Perth Amboy evening news., 1920-12-29
THE HASkIN LETTER
DOES CONGRESS- NEED
RE- BUILDING,
BY Frederic j. Haskiu.

Congress is an old-model machine
in bad repair. and must be rebuilt
and equipped with a new starter. il
an opinion, which is now being
heard from authoritative sources
And the case against the congress
sional system seems to be a good
one.
One of its minor flaws is exhibited
right now in the fact that, after
electing a new administration, We
must wait four months or so before
1t can go into action against the
many difficult problems that con-
front it. The old administration is
naturally going to make time, as
outgoing administrations always do.
Little matters like taxation, Haiti
and Mexico, it will leave to embar-
rass its successors of the other
party.
But that is only one of a number
of Ways in which Congress, as a
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 Woodrow
Wilson,. whose book on constitu-
tional government in the United
States was a standard long before
he was President, and still remains
so.
THE President of the United
States was intended-to be a re-
formed and standardized king" he
says, land Congress was meant to
be a reformed and properly regu-
lated Parliament"
But the trainers of the Constitu-
ton did their work none too well
in the first place. and time ha
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 tina
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 system
with the British parliamentary sys-
tenn, of which it seems to be a poor
imitation. In each there is a chief
VhttutiNp diiu Il ltS lSldllhB ppIl
with two branches. There the sim
ilarity ends. In England the chief
executive Is the prime minister who
is appointed by the crown, in the-
Dry at least. He forms a Cabinet
from the members of his own
party in parliament. These men are
the heads of the executive branches
or the government, just as our Cab
met members are. but they also re-
lain their seats in Parliament ard
are made there to defend their
measures and motives.
Furthermore, the Cabinet in
England originates all important
legislation. If the House of Com
mons refuses to support its legisla-
tive program, then the Cabinet re-
signs and a new prime minister
forms a new Cabinet. If the Par
Lament, on the other hand, sup
ports and passes the legislative pro-
gram offered by the Cabinet, then
1t is mp to that same Cabinet to
prove that those laws will work.
Cabinet Officers Protected.
In our Congress the Cabinet
members not only have no seats in
Congress, but they have no origi-
native power over legislation-or
at least, practically none There
are two chief results of this SO far
as the Cabinet officers are concern
ed. In the first place, the Presi-
dent and his Cabinet are called up
on to execute whatever laws Con-
sress chooses to pass; there Is no
certainty of harmony between them.
In the second place the Cabinet
officers are not subjected to effec-
tive criticism. Almost anyone can
think of a few Cabinet officers who
would have had a hard time holding
jobs If they had been forced
to defend the administrations of
their departments or the floor of
the House.
The results of the system, so far
as Congress is concerned. are cs-
sentlally the same in that they also |
make for irresponsibility. The real
origipative source of our laws is in
the Committees of the House. There
are a great many of these commit |
tees. Bills introduced are re-
ferred to them. They eport only
what bills they choose to report,
and usually these are bills drawn
up by the committee itself and
bearing the name of the chairman.
These bills are debated and fought
over on the floor of the House, it is |
true, but the size of the House, the
number who wish to be heard, and
the immense amount of business to
be transacted, make this debate
perfunctory and inadequate. In the
Senate the bills get a great deal
more real Lucrative consideration.
But differences between the House
and the Senate must be compro-
missed in the conference committee,
usually in great haste at the end of
a session.
The result of all this is that the
typical American Federal law is a
child of obscure origin. Many
hands have a share in it's upbrind- |
ing, and it is finally turned over
for enforcement to the Cabinet Of
ficer who stands often in the posi- |
ton of a somewhat reluctant and
critical stepfather.. If the child
does we'll. everyone claims credit,
and If it seems unpopular and ugly.