Evening star., 1932-12-11
Governmental Reorganization.

Governmental Reorganization.
Perhaps the greatest achievement
represented by the Presidents reor-
ranization plan IS in emphasizing the
number and the remarkable growth in
unexpected directions Of the inde-
pendent agencies of Government; how
they have accumulated authority and
new duties with age and how complete
" they have become separated from
any logical or definite functional clas-
sification. 1t is only when they are
brought into the open and paraded be-
fore the public, as the President has
done in his reorganization plan, that
the real necessity Is driven home for
regrouping them and demanding that
these agencies justify their right to
continued existence on the basis OF
value of services rendered.
Doing 1t Is another thing entirely.
This is not the first reorganization plan
nor will it be the last. The value OF
governmental functions Is relative ana
not absolute. There are as many opin-
ions over the necessity Of certain func-
tions as there are functions themselves.
A change Of status from independent
to departmental means the loss OF In
dependence as we'll as prestige. That
is resented. A transfer Of functions
from one department to another in
wolves the loss Of power to one group
and the gain Of power for another
group. Objections to reorganization are
self-evident, and any reorganization
plan stirs up hornets nest.
theoretically the closing months OF
an administration should be the ideal
time for the execution Of q reorgani-
zation plan. Outgoing administration
oficials are more able to view the
scheme Collectively and to divorce the
changes from any selfish inclinations
or ambitions. And theoretically, at
least. the Presidents plan has better
prospects of realization than any other
ever submitted. It will be effective
unless there Is positive action to the
contrary by Congress. Other reorgan-
ization schemes have been killed by no
action at all by Congress.
But while the plan as whole may
be placed In operation by Executive
orders. some Of the details can only be
accomplished through legislation. With
out legislation some Of the Executive
orders would make changes more apt
to confuse than to clarity the situation.
This legislation requires time and
thought-two elements not apt to pre-
dominate in ths short session Of Coli
gress.
Each OF the changes recommended
by the President will find objectors,
anxious to voice their objections. They
will demand an opportunity to be heard.
And If all the changes involve the COM
plications presented by merely two rec
concentrations affecting the District OF
Columbia, there should be clarification
before the changes are made.
Under the Presidents plan, for in
stance, the National Capital Park and
Planning Commission and the once
of Public Buildings and Public Parks
will be transferred to the Department
of the Interior. At the same time, legis-
lation would transfer some OF the func-
tions of the latter to the District OF
Columbia. There should be, from
some quarter, a detailed analysis OF the
result THE function OF managing.
protecting and operating the local
parks, psrkwsys and recreational ac-
tivities Is purely municipal in charac-
ter" the President suggests. The trans
fer of such functions to the municipal
government would, it is stated accom-
plish a two-fold purpose.Q consoli-
date such control in one place, and (2)
"relieve the Federal Government OF
the control Of activities that are purely
local In character and which are paid
for out of District of Columbia funds" )"
But what activities are purely local
IN character? Is the control ana
policing of the Mount Vernon Boulevard
and parkway purely local in character?
Is the control of the recreational actlV-
fties-golf, tennis, etc.-maintained In
the semi national park system OF wash
ington, with the utilization OF proflts
from such operation, a purely local.
function? Heretofore the money de-
rived has been treated as Federal
money. Is the control of the Monument
Grounds and the grounds surrounding
the Lincoln Memorial a purely local
function? If so, is not control OF the
Capitol Grounds also purely local ?
Yet control of the Capitol Grounds Is
distinct from control of the Monument
Grounds and control Of other semi-ns-
tional park areas in Washington.
Again, If the control of the semi-na-
tional parks here is local function, Il
not their purchase local function?
Yet their purchase is lodged in the
hands Of the National Capital Park and
Planning Commission. That commits
sion would become part OF the Depart
ment Of the Interior, and, as far as car
be seen, would continue to perform it:
functions in relation to semi-nationa
park purchase and planning in anc
around the District OF Columbia. 1t 1!
inconsistent thus to recognize som'
functions as purely Federal and to as
sumo that others are purely local.
Whoever drew up that part Of the plar
for the President did so without an!
great consideration Of the complex in
ter-relationship between the District o
Columbia and the Federal Government
which renders impossible any classifi