.
This is a radical change from the
present cloture rule, which was
adopted about a year ago, and which
was the first limit ever put on debate
in the United States Senate. Unlim-
tied debate has brought in its train
| two evils, flibustering and long -windcd,
| ill-directed talk, to which no one
listens.
Present Rule Stops
Filibustering
Filibustering became ntolerable
when the wlful twelve defeated the
armed ship resolution just before this
country entered the war with Germany.
1t was impossible that a country should
be at war and still leave it in the
power Of a small minority Of the legis-
lature to tie it's hands.
Accordingly, rule was adopted by
which the Senate could prevent filibus-
tering. That is all the existing rule
does practically. There is a strong
disinclination to resort to it. The ma
chinery is complicated, and once limita-
tion is evoked limitation is drastic.
Sixteen Senators must sign request
to close the debate. Then twot thirds
of the Senate must vote to close it, and
then what amounts to gag is applied.
Obviously, this rule does not touch
endless unprohtahle talk to empty
seats. Sessions are prolonged Last
year Congress was in session practi-
cally all the time. This year, in spite
of the general desire to get home for
the coming Congressional campaign,
Congress will be in nearly continuous
session.
The sense that the task before Con-
gress is too big to be performed in
the old, leisurely way is what has re-
moved all but the last objections to
the limitation Of debate. The Senate
wants to be able to get its work done.
So strong is the desire that q tradi
tion as old as the goverpment is likely
to die, and the ancient boast that the
only deliberative legislative body in
the world" is likely to be forgotten.
More Consideration
If Debate Is Cut
Senator Underwood maintains that
the Senate will be at least as much
passes as it is now. His contention is
that unregulated debate does not make
for deliberations. The long repetition
speeches are not heard Members abb
sent themselves while they are being
delivered. And devoting an excessive
amount of time to bills which are in
dispute as consequence of long
SpeecneS means naSCe In the dlSpatCh
of other bills.
There will be more consideration, he
contends, of bills in general if debate
is restricted than there is now The
proposal, he says, will not result in
gag rule. Debate is not cut off until
every one has had time to say all he
reasonably has to say upon a bill and
it's amendments. And Mr.. Underwood
points out that it took him only one
hour to present the Underwood tariff
bill, a complicated proposal with large
political Implications, to the House of
representatives. No doubt moreover,
the chairman of committee having
important legislation to explain could
obtain unanimous consent to the extern
sion of his time.
Opposition to the proposed cloture is
restricted, so far as could be learned
to-day, to the old members generally.
without much regard to party, who are
loath to depart from the tradition of
the Senate. Some Republicans. more
over, object to it as another restriction
upon publicity. They say that the Ad-
ministration has the censorship, and it
has in the Creel bureau a vast ma
chnery for manufacturing public opin-
ion. About the only place whore the
opposition has free scope is in the
Senate. They talk of fighting the pro
rosal on this ground. When they con-
slider how much opportunity for dis
cussion is left under the proposed rule
they may not insist upon their opposi-