Evening star., 1960-07-03
INTERPRETIVE REPORT

INTERPRETIVE REPORT
respect and fondness for the
; ability and courtesy of Repre-
sentative Smith. The chorus
! Of condemnation, however,
! swells again because major
measures were long delayed or
J practically killed in that 12-
member committee. And an
other attempt surely will be
} made in January to clip its
wings and weaken it's Repub-
lican/- Southern Democratic
coalition.
The 77-year-old Judge Smith
i he was a Virginia circuit
judge before coming to Con-
gresS in l931-holds the philo-
sophical view that criticism by
disappointed sponsors of bills
is an occupational hazard for
committee members. He never
theless is sensitive to assertions
that he or his committee COL
leagues trample on rights of
majorities. He denies that his
group refuses House members
their fundamental privileges
and abuses the power and pur-
pose of the committee itself by
not letting the House work its
will on certain bills vital to the
public interest.
Even Stronger Before
There was a time when the
Rules Committee was much
stronger and still more dicta-
torial than it allegedly is today.
Came the revolution Of 1910
against "Cannonism." Until
that year the Speaker of the
House not only appointed the
Rules Committee but also
served on it, usually as chair
man. The late Senator George
Norris, Republican Of Nebraska,
then a House member, was a
leader in the revolt against
Speaker Uncle Joe" Cannon.
The size of the committee was
increased to IL members, the
Speaker was excluded and
members we're elected by the
House itself, usually after
selection by respective party
caucuseS.
The committee remained
powerful. irrespective of the DO
litical party in control of the
House. In 1945. the La Toilette
Monroney Committee on Re-
organization of Congress rec
ommended-at the suggestion
OF the then Representative
Christian Herter, now Secre-
tary of State-that a limit be
put on the time that the Rules
Committee could bottle up a
bill.
21-Day Rule
This was not accepted by
Congress but in 1949 it led to
House adoption of the 21-day
rule, 275-143. Under this pro-
cedure a committee chairman
could call up any stalled bill
from the Rules Committee after
81 days.
During 1949 and 1850 it was
used several times to pry out
bills, including measures for
poll tax repeal and for state
hood for Alaska and Hawaii.
Yet, none of the bills brought
out under the 21-day rule was
passed by the House during
those two years of the Repub-
lican-controlled 80th Congress.
In 1851 it was repealed, 275-
143.
At the start of the s6th Con-
gress in January, 1859, a group
of more than 100 House Demo-
cratic liberals started a drive
to bring back the 21-day rule.
This move collapsed when they
received assurances from
Speaker Rayburn that legis-
lation which has been duly
considered and reported by
legislative committees will be
brought before the House for
consideration within a reason
able period of time"
These assurances were put
to severe test on several occa-
sions in the past two years.
A civil rights bill reported by
the House Judiciary Committee
in August, 1859, was shelved
by the Rules Committee when
Congress adjourned last Sep
tember. So were a school con-
struction bill and others wanted
by the House Democratic lead
erShip.
Two Bills Blocked
Much-modified versions of
those bills finally were passed
by the House this year after
being practically forced out of
the Rules Committee under
threat of discharge petition or
other moves. AS it is, however,
the Rules Committee still has
refused to let House and Senate
versions of the school construc-
ton bill go to conference or to
clear a housing bill for the
House.
Judge Smith and other de-
tenders of the Rules Commit
tee note that bills can be taken
from the committee by a dis
charge petition signed by at