Reorganization Plan No. 5 of 1950

The committee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to notice, in room 1501 of the New House Office Building, Hon. Chet Holifield (presiding). Mr. HOLIFIELD. The committee will please come to order.

We have met this morning to consider House Resolution 546, submitted by Mr. Bryson.

(H. Res. 546, Reorganization Plan No. 5 of 1950, and the President's message follow :)

[H. Res. 546, 81st Cong., 2d sess.]

RESOLUTION

Resolved, That the House of Representatives does not favor the Reorganization Plan Numbered 5 transmitted to Congress by the President on May 13, 1950.

[H. Doc. No. 509, 81st Cong., 2d sess.]

MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TRANSMITTING REORGANIZATION PLAN No, 5 of 1950 PROVIDING FOR REORGANIZATIONS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

To the Congress of the United States:

I transmit herewith Reorganization Plan No. 5 of 1950, prepared in accordance with the Reorganization Act of 1949 and providing for reorganizations in the Department of Commerce. My reasons for transmitting this plan are stated in an accompanying general message.

After investigation I have found and hereby declare that each reorganization included in Reorganization Plan No. 5 of 1950 is necessary to accomplish one or more of the purposes set forth in section 2 (a) of the Reorganization Act of 1949.

I have found and hereby declare that it is necessary to include in the accompanying reorganization plan, by reason of reorganizations made thereby, provisions for the appointment and compensation of an Administrative Assistant Secretary of Commerce. The rate of compensation fixed for this officer is that which I have found to prevail in respect of comparable officers in the executive branch of the Government.

The taking effect of the reorganizations included in this plan may not in itself result in substantial immediate savings. However, many benefits in improved operations are probable during the next years which will result in a reduction in expenditures as compared with those that would be otherwise necessary. An itemization of these reductions in advance of actual experience under this plan is not practicable.

THE WHITE HOUSE, March 13, 1950.

REORGANIZATION PLAN No. 5 OF 1950

HARRY S. TRUMAN.

Prepared by the President and transmitted to the Senate and the House of Representatives in Congress assembled, March 13, 1950, pursuant to the provisions of the Reorganization Act of 1949, approved June 20, 1949

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

SECTION 1. Transfer of functions to the Secretary.—(a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) of this section, there are hereby transferred to the Secretary of Commerce all functions of all other officers of the Department of Commerce and all functions of all agencies and employees of such Department. (b) This section shall not apply to the functions vested by the Administrative Procedure Act (60 Stat. 237) in hearing examiners employed by the Department of Commerce, nor to the functions of the Civil Aeronautics Board, of the Inland Waterways Corporation, or of the Advisory Board of the Inland Waterways Corporation.

SEC. 2. Performance of functions of Secretary.-The Secretary of Commerce may from time to time make such provisions as he shall deem appropriate authorizing the performance by any other officer, or by any agency or employee, of the Department of Commerce of any function of the Secretary, including any function transferred to the Secretary by the provisions of this reorganization plan.

SEC. 3. Administrative Assistant Secretary.-There shall be in the Department of Commerce an Administrative Assistant Secretary of Commerce, who shall be appointed, with the approval of the President, by the Secretary of Commerce under the classified civil service, who shall perform such duties as the Secretary of Commerce shall prescribe, and who shall receive compensation at the rate of $14,000 per annum.

SEC. 4. Incidental transfers.-The Secretary of Commerce may from time to time effect such transfers within the Department of Commerce of any of the records, property, personnel, and unexpended balances (available or to be made available) of appropriations, allocations, and other funds of such Department as he may deem necessary in order to carry out the provisions of this reorganization plan.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. We have as our first witness this morning our colleague, Congressman Bryson, from South Carolina.

Congressman Bryson, do you have a prepared statement, or do you wish to make a general statement?

STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH R. BRYSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Mr. BRYSON. Mr. Chairman, I do have a prepared statement. The copies are either here or will be here.

