Bailey, Fred, legislative counsel, National Grange_ Baldwin, Joseph Clark, Representative from New York.... Beaman, Middleton, legislative counsel, House of Representatives_. Blachly, Dr. Frederick F., staff member, Brookings Institution_- Bland, Schuyler Otis, Representative from Virginia.. Blandford, John B., Jr., National Housing Administrator. Boots, Charles F., legislative counsel, United States Senate_- Bowles, Chester, Administrator, Office of Price Administration__- State Joint Legislative Committee----- Brewster, Owen, United States Senator from Maine__. Bridges, Styles, United States Senator from New Hampshire. Burton, Harold H., United States Senator from Ohio‒‒‒‒ Capehart, Homer E., United States Senator from Indiana___. Chamberlain, Joseph P., professor of public law, Columbia University_ Denit, W. Darlington, Director, Office of Administrative Finance and Deschler, Lewis, Parliamentarian, House of Representatives_ Elliott, Dr. William Y., Vice Chairman, War Production Board_ Fairchild, Prof. Fred A., Yale University, United States Chamber Flack, Dr. Horace E., secretary, Maryland Legislative Council__ Fulbright, J. William, United States Senator from Arkansas-. Synopsis of statement of-Continued Holcombe, Dr. Arthur N., Chairman, Appeals Board, War Produc- Jacobstein, Dr. Meyer, staff director, Senate Postwar Committee.. Jump, William A., budget officer, United States Department of Agri- Kefauver, Estes, Representative from Tennessee. Kornblum, Daniel, Union for Democratic Action___. La Follette, Charles M., Representative from Indiana.... La Follette, Robert M., Jr., United States Senator from Wisconsin. Lamb, Robert K., legislative representative, United Steelworkers of McCarran, Pat, United States Senator from Nevada__. Mansfield, Dr. Harvey, Yale University Maverick, Maury, Chairman, Smaller War Plants Corporation Miller, A. L., Representative from Nebraska__ Morrow, Malcomb, Chief, Division of Public Inquiries, Office of War Mundt, Karl E., Representative from South Dakota_ Poage, W. R., Representative from Texas-- Priest, J. Percy, Representative from Tennessee_ Pusey, Merlo J., editorial writer and columnist, Washington Post.. Randolph, Jennings, Representative from West Virginia__ Rees, Edward H., Representative from Kansas__. Rhame, William T., associate, Robert Heller & Associates, Cleveland. Association Sifton, Paul, Union for Democratic Action___ Silvey, Ted F., chairman, CIO Reconversion Committee_. Smith, George H. E., research assistant to the Senate Minority Leader. Smith, Howard W., Representative from Virginia_. Stone, Mrs. Harold A., National League of Women Voters-- Taft, Robert A., United States Senator from Ohio.... Tydings, Millard E., United States Senator from Maryland.. Wherry, Kenneth S., United States Senator from Nebraska---- THE ORGANIZATION OF CONGRESS SUMMARY OF HEARINGS BEFORE THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE ORGANIZATION OF CONGRESS March 13, 1945 The Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress opened its hearings today. The following members of the committee were present: Senators La Follette, chairman, Pepper, Thomas, and White; and Representatives Monroney, vice chairman, Cox, Lane, and Plumley. Senator La Follette opened the hearings with a statement sketching the background of the committee's inquiry, the development of congressional interest in self-improvement, and evidence of public interest in legislative reform. "Congress has recognized the challenge," he said, "by creating this joint committee to make a full and complete study and recommendations for improvement." The chairman paid high tribute to the late Senator Maloney, coauthor of the resolution under which the joint committee is operating, and lamented his untimely death. Senator La Follette went on to describe the committee's plan of action, stating that it has begun its inquiry with a survey of congressional opinion upon methods for strengthening the Congress. "Later on," he said, "the committee will hear other interested groups and individuals." Senator McCarran, of Nevada, chairman of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, was the first witness. Senator McCarran invited the committee's attention to the resolution (S. Res. 40) which he introduced on January 22, empowering the standing committees of the Senate to make investigations and conduct studies of matters within their jurisdiction. "This resolution aims," he said, "to obviate the necessity of setting up special investigating committees to study matters already within the jurisdiction of the existing standing committees." Senator McCarran voiced his objection to the censorship and control exercised over the expenditures of the standing committees of the Senate by the Committee to Audit and Control. As an example of the crippling effect of such control, he pointed to the inability of the Judiciary Committee, because of lack of adequate funds, to make the study authorized by the Shipstead resolution of the operation of executive agencies. Representative John J. Cochran, of Missouri, chairman of the House Committee on Accounts, was the second witness. Mr. Cochran expressed regret at the limitations imposed upon the joint committee in section 2 of its authorizing resolution. He thought that the committee should have been given power to recommend legislation directly to both Houses, pointing out that the Committees on Rules could veto any or all recommendations ultimately made by the joint committee. Mr. Cochran welcomed the creation of this committe and expressed the hope that it would make a comprehensive study and not merely confine its recommendations to increased compensation for congressional personnel. The main points made by Mr. Cochran were as follows: The Office of Legislative Counsel should be strengthened; Congress should be equipped with adequate research facilities to serve all its committees and Members; an Investigation Division should be