Evening star., 1943-07-20
Letters to the Editor
Commission on Social Security
Urged in Behalf Of National Planning.


Urged in Behalf of National Planning
To the Editor Of The Star:
Certain recent events have cast
dramatic high light on what seems to me
vitally important problem of public
policy
Last winter Sir William Beveridge pre-
sented to the British Parliament valu-
able technical report recommending
reorganization and extension of the So
cial security services of Britain. This
document was given the widest attention
In the London press and over the London
radio. The echoes of it's publicity reached
this side of the Atlantic and by Decem-
Ter "The Beveridge Report" occupied a
prominent place in the windows OF the
leading New York booksellers.
In March the President of the United
States presented to the Congress an ex-
hausttive report on the same subject by
the National Resources Planning Board,
technically sound and philosophically
Illuminating document which is of great
er Importance to the United States than
Is the Beveridge report to Britain, since
we have so much further to go along the
line Of social security. Yet this pro-
foundly significant American report has
received only the most cursory and casual
notice, chiefly in the form of hostile
criticism from few individuals who had
apparently not read or not understood
the document. It is safe to say that 10
people in the United States know about
the Beveridge plan for every one who has
even heard of the National Resources
Planning Board report.
Congress has now seen fit to abolish
the planning board, as q part of it's civil
war against the President and the ad-
ministrative branch of the Government.
This action seems unfortunate since no
other agency in Washington was doing
such important work in preparing for
our postwar reconstruction; but it was
clearly within the province of the legisla-
tive branch If that branch considered
such a civil war desirable at the present
moment.
Coupled with the dissolution of the
National Resources Planning Board,
however, was action Of a much more
questionable nature. The Congress pro-
vided that no other agency OF the Gov
ernment should continue any of the work
of the planning board and that the rec
ords Of the board should be kept in the
archives and not made available for any
other Government agency. This is in
accord with general policy of the pres
ent Congress which repeatedly has cut
out from appropriations for Government
bureaus and agencies all funds for
acquainting the people of the United
States with the work which they are
doing. In other words, the attempt
deliberately has been made to cut of,
as far as possible, communication be-
tween the administrative branch and the
people. After however, partisans may
resent the fact-this Government is our
government, and the only. one we have.
The experts of this Government are en-
ployed by US, the citizens, to study our
problems for us. They are the only
experts so employed who are analyzing
these problems from the standpoint and
In the interest Of the general public. To
muzzle our own agencies and to prevent
them from communicating with us
except In the form Of small edition Of
onacial documents appears to constitute
vital assault upon the principle Of free
speech. Our own employees are not per-
mitted to report to us what they have
done, in language understood by the
people.
The matters with which the National