Evening star., 1948-03-08
New Dealers Attitude
On Congress Probes
Is Seen as Reversal
Protests on Investigation
OF Red Influence Recall
Different Prewur Stand
BY Darid Laurence

It makes lot of difference whose
OK is being gored.
For years business men have been
pilloried by congressional commit
tees dominated by New Deal majori-
ties, but none of the so-called lib
erals ever raised a voice in protest.
Today, when congressional COM
mittees are getting after Commu-
nistic influences in the Govern
ment, the liberals are proposing
that questioning by congressional
committees hereafter be restricted.
For years corporations have been
forbidden to play part In politi-
cal campaigns or to use their money
to express their views on political
candidates.. but no liberals have
ever come forth to protest that this
Is a restriction on freedom OF
speech.
Today, labor unions are crying
out that the law banning political
expenditures by both labor unions
and corporations is unconstitutional.
For years labor praised the Wag-
ner Act as magma charta and a
great step forward in liberal legis-
lation. And no one raised a voice
to say that the Federal Government
should keep out of labor controver-
sizes or to say that labor disputes
could not be settled by legislation.
Constitutional Argument Hit.
Today, when the Taft-Hartley law
covers both labor and management
and makes them both amenable
To governmental regulation in GER
tain particulars, there Is an outcry
against the law as restrictive and
as putting the hand Of Government
into labor relations.
Most interesting are the various
arguments being made about con-
stitutionality. 1t seems that no
body in liberal circles has hereto
fore questioned the right OF Con-
eress to ask all sorts OF impertl-
nent questions about the private
affairs of business men. In the
New Deal days there was kind
of ehoulish glee exhibited every
time q reputation was smeared. To-
dav. It seems that when the anti
radicals are doing a bit OF smear
ing, 1t Is all wrong and new rules
have to be written.
Two wrongs do not make q rignt
and. of course, there ought to be
more restraint exercised by Con-
eressional committees themselves IN
tnterrogating private citizens. In
diyidual members ought to use
more restraint in discussing, under
their immunity privilege. the al
fairs of private citizens. But 1t
does seem as If those reforms might
have been championed during New
Deal days, too. There were sup
posed to be liberals then, too.
Issue Is Not Freedom.
As for the hue and cry about the
constitutionality of the provisions
of law forbidding corporations or
unions to expend money to favor
or oppose political candidates. the
Supreme Court will be deciding
something more than the right OF
labor union newspapers to express
orinions-a right that never was
intended to be challenged anyway
when the law was written. The
court will be deciding whether labor
unions can send out reprints and
srend money to inf1uepce elections
by paying various sorts OF cam
paign expenses.
Maybe both corporations and
labor unions should be immune
from control by Congress. Maybe
they should be permitted to spend
millions to carry on campaigns OF
distortion and influence the election
results. But heretofore the Supreme
Court has ruled that Congress has
the power to legislate on how mucn
could be spent In election cam
paigns.
If Congress cannot set the limits
TO labor union expenditures, it can
not set them on corporations or on
private citizens or anybody else. The
whole question Of slush funds and
corrupt practices then is back where
it was in the early part Of this CEN
tury before the big scandals were
exposed that led to the passage Of
the Federal Corrupt Practices law
and various State statutes.
Not O single law has been de-
clared unconstitutional since Presi-
dent Roosevelt appointed a ma
jority of the justices on the present
Supreme Court. 1t will be interest
ing to see whether this court Is
going to begin taking away from
Congress powers Of regulation just
as the old Supreme Court used to
do. To deprive Congress OF the
power to legislate on the expendi-
ture of money to influence political
campaigns would be q novel re-
versal for a liberal court to make.
Reproduction Rights ReserveO