Evening star., 1932-07-02
Words, Words and More Words,

With the recent struggle that led to
enactment of the so-called economy bill
now fresh in mind, it is possible to
study with full appreciation the pledges
of the Republican and Democratic
platforms on the business of Govern
ment reorganization.
Said the Republicans:
Efficiency and economy demand re-
organization of Government bureaus.
The problem is non-partisan and must
be SO treated if it is to be solved. As
a result of years of study and personal
contact with conflicting activities and
wasteful duplication of effort the Presi
dent is particularly fitted to direct
measures to correct the situation. We
favor legislation by Congress which will
give him the required authority
Said the Democrats:
We advocate an immediate and drastic
reduction of governmental expenditures
by abolishing useless commissions and
Offices, consolidating departments and
bureaus and eliminating extravaganza to
accomplish saving of not less than 20
per cent in the cost of Federal Gov
ernment, and we call upon the Demo-
cratic party in the States to make a
jealous effort to achieve proportionate
result.
So, one might think. regardless OF the
choice of the people at the polls in No
vember, the waste and ineficiency rep
resented through lack of properly CO.
ordinated work in the Government
establishment will be cured. One might
think so, in fact, until the realization
dawns that both parties adopted sub
stantially the same planks four years
ago; that nearly twelve years ago Pres
ident Harding appointed a commission
that produced voluminous findings on
departmental reorganization; that Pres
ident Hoover has made sort of per-
! sonal pet of governmental reorganiza-
ton even before he was elected to the
presidency; that such governmental re-
organization was put forward as the
sane and sensible solution of the prob
lem of reducing fixed governmental
costs at the outset of this Congress
and that the sum total of such efforts
has been the hodge-podge economy bill
that cut nothing much except the al
ready small salaries of the hard-worked
governmental personnel and that is un-
satisfactory to the President, to Con-
gress and to the people.
1t is a fact as sad as it is true that
the hope of making governmental re-
organization a non-partisan undertak-
ing is practically futile at the outset.
The President-any President, for that
matter-would be capable of making
effective and helpful reorganization. But
before he is able to do that he must be
given the authority, and such authority
would amount to power almost dicta-
torial in its scope. Congress reluctantly
surrenders such power, as witness the
strings that it has tied to the grudging
permission given the President to rec
ommend reorganization that Congress
may veto at will.
Nor does the problem fare any bet
ter if left in the hands of Congress, as
politics and patronage are involved in
every step to abolish so much as a
bureau or to consolidate two commits
sions
There is waste and ineficiency re-
| sulting from some duplication of effort
in the government establishment, but
not as much as claimed. 1t is nothing
less than absurd to believe that govern
mental costs could be reduced in any
amount approaching 25 per cent by
throwing out commissions and consoli-
eating bureaus. The great cost of gov
ernment does not result from the fixed
| charges of administration. These are
relatively small. When the parties be-
gin talking about cutting down tre-
mendous subsidies to special groups and
special interests, then party platforms
! relating to economy in government can
be studied with some degree of as
surance that they mean more than an
| issue of words.