Evening star., 1949-01-24
S1st Congress Seen
Earning Reputation
As Most IntoIerant
Methods Of Democrats
In Filling Committee
Posts Are Criticized
By Dapid Laurence

Inc SUtn congress may nave Deen
the, worst Congress" from some
viewpoints, because it refused to
spend more of the public's money
for social-welfare projects, but the
Democratic majority in the 81st
Congress is starting off to earn the
title of the most intolerant."
The Democrats already are talk
ing of forbidding any public hear
ings whatsoever on new legislation
to replace the Taft-Hartley Act.
The House of Representatives is
talking of allowing only day to
consider minimum wage legislation
and to steamroller new bill
through without hearings. thus de-
priving the citizens of an oppor-
tunity to be heard.
But the most amazing example
of denial of the rights of the
people is the capricious way the
leadership of the Democratic Party
in the House has decided on GER
tain committee assignments.
Members Must Be Lawyers.
Only lawyers, for instance, are to
be permitted to serve as members
of the Democratic majority on the
House committee investigating un-
American activities. This is but a
subterfuge to get rid of Representa-
tive Hebert of Louisiana. who did
not support Mr.. Truman in the last
election but voted for Gov. Strom
Thurmond.
The specious argument that only
lawyers can serve on the .Un-
American Activities Committee can
rise to plague the Democrats. Fpr
1t can lead to demands for dis
elimination in choosing the men,
bers of other committees Perhaps
the Democratic chiefs will be asked
to decide next that only members
who once held cards in labor unions
are eligible for membership on
the House Labor Committee or that
only persons who have once been
farmers can serve on the Agr!cul-
ture Committee.
It would be in line for members
with banking experience to insist
that they should have precedence
in selections for the Banking and
Currency Committee, which could
mean that men of one viewpoint
could dominate such committee.
The hypocrisy Of the action taken
by the Democratic leaders becomes
Immediately apparent when it is
noted that the rule about lawyers
only" is not to be applied to the
House Judiciary Committee, which
has charge really of all legal matters
and problems relating to the Fed
eral judiciary and the judicial code
Basis of Election.
The people Of America do not
choose their representatives in Con-
gress on the basis of their expert
ence in certain professions or occu-
pations. The people of all districts
have a right to representation on
important committees because of
the all-around ability of the men
or women elected.
To say that Representative
Hebert of Louisiana, Democrat, who
already has had experience on the
House Un-American Activities Com
mittee and is generally regarded as
fair and impartial in his handling
of witnesses, is now to be unSeated
because he doesn't happen to have
been a lawyer is to give an example
of arbitrariness and intolerance
which certainly doesn't come under
the head of either fair DEAL or
liberalism"
Even lawyers can be headline
hunters. Also the theory that law
yers make the best jurors has often
been disputed. Certainly not all
lawyers are judicial-minded. Many
of them are prosecution-m minded.
There is, therefore, no real logic or
consistency in the new rule. 1t
can only mean that the Truman
administration Is back of the
purge" and that, sooner or later,
If the author Of the red herring"
phrase has his way, the Un-Ameri-
can Activities Committee will be
stripped Of its powers and perhaps
abolished-and all Communists will
then have a right to rejoice.
Were this the only issue involved,
II would be serious enough, but a
trend toward squelching an opposi-
ton viewpoint is dangerous. In a
Communistic regime the one-party
system hourishes, but in a democ-
racy opposition, even within a politi-
cal party, has always been consid-
cred healthy.
Reproduction Rights Reservedl