Evening star., 1932-06-11
The Wagner Relief Bill.

The Wagner Relief Bill.
History was written yesterday in the
Senates frantic passage of the Wagner
relief bill. The adjective is used ad-
Nsedly and without criticism For the
Senate's gesture was the gesture Of a
frantic man who. appalled, and bafded
and not knowing which way to turn
decides to strike out and do something
The consequences may not have been
weighed-but this is today and tomor-
row viii be another day.
Whether one agrees with Senator Reed
of Pennsylvania in his gloomy observa-
ton that when the time comes to record
the decline and fall of the American
Republic this day will be pointed to
''as one of the milest1nes on the road
OF the disintegration of our country"
depends upon ones individual appraisal
Of the strength and weakness Of
democracy. But the practical offset to
the catastrophe consequences foreSeen
by Senator Reed lies in the fact that
this is a campaign year. Unfortunately,
the thoughts of these who make the
laws are influenced by that fact. And
when the stringency of this period
passes and the American taxpayer
seeks to balance his own budget and
his chosen representatives in Congress
are relieved of the ominous din of
campaign and the anguished cries of
those who suffer, there may come the
counteraction that will prevent a dan
gerous tendency frcm becoming accepted
practice
That the Wagner bill is the enaction
into law of dangerous and perhaps
fatal tendency that breaks away from
a fundamental principle OF this Gov
ernment is not to be denied.
That positive definite action is neces-
sary in the face of appalling conditions,
and that the Nation at large has been
fed on the theory that such action can
be taken only by the Federal Govern
ment, is not to be denied.
The whole question, then, is whether
the method chosen to bring relief from
some of the physical woes that beset
large portion Of the population is Of
sucn merit, because of the good to be
accomplished, that the inherent dangers
OF the method are outweighed.
This bill is devised as loan to the
States, the amount of the loan depend
ing upon the population and the use Of
the loan and expenditure of the money
depending upon forty-eight Governors
of forty-eight States. The repayment
of the loan is to be made out of future
Federal road-aid funds to the States.
Therefore, as Senator Costigan candidly
describes it, the loan provision is more
In the nature of "sUbterfuge" to
escape the appearance Of giving money
directly to the States. The Federal
Government is giving the money, and
the Federal Government will as
matter of fact, repay its own advances
out of what it otherwise would give the
States to build highways.
The relief to be accomplished Is
questionable. AS was pointed out in
Senate debate, the relief funds are not
apportioned on the basis of need for
relief-but on the basis of population.
And while this apportionment might in
theory be NEST logical, it will fall short
and prove wholly inadequate in the case
OF States where the industrial depres-
sion has struck hardest, and may con-
stitute a surplus in other States where
the people have devised their own
methods of meeting their own troubles.
If any worthwhile relief could be ac-
complished through this initial $780,
100000 appropriation. or advance, or
loan, or gift, it would be cheap at the
price. The expense is not what led
those eight members of the Senate yes
terday to record their votes in opposi-
ton. Those Senators-Austin, Bing-
ham, Dale, Hebert, Metcalf, Moses.
Reed, Gore-viewed this initial $780,
600, 900 expenditure as opening the
floodgates, and the imposition of bur-
Gen upon the Federal Government un-
der which it cannot stand. If they are
wrong, it will be because of revolution
in popular thought that has been long,
perhaps too long delayed.