Evening star., 1943-04-13

Such step Is ~
permissible and David Lawrence.
his words of disapproval of the
"rider" which was made a part of
the measure, and hence could not
be separately vetoed, are also con-
stitutional. But the argument used
by the President simply does not
improve relations between Congress
and the Executive, but tends to
aggravate them.
Whoever prepared the statement
for the President-for it does not
seem possible that Mr.. Roosevelt
did-put the Chief Executive in the
position of not only being piqued,
but of using adroit phrases to accuse
Congress of doing something it
never did. Here are the statements
to which, as matter of historical
record exception will be taken by
members of Congress:
l. The President says: The rea-
sons which prompted me to exercise
the authority conferred upon me
(the act of October 2, 1942) are fully
explained in the letter which I sent
to Chairman Doughton of the Ways
and Means Committee on Feb
ruary l5."
Lacked Legal Opinion.
But the letter sent by the Presi-
dent did not contain any legal opin-
ion from the Attorney General set
ting forth why the Executive had
authority to break salary contracts
entered into before the outbreak of
war. The truth is there never was a
legal opinion furnished. The At
torney General has since transmitted
to Congress copy of his letter to
the President and 1t contains only an
arbitrary claim that the action was
legal, but it doesn't reveal any sup
port or explanation whatsoever for
the claim.
2. The President says: But the
Congress has chosen to rescind my
action limiting excessive salaries
without even attempting to offer a
substitute"
This is not correct. Congress did
write substitute into the law itself.
1t stated that salary Or wage paid
between January /, 1912, and Sep
tember IS, 1912, shall constitute the
upper limit and that nothing can
be done to reduce either the salary
or the wage. This means that there
Is now statutory limitation on the
payment of a salary in excess of
S67 200, FOR instance, if that wasn't
the level before September IS, 1912.
Restricts President.
Nobody in America can earn in
excess of that sum now-the limit
set by the President before-if this
wasn't the rate paid before Septem-
Der Is, 1912. What the law does
prohibit, however, is the exercise
by the President through an execu-
tive order of any power over pre-
war salary levels-a power clearly
usurped by the tricky people who
write executive orders for the Presi-
dent to sign, and which the Presi-
dent signs because he is in too much
of hurry to find out what the
legal powers over salaries really are
3. The President says: The act
Of October 2, 1912, set forth stabi-
li5ation program. 1t could, of
course. be revised or repealed by the
Congress but subject, under the
Constitution, to the approval or veto
by the President. The Congress,
however, did not adopt this consti-
tutional method"
The implication here given is that
Congress adopted an unconstitu-
tional method This is not correct.
Congress has right to append riders
to any piece of legislation and the
President can approve or disapprove
when he exercises his right to sign
or veto.
Riders Constitutional
4. The President says: This svs-
tenn of attaching riders has been
used by former Congresses in a
number of notable cases, Such
abuses of sound legislative procedure
have been protested by many former
Presidents"
The use of the rider has been con-
oemned, but 1t is constitutional,
There have been proposals that a
constitutional amendment should be
adopted to enable Presidents to veto
separate items in an appropriation
bill, but there is no such clause in
the Constitution today.
The President might ask himself
why the Congress resorted to a rider
In this case. 1t was because Mr..
Roosevelt resorted to a misuse of
power in issuing the original execu-
tive order. Since the majority of
members of Congress resented that
arbitrary act, they refused to force
themselves into position whereby
1t would take a two thirds vote to
override a veto. A veto could mean
that one vote more than one-third
OF either house, comprising a rub
her stamp minority, could deprive
the citizens of their rights to a
contract entered into before the out
break of the war and which Con-
gress refused to enact into law when
the proposal was specifically brought
before them before.
Reproduction Rights Reserved.)