if Congress shall adjourn before the expiration of sixty calendar days from the date of such transmission such Executive order shall not become effective until after the expiration of sixty calendar days from the opening day of the next succeeding regular or special session.

APPROPRIATIONS IMPOUNDED

SEC. 408. The appropriations or portions of appropriations unexpended by reason of the operation of this title shall not be used for any purpose but shall be impounded and returned to the Treasury.

TERMINATION OF POWER

SEC. 409. The authority granted to the President under section 403 shall terminate upon the expiration of two years after the date of enactment of this Act unless otherwise provided by Congress.

[PUBLIC-No. 2-73D CONGRESS]

[H. R. 2820]

AN ACT To maintain the credit of the United States Government

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled

TITLE III. AMENDMENTS TO LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATION ACT, FISCAL YEAR 1933

SECTION 1. Sections 407 and 409 of title IV of part II of the Legislative Appropriations Act, fiscal year 1933, as amended by section 17 of the Treasury and Post Office Appropriation Act, approved March 3, 1933, are amended to read as follows:

"SEC. 407. Whenever the President makes an Executive order under the provisions of this title, such Executive order shall be submitted to the Congress while in session and shall not become effective until after the expiration of sixty calendar days after such transmission, unless Congress shall by law provide for an earlier effective date of such Executive order or orders.

"SEC. 409. No executive order issued by the President in pursuance of the provisions of section 403 of this title shall become effective unless transmitted to the Congress within two years from the date of the enactment of this Act." Approved March 20, 1933.

Senator HARRISON. May I ask you in that connection if you have looked over the former acts that have been passed which created new departments and transferred certain functions from one department to the new departments?

Mr. GULICK. Yes, sir.

Senator HARRISON. And do they carry out the same general idea as this law?

Mr. GULICK. Since 1913 there have been two departments created, Commerce and Labor. In 1903 there was set up the Department of Commerce and Labor, and then they split that; they put Commerce in one Department and Labor in another Department in 1913.

The Overman Act, which was passed during the war, when President Wilson was in office, was another act dealing with the broad problem of reorganization. As you remember, a great many emergency agencies had been set up at that time. The problem arose as to what could be done with those, in fitting them into a more orderly structure.

Senator HARRISON. That was a war measure, was it not?

Mr. GULICK. That was a war measure, with a limited term of application. Now, in the Overman Act, the first effort was made to give the President general authority to make reorganizations. Be

fore that his powers of transfers had been attached to a specific department or a specific division.

Senator HARRION. What was the limitation of time? For the duration of the war?

Mr. GULICK. Yes; and that was terminated with the passage of a resolution by Congress officially setting a final date to the war condition.

In the Overman bill the language was as follows:

The President is hereby authorized to make such redistribution of functions among executive agencies as he may deem necessary, including any functions, duties, and powers hitherto by law conferred upon any executive department, commission, bureau, agency, office, or officer, in such manner as in his judg ment shall seem best fitted to carry out the purposes of this Act, and to this end is authorized to make such regulations and to issue such orders as he may deem necessary.

In presenting this bill it was rather interesting that Senator Overman, who handled the matter in the Senate, made the statement that he felt that though the action was couched in emergency terms it represented a type of legislation that could be permanently on the statute books. He said in the Senate:

So far as I am concerned, even if these were not wartimes, I would be in favor of this bill. Everybody familiar with the history of this country knows, and especially those 18 members on the Appropriations Committee with whom I have the honor to serve, that there is the most utter confusion and great duplication of work among the departments of government. Anyone knows, or should know it, that during the term of former President Taft, in time of peace, a resolution was introduced which the Senate passed, which practically gave him the authority now sought by the pending measure, but in relation to one subject only. Time and again Congress has acted on this question and given its authority for special objects.

Then he said:

From time to time we have been passing little popgun bills that ought to have been settled without coming to Congress. Eight or ten times Congress has been called upon to pass through the Senate and House bills which, if the President had the authority that this bill proposed to give him, we would have done without the delay always caused.

Senator HARRISON. What is the date of that resolution?

