The Omaha guide., 1945-10-20
News
THE<NE:S'|Wj|1SlS5EE
By PAUL ALLON -
Released by Western Newspaper Union.
DECLARED OLD IDEAL
RULMALLON

OAANNAs
DECLARED OLD IDEAL
Observation-Disclosures the full
employment bill is being pushed
through congress into law by a pre-
ponderant favor for it-and there is
no objection to the basic hopefulness
Of its theory-no one seems to know
what it means, or even where it
came from. By great odds, it is
the most uncertain and ~unclariied
piece of legislation of my time here.
/ have been calling it a CLIO
bill because the CLIO has CAM
paigned for 1t in the usual ex-
pensive and p-repossessing man.
ner which obscures other back
ing and monOpolizes the publ
J city. But CLIO planners did not
write it.
The numerous senator's whose
names are attached as co~-authors
will give you little satisfaction if you
inquire where they got the notion Of
passing a law proclaiming the right
to work which has always existed,
legally, constitutionaIly and by cus-
tom. The original draft Of their bill
was probably composed, as nearly
as I can ascertain. by the Farmers
Union, farthest left Of the three farm
ers Hobbies and often called the
farmer branch of the CLIO. But of
all things the farmers need right
now, a law declaring their right to
work must run behind help short
ages, equipment shortages, price
fears and practically every other TX
listing agricultural consideration.
The Farmers Union people will
say they got the idea out of a speech
Mr.. Roosevelt made in which he
mentioned a lot of rights. including
the right to work. But Mr.. Roose-
welt did not say there ought to be
a law, and before he mentioned the
matter it had gotten into a resolu-
ton of al international labor Office
meeting in Philadelphia. Sir Will
liam Beveridge, whose vas social
security hopes we're swamped in the
last election, was an ardent
champion of legislation to declare
the right to work. Going behind and
beyond him, an investigation will
bring you to the fact that such a
right is declared in the Soviet Rus
sian constitution.
There it has some meaning
because under a dictatorship fix
ing salaries, controlling hours,
renting homes and even cooking
and charging for the workers
meals, while restraining the
worker from freedom, a law
promising to share whatever
work the government gives is a
realistic right. But this is all
far behind American ideals and
rights which already go much
further, promising among other
things, freedom Of work at one
place or another and the right
not to work.
Even this would not be so perplex-
ing except that both sponsors and
amenders Of this ri~ght-to-work bill
agree it carries no legal rights. Co.
author Thomas of Utah may not
have been pinned down on that point
yet, but Co-author Murray and
Amender Taft, and all the others,
seem agreed no citizen could sue
an employer or the government for
a job or get out an injunction, or
that a labor union could sue, or get
the courts to make someone estab-
fish jobs or wages, hours or any
thing. This, they all say, is just a
declaration of policy by congress,
no matter how it is worked. It's
authors particularly deny that it is
a trick to establish a legal basis for
a whole new conception of law in
which the unions or individual work.
ers could build up decisions through
this new Supreme court to indict
the government or employers and
perhaps establish criminal penal
ties.
II ~ uOCS uOb uU LulS, Lutu
what does it do? Well, its spon-
sors rather frankly indicate they
look on it as a political propa-
ganda step, establishing a pol
icy-peg upon which they can
hang future legislative demands.
Particularly they want big
spending appropriations made in
the future, and they will then
say: 1.-THE policy of every man
a job has been established SO
this appropriation must be made
to give him a job" Or they can
build up a demand that the Alu-
minum company be broken up
for that reason, or that all black
hair be made white because il
woHld create jobs in the hair
dyeing industry.
This makes it seem unimportant
because congress retains the right
to appropriate or not appropriate
regardless of this underlined decIara-
ton Of an unagreed policy. Frank
ly, then | do not know what it
/! means, except that everyone will
ask for government funds.
A decline in work-week is another
provision. Plans to cut the govern
ment work-week again from 40 Git
was 49, to 80 have already been pro-
| posed in bills. This keeps salaries
| where they we're and prevents nor
NAL utilization Of the talents, abili-
ties and aptitudes Of the nations
manpower. II does not increase pur-
chasing power or create more I'M
ployment opportunities; it merely
shares-the-work. less work for the
patton as a whole. therefore less pro-
ductivity and less tax to
sustain a high economy. needed for
full employment.