Evening star., 1946-01-20

Congress has been attempting to muddle
along with hand tools in a mechanized
age" yet the group realizes it faces a
difficult job of convincing Congress to
adopt many of the proposals, for some
of these are distinctly controversial. 1t
is likely there will be a contest even in
the committee over some.
A scanning of these indicates how
controversial some may be. In this
category are the following three pro-
posals:
To streamline Congress by reducing
the number Of committees from 81 to
32-leaving Is standing committees in
each house. Such move is bound to
encounter the jealousies and love of
rank of many of the chairmen of the
49 committees that would be abolished
or merged with other committees. They
became chairmen by waiting their time
for the spotlight and power under the
slow grinding of the seniority system.
They won't want to step aside.
To trim the power of the House Rules
Committee down to the point where it
no longer could bottle up indefinitely
any bill a majority of this group wishes
to keep from action on the House floor.
1t is suggested this be accomplished by
adoption of a requirement that the Rules
Committee make report to the House,
favorable or adverse. Within say, 20
days after it receives bill The idea
here is that in representative govern
ment the legislature itself should have a
chance to vote controversial bill up
or down. On the other hand, it will be
argued that under the present system
any bill pigeonholed by the Rules Com
mittee now can be forced to the floor
by use of the discharge petition. This
requires the signature, however, of
majority of the House membership, 2l8,
and only rarely does this method sue
ceed.
Seniority Rule Attacked.
To modify the seniority system of Sc
lection of committee chairmen of pro-
viding for the periodic automatic selec-
ton of new chairman for each stand
ing group, say every six years An al
tentative might be that the committee
chairman be chosen at the beginning of
each Congress by the majority party
Committee on Committees, as they are
in some of the State Legislatures.
The principal trouble about changing
the much-denounced seniority rule has
been that up to now no politically
practical" substitute has been sold to
Congress. 1t is widely agreed it is an
imperfect system; that in many cases
the best committee member never has
a chance to be chairman. Representa-
tives and Senators from States where
election campaigns regularly are close,
and numerous reflections not likely,
stand little chance ever to be chair
men.
The National Planning Association,
which has given substantial support to
the congressional reform movement,
frankly recognizes the difficulty in
changing the seniority system. In
brief submitted by Robert Heller, Cleve-
land, Ohio, business management con-
sultant, the association succinctly
states:
when the seniority rule is viewed
absolutely, both outsiders and members
hold opinions of it ranging from mildly
bad to definitely evil. When the seniority
rule is viewed relatively, outsiders state
that anything would be better and in
siders state that anything so far pro-
posed would be worse.
"It is far too easy for the outsider
to say that the seniority rule should be
eliminated and equally far too easy for
members to evade the issue by depre-
eating alternative proposals"
Hit in Heller Report.
The Heller report, which has been
widely indorsed, condemns the seniority
rule in no uncertain terms, and calls on
Congress to find practical substitute
for a recognized evil. The present rule
is seriously defective, it holds, since Cd
the protection given chairman because