Mr. GULICK. The date of that resolution is-let me see. Was that 1917 or 1918? I have the text of the bill here.

Senator HARRISON. My recollection is that the purpose of that legislation was not so much the reorganization of departments; it was to cut out the red tape in the conduct of the war.

Mr. GULICK. I think that was advanced as well, but the powers given went beyond that to the more orderly reorganization. It came just at the end of the war period.

Senator TOWNSEND. It was termed "a war measure", was it not? Mr. GULICK. It was termed "a war measure", there is no question. about it.

Mr. BROWNLOW. It was approved May 20, 1918.

Representative VINSON. Now, you stated that there were some restrictions in that act. What were they?

Mr. GULICK. Well, the only restriction in that act had to do with the general purpose of the bill. As a matter of fact, I think that students of constitutional law today would say that the standards which were set in that bill were somewhat inadequate; that there

should be a more definite statement of the policy to be achieved in the draft of the act itself, as was done in the Economy Acts.

Senator HARRISON. Have you got the purposes of the legislation there as stated in the law?

Mr. GULICK. I want to see if the text of the law here is adequate to answer that. It starts in this fashion: The title was "An act authorizing the President to coordinate and to consolidate executive bureaus, agencies, and offices, and for other purposes, in the interest of economy and the more efficient concentration of the Government." That is the title of the act. Then it gives the enacting clause:

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That for the national security and defense, for the successful prosecution of the war, for the support and maintenance of the Army and Navy, for the better utilization of resources and industries, and for the more effective exercise and more efficient administraiton by the President of his powers as Commander in Chief of the land and naval forces, the President is hereby authorized to make such redistribution of functions among executive agencies as he may deem necessary—

as it is geared primarily to the war situation. Well, the Overman Act expired with the passage by Congress of the resolution fixing the date of termination of the war.

Senator BYRD. What was accomplished, Mr. Gulick, if anything, under the Overman Act?

Mr. GULICK. Practically nothing under the Overman Act. Then the next legislation of this character

Senator TOWNSEND (interposing). Pardon me there. You say nothing was accomplished. What were the reasons that nothing was was accomplished?

Mr. GULICK. Well, it was passed in May 1918.

Senator BYRNES. Six months before the end of the war.

Mr. GULICK. Mr. Hester, were any transfers made under the Overman Act?

Mr. HESTER. Oh, yes; there were quite a few transfers made. One Executive order making transfers was issued on or about May 31, 1918.

Senator BYRD. Were any bureaus abolished?

Mr. HESTER. No; I do not believe there were, Senator.

Senator BYRD. Mr. Chairman, I think we ought to have a statement as to what was accomplished.

Senator HARRISON. I happened to be a Member of Congress at that time, and I suppose you were.

Senator BYRNES. Yes.

Senator HARRISON. My recollection of the purpose of the legislation was that the whole thing was to wipe out red tape in the conduct of the war and to give to the President very broad powers. I do not know whether the War Industries Board was created under that act or not, but it will be recalled that it was in the War Industries Board that many of these things were put together, in order to more efficiently conduct the war.

Senator BYRNES. Mr. Gulick, Senator Byrd has asked that if have not the information now, you will supply hereafter any information you may have as to any transfers which resulted from the

act.

Senator BYRD. Especially whether any bureau activity was abolished under the legislation.

Representative TABER. I wonder, Mr. Chairman, if that is in print at the present time.

Senator BYRNES. As to what was done under the act?

Representative TABER. No; the act itself. As I recall reading about it, it related to a considerable number of other things besides the consolidation power, or the power to transfer functions.

Senator BYRNES. Mr. Taber, Mr. Gulick says he has a copy of the act in this statement that he has before him.

Representative TABER. Has he put that in the record?

Senator BYRNES. Yes. Will you proceed with your statement as to subsequent action?

Mr. GULICK. The subsequent action on this point, of real significance, was the two Economy Act provisions, one at the close of Mr. Hoover's administration and one at the beginning of Mr. Roosevelt's administration. You remember that President Hoover sent a message to Congress shortly before the end of his term outlining the need for reorganization of the Government, speaking of the neces sity of splitting the executive and judicial functions of regulatory commissions, tying the executive functions into the executive branch and providing for a continued separate existence for the quasijudicial functions, the general program being very much like that which we have suggested in our report.

