The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1925-04-21
i s BUSINESS GIVING FLOOD OF CREDIT TO FOREIGN b
DA IVES REVIEWS ATTACKS ON
SENATE RULES
Continued from First Page.)

Continued from First Page.)
ton, their attitude on his propo-
sition.
The Senate is responsive to pub
lie sentiment, he said, but Senators
must know that in the States
which they represent this sentiment
exists.
/ The Vice President, who within
a few minutes after his Inauguration
on March 4 subjected the Senate
to a tongue flashing unparalleled In
the nations history, declared ms
appeal was not made in a spirit
Of hostility.
Issue NOn-P Partisan.
"The issue is non-partisan, non
sectional. and patriotic" he said
IAN Improvement in these rules
to expedite the conduct of business
1 is as impersonal and non-partisan
a question as was that of the adop-
ton OF the budget system 1mprov-
/ ing the conduct Of routine govern
mental business"
Dawes said he had already asked
the Senate to relinQuish its right
! to filibuster.
Although know each Senator
realizes that to change the present
rule to provide better cloture, he
must individually relinquish po-
tential right, I have full confidence
/ In the patriotism and integrity OF
Senators when they confront ques
ton Of plain duty affecting the In
terests OF the nation" he said.
The text of Dawes speech FOL
| lows:
Text Of His Address.
Az vice President, elected. not
Tv the senate. or by q State, but
/ by the people OF the United
states to preside over the Senate,
/ I conceive myself charged with
the duty of calling attention to
methods of Senate parliamentary
procedure in their relation to
the national interest.
The fact that of practically all
deliberate and legislative assem-
blies of the world. the United
States Senate, almost alone,
chooses to conduct it's business
under rules which do not provide
properly effective cloture. en-
phasizes this duty on my part.
h The issue presented in the
movement for reform in the
present rules Of the Senate of
the United States is non-parttsan,
non-sectional, and patriotic.
An improvement in these rules
to expedite the conduct Of busi-
ness is as impersonal and nom
partisan q question as was that
OF the adoption OF the budget
system improving the conduct Of
routine Governmental business.
Absence Of CIOutre.
AS emphasizing this non-partisan-
ship, on the day after had
called the attention OF the Senate
to the need for q change in the
rules las q Vice President who >
happened to be a Republican,,
that able and distinguished Demo
crat, Senator Underwood Of Ala
hanna. long an earnest advocate
i OF reform in business methods of
the Senate, re-introduced q reso-
luton in the Senate providing
for better cloture.
/ The absence of cIoture has been
denounced on the floor OF the
Senate by Senator kellogg, now
Secretary Of State under q Re-
publican administration.
/ In the platforms OF the Demo
cratic party adopted 1916 and
1920 was a plank which reads:
I'VE favor such alteration OF
the rulse OF procedure Of the
Senate Of the United States as
will permit the prompt trans
action of the nations legislative
business.
1t is evident from ali this that
the advocates of this reform rec
ognize it as non-partisan.
1t cannot be accomplished ex-
cept 1t is accepted in the hearts
and consciences Of all citizens as
non-partisan and patriotic re-
form demanded by the people in
the interest Of all the people.
| 1t should not be discussed from
any other standpoint than that Of
non-partisanship:
The issue is this: Shall the
Senate continue unchanged its ex-
listing rules, which admittedly
make possible, at times, the ex-
ercise by a minority or even one
Senator of power TO block the
purpose of majority Of the Sen.
ate to legislate?
OF what material relevancy IL
the claim that this power Of
blocking legislation desired by the
majority, acting under its consti-
tutional rights, is sometimes a
| cneck 10 mistaken leglGlatlOn, II
that check involves the use OF
power the existence of which ia
not contemplated by t he Consti-
tuition and Is inconsistent with the
principles Of representative gov
eminent?
OF what relevancy are the
claims that because the power
of unlimited debate in the early
days of the Senate with its small
membership was not abused, this
power with its consequences should
have existed then or should exist
now?
Rule by Minority.
Because It could modify the
conduct of government business
as intended by the Constitution,
the existence of the power was
as wrong in the past as both its
existence and exercise are wrong
at the present time.
Who can justly claim that the
protection of the country against
hasty legislation demands not only
a concurrence in legislative &C.
ton of the two houses OF Con-
gress, the veto power OF the
President of the United States
and the power Of revision by the