I would like to state to the chairman and to the committee that we had no notice of this meeting until after we adjourned last night, and consequently are taken somewhat by surprise. Then, too, I have two other meetings at this same hour in other buildings, one of which I am chairman of, and a hearing is going on now. So, as the author of the resolution which would stay the effect of the President's Reorganization Plan No. 5, I am appearing more or less in a perfunctory capacity, because it is common knowledge that I know little or nothing about patents. But there is a gentleman here eminently qualified to speak; in fact, more than one, our own former colleague, Congressman Fritz Lanham, from Texas, and Mr. Watson, the vice president or vice chairman of the American Patent Law Association.

With that statement, that is about all I have to say, unless someone wants to ask me questions.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Thank you very much.

Mr. BRYSON. I would like to have the statement that I sent to the committee put in the record at this point.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. That will be done, unless there is objection; and I see there is none.

(The statement referred to follows:)

STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH R. BRYSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

I am offering a House resolution disapproving of Reorganization Plan No. 5 of 1950 which was messaged to the Congress by the President of the United States on March 13, 1950. As the Members realize, the Reorganization Act of 1949 provides that the reorganization plan becomes effective 60 days after its presentation to Congress, unless either body of the Congress by majority resolution disapproves the plan within the stated time. Reorganization Plan No. 5 will become effective at midnight, May 24, unless either body of the Congress takes such negative action.

I am chairman of Subcommittee No. 4 of the House Judiciary Committee. My subcommittee has initial jurisdiction, as delegated by the Judiciary Committee, over legislation concerning patents, trade-marks, and copyrights. The subcommittee was recently approached by a delegation of eminent patent attorneys representing the American Patent Law Association and other substantial organizations in that field, with seemingly sound arguments in opposition to Reorganization Plan No. 5 because of its transfer of functions of the Commissioner of Patents to the Secretary of Commerce. As represented by them, the plan would convey to the Secretary of Commerce all of the discretionary functions now residing in the Commissioner of Patents. Because of the fact that the Patent Office is an institution of the Government exercising quasi-judicial func tions, it was the unanimous judgment of the subcommittee that the result would be very harmful to the American patent system. Moreover, the subcommittee has been assured by responsible people that the reorganization plan would create no new efficiencies nor would it effect any economies in the operation of the Patent Office.

The Reorganization Act of 1949 provides that any Member opposing a plan of reorganization recommended by the President can offer a resolution disapproving the plan. Such resolution is referred to the appropriate committee of the House, which is given 10 days within which to consider and take action upon it. In absence of such action, provision is made in the act for bringing the resoultion up on the floor of the House as a privileged matter for debate.

A few days ago Senator Wiley introduced such a resolution in the Senate disapproving Reorganization Plan No. 5, which he did with the consent and approval of the full Judiciary Committee. The reasons for this action on the part of Senator Wiley were described in full in a statement which he inserted in the Record at the time he introduced the resolution. I heartily endorse the sentiments he described in that statement.

As I see it, it was never the plan of the Hoover group to substantially interfere with agencies of the Government exercising judicial functions. However, it has been apparently overlooked that the Patent Office is such an agency, and I am more than fearful that the transfer of discretionary functions from the Commissioner of Patents to the Secretary of Commerce might, at some future time when an incumbent of the latter office may be of different stamp from the present incumbent, cause the basic theory and purposes of our patent system to be substantially impeded or altogether thwarted by an unwise exercise of discretion on the part of the Cabinet officer who may lack the professional qualifications requisite to a proper appreciation of the patent system. It is significant to note that the plan in question specifically exempts, among others, the functions of the Civil Aeronautics Board, presumably on the theory that it is an agency exercising judicial functions. If that be the case, then I see no logical distinction between the Civil Aeronautics Board on the one hand and the Patent Office on the other. Indeed, the Patent Office represents an ancient and time-honored institution in this country, and a body no less authoritative than the Supreme Court of the United States has gone on record to describe in detail their view of the importance that the functions of the Patent Office be discharged by experts who are professionally qualified in that field, without interference by offices in higher echelons of the executive branch of the Government.

I am mindful of the fact that, in order to gain maximum benefit from the over-all scheme of governmental reorganization proposed by the Hoover Commission, it is essential that the plans pursuant thereto be not whittled away by one exception after another. However, I am convinced that the Hoover Committee committed error in proposing a plan on the reorganization of the

« Previous Continue »

Books