Evening star., 1949-07-19
Made in America

In proposing that Congress investigate
the Presidents Council of Economic Ad-
visers to see whether the ideas Of its men,
bers are made in America" Senator Byrd
has departed rather excitably from his
usually level-headed approach to the prob
lem of our Federal fiscal policy.
As one of the few men in Congress who
have fought consistently and inteliigently
for balanced budgets, Mr.. Byrd has long
had the respect not merely OF those who
agree with him, but also of many of those
who believe that his own reasoning Is open
to serious question. But the basis of that
respect is weakened more than little
when he suggests that the Presidents three
economic advisers may be guilty OF some
kind of un-American wrongdoing for fol-
lowing the ideas OF the late Lord Keynes
of Britain in their endorsement Of deficit
spending as device to combat recessionS
or depressions.
Along with others, Mr.. Byrd has often
argued most persuasively against the
Keynesian theory. Whether that theory
is right or wrong however, he does poor
service to himself in implying that just
because of its foreign origin Americans
may somehow be un-American If they
espouse it, The Christianity we pur-
port to follow, our republican form Of
government, our democratic processes, our
system of law, our capitalism, our medicine,
our psychology, and giant revolutionary
enterprises like our atomic project are all
based on ideas made not in America but
in a wide variety of lands abroad. Had
we tried to build our society solely on the
basis of our own home grown thoughts,
had we not borrowed lavishly from the
thinking and practices of others overseas,
our country instead of progressing dynam-
ically, would have been stagnant at its
very start.
To say this is not to say that the Presi-
dents three economic advisers ought not
to be asked to appear before some congress
sional committee to explain their views in
relation to the Keynesian theory. Such an
inquiry could be both interesting and in
structive. But the Objectionable feature Of
Mr.. Byrd's proposal is that he has made
it in way that tends to insinuate that the
trio-"a strange group of men" who are
spinning economic ideas" and who seem
to be debating" Federal fiscal policy-may
be engaged In sort of conspiracy or be
weak in their Americanism because, like
Keynes, they favor deficit financing. On
its face-and it is surprisingly uncharacter-
istic of Mr.. Byrd-this has all the ear
marks of being a mixture of nonsense and
unfairness, particularly when measured
against the fact that under our Constitu-
ton, Congress alone has decisive control
oyer the Nations purse strings.
Actually as long as that control is exer-
cised no little band of men can dictate"
our fiscal policy II there is any investi-
eating to be done on the subject, the field
of inquiry should embrace all of Congress
and the gimme" pressure groups among
the American people. With a handful of
exceptions like Mr.. Byrd, the Senate and
House have strongly supported deficit
spending for well over fifteen years, and
the majority of the electorate has done
likewise. OF course many legislators, just
as they favor virtue and deplore sin, have
sung the praises of balanced budgets and
warned against red-ink financing. But in
times of test-as in the case this session
of the so-called "porkbarrel" rivers-a and
harbors bill-they have refused to econo-
mize Their constituents would have been
displeased otherwise.
Thus, II we are frank with ourselves,
we will not attribute our fiscal policy to
foreign" ideas subtly foisted on us. For
the truth is that that policy, regardless Of
its Keynesian flavor, and whether 1t Is
wrong or not. has been and is continuing
to be made in America"-by the Congress
of the United States and the American
people. If it Is placing us on the road
to ruin" as Mr.. Byrd believes, the Nation
as a whole is to blame for 1t, not merely
three men submitting economic reports to
the President.