established in the General Accounting Office to make particular studies for standing committees; as a first step in this direction, he pointed out that the Independent Offices Appropriation Act provides $65,000 for this purpose. Mr. Cochran observed that the House of Representatives had already authorized several special investigating committees in the Seventy-ninth Congress; he expressed his objection to this device, feeling with Senator McCarran that investigations should be made by the standing committees, with the assistance of the General Accounting Office. The Congressman also expressed himself as favoring the de vice of joint committees with joint staffs like the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation. Mr. Cochran thought that the number of standing committees iz the House might well be reduced to not more than 20 by dropping the inactive committees and consolidating those with overlapping jurisdictions. He gave several examples of possible committee consolidations. Mr. Cochran also deplored the frequent turn-over among committee clerks every time a change in chairmanship occurred. These clerical positions, he felt, should be career jobs and the standing committees should be restaffed with qualified nonpartisan personnel. He gave the House Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments as an example of a committee which lacks a staff adequate to perform its functions. There ensued a general round-table discussion among the members of the joint committee present, with special reference to the problem of adequate staffing, the resources and needs of the Legislative Reference Service in the Library of Congress, the use of exclusive committees in the House, the scope of the study to be made, and related matters. MARCH 15, 1945 The Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress continued its hearings today, pursuant to House Concurrent Resolution 18 The following members of the committee were present: Senator La Follette, chairman; and Representatives Monroney, vice chairman, Cox, Lane, and Michener. Congressman Voorhis of California was the first witness. Mr. Voorhis opened his statement by stressing the vital importance of the decisions facing Congress on postwar foreign and domestic prob lems. In order to meet these tasks effectively, he argued, Congres must be better organized and equipped than it now is. There widespread public interest in, and support for, changes in legislative organization and operation designed to strengthen the Congress, he said. Representative Voorhis submitted to the committee a series of specific suggestions under the following headings: 1. Staffing. Both the individual Members, the committees, and Congress as a whole, he said, should be adequately staffed. Individual Members should be provided with administrative assistants at perhaps $7,500 a year to assist them in their office and departmental work and they should be also furnished with more technical assistants. Likewise, the supervisory and legislative committees of both Chambers should be equipped, according to Representative Voorhis, with their own qualified, expert staffs. These committees now receive much valuable information from departmental experts, he admitted, as well as from representatives of special-interest groups, but such advice often amounts to special pleading, or is ex parte in character. He felt that Congress ought not to rely solely on interested agencies and private groups for guidance, but that it should equip itself with independent sources of reliable information. He paid tribute to the Legislative Reference Service in the Library of Congress, which is handicapped, he said, by low salary levels and should be strengthened. The Legislative Reference Service was described as a fact-finding not a policy-recommending agency. In support of his recommendation under this heading, Mr. Voorhis invited the committee's attention to two bills recently introduced by him: H. R. 5486 (78th Cong.) and H. R. 628 (79th Cong.) which would create a Joint Legislative Staff Service for the Congress, etc. In comments at this point, Mr. Michener raised the question of the danger of patronage appointments to the legislative staff and Mr. Monroney suggested that the committees have both majority and minority staff aids. 2. Committee structure.-Representative Voorhis advocated simplification of the committee structure of Congress through the process of consolidation. However, some committees, he felt, have too much to do and should be subdivided. Here he suggested that the Ways and Means Committee might well confine itself to taxation and be relieved of jurisdiction over legislation pertaining to social security. The seniority rule on committee chairmanships, he felt, is not always satisfactory, but he had no substitute to suggest. 3. Leadership. In order to furnish the Congress with that unity of command which it now lacks, Representative Voorhis proposed the establishment of Majority and Minority Policy Committees, to be composed of the chairmen and ranking minority members, respectively, of the major committees, and to be assigned the responsibility of taking an over-all view of national policies and coordinating the legislative program. In at least one field, he pointed out, Congress has already moved in this direction by setting up special Senate and House Committees on Postwar Economic Policy and Planning. The speaker deprecated the practice of embodying legislation in appropriation bills and the tendency of legislative committees to give the right-of-way to legislation originating in the departments and to subordinate private member bills. In this connection, Mr. Monroney suggested the designation of a Docket Day, at regular intervals, when committees would give exclusive consideration to private member bills. 4. Functional group representation. Mr. Voorhis also proposed the creation of a National Advisory Council, representing the various or |