Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-12-08
TARIFF FIGHT TO CENTER
ON FLEXIBILITY AGENCY
Opposing Arguments on Giving Power
to Congress Or President Are
Summarized.

week might be Mr.. Curtis These Sena-
tors are reminded that four years from
now the President might be a Dem
ocrat.
This is brought forward again and
again in the debates! If the law is
passed, 1t will remain law, unless and
until repealed. While it remains law,
the Presidents entitled to exercise the
junction may change. There might be
President strongly Republican, and
gh-protectionist in view, who would
make changes upward but not down
ward. There might be a President
strongly Democratic and low-tariff by
convection, who would make changes
downward but not upward. ConSe-
quently the question must be decided.
not with reference to President Hoover
but to any President-President x.
The flexible provision would give the
PRESIDENT much power. No doubt of
that. Yet not as much as the arelI-
ments frequently imply
1t must be remembered that the
PRESIDENT cannot pick out a business or
a commodity and arbitrarily raise the
tarin On 1t or lower the tariff on it. Thu,
PreS'Ient must wait on the Tariff Com
mission. He can do nothing until the
Tarin Commission has sent him report
ana recommendation. Then, and on1v
then: does the President get any power.
AT tnat point. and only at that point,
he gets two powers.
He can act upon the report or he can
ignore it. II he decides to act on the
report he can Ak q new tariff rate with
IN limit OF so per cent of the existing
rate.
Figures Recalled From Dead,
Much OF the argument against giving
the power to the President was constI-
tutlonal and historical. In many
speeches the ghost of Charles Stalkec
through the Senate chamber. Prince
Rupert was summoned back by Sena-
TOR Hiram Johnson of California. The
narons OF Runnymeade, Magma Charta.
the menace of monarchy"-all came
back from the dead. The fundamental
argument in all this was that the power
10 NIX a tarin rate is the power to tax,
and that the power to tax must always
De Kept in Congress-never given to the
Executive.
Turn now to the arguments against
giving the power to Congress. One OF
these arguments has to do with time.
Congress, everybody knows, is slow TO
act about anything. For Congress To
take any step consumes-on the average,
it Is safe to say-probably a hundred
times as many days as normal Presl-
NCAN WOhAA AC4uiAC 1OL bIlS same SUSp.
Moreover, Congress normally, except
for special sessions, Is away from Wash
ington for eight months every other
year.
Consequently, between the habitual
SlownesS OF Congress and its not being
IN session for prolonged periods. flea-
lble provision dependent on Congress
would be too long in ticking"
It Is easy to visualize a possible case.
A business man, or line of industry,
might be subjected to some sudden
change in trade which would make a
change in the tariff imperative and
just. Such business might apply to
the Tariff Commission. The commission
might consume several weeks or months
in investigation. Thereafter, Congress
might fail to take the matter up for
yet more months. Or Congress might
be out of session for eight months.
The sum of all might result in as much
as a year elapsing before the needed
change would be made And, as things
go nowadays, the change might become
unnecessary, or quite different change
might be called for.
Another Strong Objection.
One other strong objection is made
to giving to Congress the sole power
of putting tariff change into effect
Let US assume that q manufacturer of
leather wants q change in the tariff
He makes out good case. The Tariff
Commission recommends the change
and the recommendation is sent to
Congress.
At this point a member of Congress
representing not leather district but
a sugar district might see opportunity
for himself and his constituents. He
might say, in effect, II move, as an
amendment to the proposed change in
leather, that there shall also be change
in sugar. will vote for your change
in leather provided, and only pro-
vided, you friends of leather will in
turn vote for my change in sugar"
Members of Congress representing
textiles might take the same attitude
Also members representing steel. And
so on. Quickly we should have an old
fashioned general revision of the tariff,
accompanied by the familiar log roll
ing.
The force of this argument was freely
admitted by those Senators who demand
that Congress and not the President
shall have the power Of operating the
flexible provision. To offset the argu-
ment they proposed that Congress
should adopt a rule binding itself to
act only on the one rate reported by
the Tariff Commission, and rates ger
name to the items included in such
That would be ideal. But Senator
Vandenberg Of Michigan and many
others emit jeering laughs. They say
there is trick In the word "germane. J"
"a pretty fairy tale! This Senate
can find anything 'germane' 1t
pleases. We might start with innocent
little shoe strings, discover them ger
name to shoes. shoes 'germane' to
leather, leather to hides. hides to the
farm problem, the farm problem to the
industrial problem-and soon the lowly
shoe string runs itself into a general
tariff revision and into major po-
litical crisis"
Fundamentally. like a good many
this era. 1t is a conflict between ancient
rigidities of the Constitution and mod
ern conditions of life and business
Between a Constitution written in the
days when it took a week for Senator
to come from Massachusetts, to Wash
ington and the condition in which Sen
ator Walsh can make the trip in five
hours by airplane. or can address his
constituency by radio in five minutes
Congress is still practicing the pace OF
stage coach days. at least the Senate
is. and Congress can act not faster
than the Senate end of 1t.
II the Senate insists on Congress
having the sole right to operate the
flexible provision, then the Senate Will
be under one more pressure to change
those ancient WAYS and rules, whose in
herent and inevitable dilatoriness was
picturesquelv made clear to the public
by recent Vice President Dawes.