The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1935-08-20
Liberal Viewpoint
by DR.. HARRY ELMER BARNES

TT is obvious to most thoughtful persons that
l. even a temporary salvaging of the capitalistic
system will be possible only as the result of the
adoption of thorough-going economic planning
Otherwise, even if We get temporary and hcti-
tious recovery, the evils of economic anarchy
and unrestrained avarice are bound to plunge
us into another depression. And the old gray
mare" of capitalism "ain't what she used to be-
The system can no longer stand the shocks
imposed by severe panics and depressions.
Hence, number of important questions arise.
In the first place, is planning compatible with
capitalism and the profit system? Second, can
we get sane and adequate plan formulated and
put through Congress-? Finally, can we get any
adequate program of economic planning past
the scrutiny of the Supreme Court?
I shall here consider only the third issue
raised, namely the difficulty of running the
gantlet of the Supreme Court with any plan
of economic control sufficiently broad-gauged
to be of any significance. This problem is dealt
with by one of the foremost living authorities
upon constitutional law, Prof Thomas Reed
Powell of Harvard University, in an article in
Fortune.
DASING his analysis upon the Schechter
- case in which the Supreme Court set aside
the NRA as unconstitutional Prof Powell
makes the following significant generalization:
That the poultry code could have been dis
posed of with the courts finding that it involved
an improper delegation of congressional power
to the President.
That the court, however, chose to base it's
decision also upon the ground that Congress
itself had no power to regulate the business of
the Schechters
That in discussing the power of Congress
the court did not confine itself to the kind of
business done by the Schechters.
That the question consequently arises
whether the Supreme Court would approve any
national economic plan.
THAT the court clearly will permit no ma
tional plan regulating wages and prices uni
versally and that it is even doubtful that it
would permit such regulation in the case of ship
pers in interstate commerce.
THAT if Congress can not succeed with stat
utes based on the commerce power vested in
Congress there is little prospect of, achieving a
similar object on other constitutional powers"
WHETHER we have broad economic plan
w ming or not, even the recovery of tenn
porary and superficial prosperity must rest upon
putting more purchasing power in the hands of
the masses. Prof. Powell is inclined to believe
that the Schechter decision makes it perfectly
clear that the increased and wider distribution
of purchasing power are not in themselves as
direct detectives, within the purview of the ma
tional commerce power" This inevitable con-
cusion, he says 'is serious not only because it
in the case of the Schechters, but because the
rejection of purchasing power considerations
may mean that the court will not permit Con-
gress to regulate wages and hours of labor in
mines and plants even when such mines and
plants actually compete with each other in inter
state commerce"
Prof Powell points out the significant fact
that the closer any legislation actually is to any
serious economic planning, the more certain it
is to be rejected by the Supreme Court
"One thing, however, is clear enough from
the lack of clarity of the courts decision. The
more general and widespread any plan of ma
tional regulation of industry, the more likely it
is to fail to run the gantet of the Supreme
Court"
Economic planning can hardly be realized
without broad delegation of power TO the
president by Congress. But such delegation
comes rarely except in moments OF crisis. Even
Congress, to say nothing of the Supreme Court,
is willing to approve such transfers of authority
only in emergencies But economic planning
means consistent, longtime controls over our
economic life which will persists IN normal times.
More and more. il is becoming evident that
the issue clearly resolves itself into one OF taking
away from the Supreme Court the right to de-
clare laws unconstitutional or being prepared to
accept economic chaos and collapse in this coun-
try. This IS the answer Roosevelt can hand on
to Hoover.