Evening star., 1943-07-06
The Political Mill

in that body were overthrown,
but only after an intense struggle,
a forerunner OF the progressive
conservative split in the Repub-
iican party which brought the
COP eventually to its knees.
So. 1t may be easier to win this
proposed legislative reform by
amending the Constitution itself.
Further, the reform would be per-
manent-unless the Constitution
were again revised.
Coed Reason for Single Subject.
There is no good reason for in
Guiding two subjects In the same
bill. Indeed, the reasons for not
doing so are very good. Why
should 1t be possible, for example,
to tie an anti-lynching bill to
relief measure, or an anti.poll
tax bill to a public works bill7
This Is not said in derogation
Of either anti-lynching legisla-
ton or anti-poll tax legislation.
These are measures which should
be considered on their merits
alone. To both strong constitu-
tional objections have been
raised. The Senators and Repre-
sentatives from Southern States
have fought them again and
again, by whatever parliamentary
maneuvers were possible. The
strongest has been the filibuster
in the Senate, made possible by
the rule of unlimited debate in
that body.
The second section OF the pro-
posed amendment. which de-
clares that no law shall be
amended or revised by reference
to its title only, deserves support.
There has grown up q practice
by which Federal laws are
amended merely by eliminating
from, adding to or substituting
words In 4 statute, with a refer
ence In the amending law only to
the title Of the original law and
the section which it is proposed
to amend. 1t is lazy mans way
OF doing business.
Instead OF rewriting and re-
enacting the law. 50 that the pur-
pose shall be clear to any one who
reads an amending bill, there is
only tumble of meaningless
words, numbers and references
crazy quilt which can only be
put into understandable form by
a careful reading Of old laws.
Vote without Understanding.
The consequence is that Sen
ators and Representatives, in
many instances, are called on to
vote on changes in existing law
which are meaningless to them
unless they employ legal talent to
put the loose pieces together, or
can find the time themselves to
do this work.
Here Is = random example of
amending laws by reference only.
A bill, H. r. 2798, entitled AN
act to amend the act entitled
An Act to provide that the
United States shall aid the States
In the construction of rural post
roads, and for other purposes
approved July IL, 1916, as
amended and supplemented, and
for other purposes" was passed
by the House on June 8. There
were five amendments by refer
ence to sections of the earlier
laws by the House, and the Sem
ate committee, when 1t reported
the measure, added q new section
in which there were four more
amendments by reference. Par
ticularly has this method of
amending laws by reference been
used In tax legislation.
The proposed amendment is
practically Identical with a pro-
vision In the Florida constitution.
1t is similar, too, to constitutional
provisions of other States. Sem
ator Andrews insists that the
Legislature in Florida is enabled,
by reason of this constitutional
provision, to accomplish its work
quickly and In far more orderly
fashion than Congress. If the
sessions of Congress can be ex-
pedited, 1t would be a good thing
for the country.