The Rock Island Argus and daily union. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1920-1923, 1920-12-29

Washington. D. c., Dec. IL
That congress Is an old-nodel ma
chine In bad repair, and must be
rebuilt and equipped with . new
starter, is an opinion which is now
being heard from authoritative
sources. And the case against the
congressional system seems to be
. good one.
One of its minor flaws is exhib-
tied right now in the fact that.
after electing q new administra-
ton, we must wait four months or
SO before it can 60 mo action
against the many difficult prob
lens that confront it. The old ad-
ministration is naturally going to
mark time, as outgoing admins
trations always do. Little matters
like taxation, Haiti and Mexico, 1t
will leave to embarrass its success.
sor of the other party.
But that is only one OF a num-
Der OF ways in which congress, as
Q machine, works poorly because
of the way it is designed. 1t seems
to have been intended to work
much as the British parliamentary
system does, but to have failed. At
least, that Is the opinion OF Wood
row Wilson, whose book on consti-
tutional government in the United
States was q standard long before
he was president, and still remains
SO.
THE president of the United
States was intended ........ to be
q reformed and standardized king,
he says, land congress was meant
to be a reformed and properly reg
ulated parliament"
But the trainers Of the constitu-
ton did their work none too well
in the first place, and time has
changed it a good deal. Today the
congress of the United States is
remarkable chiefly for its unwield-
mess and responsibility.
How They Pass the Buck.
The chief fault Of it, the critics
seem to agree, lies in the fact that
the men who design the laws have
little to do with enforcing them,
and those who have to enforce
them have little to say in framing
them. In other words, the thing
works out as an elaborate system
for the passing of the buck.
This can best be understood by
comparing our congressional sys-
TEN with the British parliamentary
system, of which it seems to be q
poor imitation. In each there is q
chief executive and q legislative
body with two branches. There
the similarity ends. In England
the chief executive is the prime
minister, who is appointed by the
crown, in theory at least. He forms
a cabinet from the members of his
own party in parliament. These
men are the heads Of the executive
branches Of the government, just
as our cabinet members are. but
they also retain their seats in par
lament and are made there to de-
fend their measures and motives.
Furthermore, the cabinet in Eng
land originates all important legis-
lation. II the house Of commons
refuses to support its Legislative
program, then the cabinet resigns
and a new prime minister forms a
new cabinet. II the parliament, on
the other hand, supports and passes
the legislative program offered by
the cabinet, then it is up to that
same cabinet to prove that those
laws will work.
Cabinet Officers Protected.
In our congress the cabinet mem
bers not only have no seats in con.
gress, but they have no originativt
power over legislation-or, at least
practically none. There are two
chief results OF this SO far as thu
cabinet officers are concerned. Ii
the first place, the president ant
his cabinet are called upon to ex
ecute whatever laws congress.
chooses to pass; there is no Ger
tainty of harmony between them
In the second place, the -cabine