The Washington times., 1937-09-10
LEADERS, MOVES
IN CONGRESS RK
MANY MEMBERS
Fear Commitment in
Coming Session
By FRANKLIN G. sARTwELL

ny gAANALAN Gs SAkIWEAA
Members Of Congress who don't
fall under the coveted classified
tion OF. leaders" are beginning to
wonder just how far the real or
fancied leaders in one session can
commit a Forthcoming session.
And on their decision as to the
limitation Of the commitment will
depend the crop control legislation
which the President expects to get
through the next session, as well
as the end Of the "unholy alliance"
which formerly was known as the
domestic sugar lobby.
Faint rImblings Of discomfort
are coming from rank and file
Congressmen who dislike the man
ner in which the cotton State Sen
atorS and Representatives pledged
crop control legislation in the fu-
ture in order to get loans on this
years cotton crop. The same
rumblings are coming from those
who dislike the methods of assur-
ance given by sugar State Senators
that the growers would divorce
themselves from the refiners If the
President would sign the discrim
inatory sugar quota bill passed in
the final days Of the last session.
AGREEMENTS HEARD
OF course, no Congress can, even
by legislation, bind future Con-
gress. But the members are now
wondering whether small groups
in one session can make binding
agreements as to what a future
session will do.
Apparently Mr.. Roosevelt is TAX
ing the assurances on crop con-
troll legislation and on the sugar
lobby at a high value. He is max
ing loans on cotton and has signed
the sugar bill.
IF these small groups were able
to give the President assurances
which were substantial enough to
warrant his granting the favorS
they sought, why, the not-particu-
larly articulate members Of Con.
gresS want to know, were they not
able to accomplish their reforms
in the session then in progress?
ASSAIL PROMISES
In other words, If the cotton
Senators could promise crop con-
trol legislation in November or
January, why couldn't they give
1t to the President when he was
demanding it in August?
And, If the sugar State Senators
could promise that the "unholy
alliance" between the sugar re.
finers and the domestic growers
would be broken UP and here
after would not function, why
could they not have brought about
the divorce early enough to have
given the President the type Of
sugar bill which he and his Cabi-
net had been demanding through
out the session?
It is the view of these quiet
but thinking members that the
President has probably been
handed lemon"
CROP CONTROL SEEN
It may be that he will get his
crop control legislation in the next
session. In fact, he probably will.
But he won't get it because the
cotton Senators made any prom
ises at the tail-end of what has
become known as the "do-noth-
ing' Congress.
It may be that the domestic
sugar lobby has been broken up
as the President has been assured.
But that is a whole lot more doubt
full than that the crop control bill
will be passed. The sugar lobby
and others have habit of re-
manning steadfaSt through the
years.
But the fact the President may
be "stung" on these agreements is
not what is worrying the 400 mem
bers of the House who are not
leaders. What is worrying them is
that seemingly responsible leaders
should presume to say in advance,
even to pledge in advance, what a
forthcoming session will do.