As the result of that message to Congress the Economy Act provided that the President should be given power to reorganize, to transfer, to abolish agencies in the interest of economy; and provided that when he took action, through Executive order, to carry out any of the powers there stated, that the Executive order should lie before Congress, and either House of the Congress, either the Senate or the House, might, by resolution, veto the Executive order so that it would not go into effect.

Under the provisions of that act, the President did submit a reorganization in a certain division.

Senator BYRNES. When?

Mr. GULICK. Just before he left office.
Senator BYRNES. Have you the date?

Mr. HESTER. December 9, I think, 1932.

Mr. GULICK. And that was in what division, Mr. Hester?

Mr. HESTER. What is that?

Mr. GULICK. In what division did he suggest a reorganization? Mr. HESTER. Well, it was very broad. All the Executive orders were printed in the Congressional Record. I should say there were about a dozen Executive orders. They also appear in House Document 493, Seventy-second Congress, second session.

Senator BYRNES. To solve that, unless they are very voluminous, I would like to have you give those orders to the committee.

Mr. GULICK. Well, we could summarize the individual orders that were prepared.

Representative TABER. If they are in the Record, you could put the page of the Record and the date in.

Representative GIFFORD. Why not let the President's message itself go in there?

Representative TABER. I am afraid it would be pretty long.

Senator BYRNES. I think Mr. Taber's suggestion is sufficient, that you just refer to the page, and the date of the Record. I was merely

asking it for my own information, to recall to my mind the things that were done as the result of that act. If you put the pages in the record, as suggested by Congressman Taber, it will be satisfactory.

Mr. GULICK. All right.

Senator BYRNES. If you are going to give the history of what occurred as the result of the Executive order, I think that would follow.

Mr. GULICK. As the result of the presentation of that Executive order, a resolution was passed in the House vetoing the action that was taken.

Senator BYRNES. Nothing was accomplished.

Mr. GULICK. Mr. Hester, can you tell us what reorganizations were accomplished under it?

Mr. HESTER. That resolution of the House killed all those Executive orders and then later on Attorney General Mitchell rendered an opinion to the President (reported in 37 Ops. Attys. Gen., p. 56) in which he held that the provision in the Independent Offices Appropriation Act, which set up a congressional committee to pass upon refunds of internal-revenue taxes, was unconstitutional, and in that opinion he pointed out that the provision which authorized one House to disapprove reorganization Executive orders was unconstitutional. Senator Byrnes will recall that later on he discussed this opinion on the floor of the Senate, and that led to the amendment, on March 3, 1933, which required an act of Congress to veto one of these orders. The reason for it was, as Mr. Mitchell pointed out, that the Congress had made a proper delegation-that is, within safeguards to the President, and that therefore the only way that Congress could veto such an order would be by an act of Congress.

Senator BYRNES. You may proceed, Mr. Gulick.

Mr. GULICK. Then that same principle of veto through an act of Congress was introduced into the Economy Act which was passed immediately after that.

Mr. BROWNLOW. No; it was March 3.

Mr. GULICK. March 3; that is right. It was just the end of the Hoover administration, but it was amended to continue it for 2 years in the Roosevelt administration. Will you explain that, Mr. Hester?

Mr. HESTER. There was a strange thing about that. It was thought that that amendment extended the act to 20 years from the date of the amendment; but, as it was afterward construed the amendment did not extend the time and the act expired 2 years from June 30, 1932, the date of the original act.

Mr. GULICK. Yes. As the result of that opinion of the Attorney General necessitating that there must be a careful specification of the standards which were to be applied by the President in reorganization, the bill which we have drafted-Mr. Hester has draftedto represent the point of view presented by the committee, you will remember, in its opening sections, establishes with considerable care and practically within the language of the prior provisions of reorganization acts, the last two Economy Acts, the standards under which the President must act in carrying forward all reorganizations.