Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1919-10-13
LEADERSHIP IN WASHINGTON
NEEDS TO BE JACKED UP
There Cannot Be Efficiency and Economy
Until Responsibility for Carrying Out
Dart, DoIiciae lie Concentrated

~ could be tolerated when the country
was small have long since been outgrown,
but they are still employed in Washing
ton because nobody has been interested
enough to insist on change.
The antquated methods attract the at
tention of new senators and representa-
tives when they first take their seats,
but when they suggest changes they are
reminded that it is the prime business
of a new member to adjust himself to an
understanding of precedents hoary with
age and to follow the lead of the older
members
Yet, after years of talk, the present
Congress is at last considering the adop-
tion of the budget system in dealing with
revenue and expenses. Some sort of
budget system is likely to be adopted
within a year or two. The bill which has
just been reported by committee of the
House of Representatives directs the
President to submit annually to Congress
an estimate of the total amount that will
be required to run the government for
the next fiscal year, He is to receive the
requests of the various executive depart
ments, pass upon their necessity and
submit his conclusions in detail to the
national Legislature. Then all appropria
tons are to be considered by single
committee of each chamber of Congress,
instead of, as at present, by six different
committees. And when the appropria-
tons are made all expenditures are to
be audited by comptroller general of
the United States. At present each de-
partment audits it's own expenditures.
The advantage of this plan is that it
concentrates control over national eX-
penditures in such a way as to make it
possible to adjust the annual revenues
to the annual needs of the country. At
present there is no conscious relation be-
tween revenues and expenditures. Con-
gress makes its appropriations and trusts
to luck to find money to meet the bills.
1t is morally certain that many mem
bers of the committees that now draft
appropriation bills will object to sur
rendering their power They will insist
on the preservation of the old custom of
log-rolling with members of other COM
mittees to get money for their pet pro-
jects, and unless they can be convinced
that it is of greater Importance that
national solvency be preserved than that
they get money for public building for
some small town in their districts, they
can make it difficult to pass the budget
bill
The situation in connection with this
measure calls attention to a grave de-
feet in our system of congressional gov
ernment. 1t can be best illustrated by
comparing our methods with those of the
British Parliament. In England when a
revenue bill, for example, is introduced
in the House of Commons by the re-
sponsible member Of the ministry, its
passage is morally certain, and the taxes
under the new bill run, not from the
date of its passage, but from the date
of its introduction. This is because the
party in power follows the lead of it's
ministry, allows that ministry to formu-
late it's policies, and then enacts them
into law. This is party government at
its best. 1t is not possible, under it, for
any group to play ducks and brakes with
a party program without overthrowing
the leaders, compelling the prime minister
to resign, and forcing a new election on
the issues which it has raised.
The nearest approach to this system
which we have had grew up under what
came to be known as Cannonism in the
House. The speaker was the elected rep
reSentative of the majority, and almost
absolute power was delegated to him.
Grave abuses grew up under this system
because the speaker, nominated in a
party caucus, was the selection of a
| majority of the majority party, and was
frequently the choice of a minority of
Congress as a whole. Cannonism was
finally destroyed because the minority Of
the Republican party opposed to it joined
with the Democratic party in so revising
the rules of the House that the speaker
was shorn of his power and the direction
of the course of business was put in the
| hands of a committee selected by the
party caucus.
Congress muddles through under this
system, but there is an evident lack of
directing authority in the transaction of
business. Every member feels free to
assert his individual will on the floor
of the House, and there is hesitancy
to call caucus of the majority party
| and thresh out there what differences of
opinion there may be and make definite
decision upon what Congress should do
And even when a caucus is called mem
| bers at times refuse to attend, and an
nounce that they will not be bound by its
decisions.
This makes the success of party gov,
ernment difficult. 1t makes of Congress
debating society instead of legislative
body committed to certain specific poll,
cies and bending every energy to the
enactment of those policies into law. II
destroys party discipline nominally in the
interest of free representative institu
tions. No one wishes Cannonism to bt
restored, for its evils were as great as it,
benefits. 1t was form of tyranny ad