OCR Text |
Show National Topics Interpreted j J i;"u..V?.Y by William Bruckart feDT' Njl,-nl frf-n RulUllnir Washington. P. C .rijj-Ljji Washington. Frcsidont Roosevelt tt.ited to the newspaper correspondents correspond-ents In his press H'anf j Crop conference the ath- Control Back " d!1V h! crP control must be brought back. He said it with some emphasis. Witliin a tew days before that, he had given his approval to a bill placing a minimum on wages and a maximum on hours in which labor could work in industries whose productions enter into interstate commerce. The President was not specific as to details of the legislation in either case but it is important to note that he has reaffirmed his position on these two principles for it is to be remembered that both the NKA and the AAA were thrown out by the Supreme Su-preme court a long time ago. and the President seeks now to restore ihem in another form. This circumstance would seem to confirm assertions that have been made in various quarters lately that the President wants to maintain a "planned economy" for this country. coun-try. It would seem that he is determined de-termined to go ahead along those lines and that his program for reorganizing reor-ganizing the Supreme court was a part and parcel of the scheme. In other words, the President's new declaration about crop control and wages and hours and his support of the Wagner housing bill represent a return to the original theories which he held for "'remaking" our nation. After discussing these circumstances circum-stances pro and con with proponents as well as opponents in the congress, con-gress, the conclusion is inescapable that Mr. Roosevelt and his advisers are headed into new ground. They desire evidently to make the federal government the most important factor fac-tor in our national life and to set aside little bv littlp thp functions nf state and local governments by their course of action. Undoubtedly there is strong argument argu-ment for the policies they have adopted; certainly, there are many functions which the national government govern-ment can perform more effectively and more efficiently than they can be performed by state governments, and equally, it is true that some phases of our national life should not I be subjected to the influence of state hues. On the other hand, there surely sure-ly is valid reason why Washington bureaucrats should not be allowed to interfere in the daily practices and convictions of individuals. The reason I believe all of this is so important now is that always there has been a tendency of federal fed-eral functions to expand. To say this in another way: Federal officials of-ficials from the lowest to the highest high-est seem to be equipped with a particular par-ticular faculty for delegating to themselves additional authority as soon as they are accorded power. What the country should fear then, it seems to me, is the steady encroachment en-croachment upon the rights of states and thereafter the rights of individuals. individ-uals. Perhaps I should have reversed re-versed the order and should have said, first, encroachment upon the rights of individuals and, second, thereafter encroachment upon the rights of states. Now, there are those persons in considerable number who believe sincerely that the federal government govern-ment is the agency through which all public functions should operate. I cannot agree. Rather, long experience ex-perience in Washington convinces me that the old. old argument for state rights so long one of the tenets ten-ets of the Democratic party has too much merit to be overthrown without consideration for the effects of the new theories. It may be that human nature has changed enough to accept new theories and live happily thereunder but I am quite convinced that human nature does not change so fast To get down to cases in application applica-tion of the principles discussed above, let us con-Wages con-Wages and sider the wages Hours Bill and hours bill That measure shows how this encroachment takes place and gives a rather clear picture pic-ture of the expansive nature of federal fed-eral policies. The wages and hours bill first creates cre-ates a labor standards board. It is circumscribed by certain limitations which say that it cannot fix wages above forty cents per hour nor can it reduce the number of working hours per week below forty. Further, Fur-ther, a great number of lines of work are exempted from jurisdiction jurisdic-tion of the board work of a seasonal season-al character, farm labor, labor in certain specified industries which obviously cannot be subject to regulation regu-lation without destruction of the business itself. Besides these restrictions, re-strictions, there is an implied warning warn-ing in the bill against sudden or abrupt changes in business practices prac-tices that would dislocate industrial operation or curtail employment. These delimitations would seem to leave the board without a great deal of authority. Such, however, is not the case. Among those industries remaining under the jurisdiction of the board, there is yet as much power pow-er as obtained under NRA and its codes which were so hidebound and so inelastic that thousands of firms were in open rebellion against the restrictions unless they were able to pass on the higher costs resulting from these restrictions, to the public. pub-lic. That Is, unless they could make the consumer pay the added cost, they faced eventual bankruptcy. I do not say that the labor standards stand-ards board as now conceived will go as far as the NRA codes but experience expe-rience with the present national labor la-bor relations board indicates that the public should expect the maximum maxi-mum exercise of power instead of any middle of the road policies. The labor relations board has become a festering sore on private initiative. Business interests everywhere, while being pounded on the back by the administration to employ more workers, are kept in a constant con-stant state of confusion by the bias of the board. This is the board which w as designed by Senator Wagner, of New York, to maintain peace between be-tween labor and employers. If the labor la-bor standards board can use the discretionary dis-cretionary powers accorded It and can proceed in correcting abuses of labor as rapidly as is "economically feasible," it may be able to develop better conditions in industry. But such language as the words "economically "eco-nomically feasible." are subject to all kinds of interpretation and if the membership of the labor standards board happens to include some radical rad-ical labor leader, most anything will be economically feasible. It is from such quirks of law that bureaucrats expand their powers. But there is yet another phase of this policy that demands consideration. consider-ation. While the Another United States is Phase one urnt under the federal govern ment, it is made up of a number of sectional units and each sectional unit comprises a number of states and even each state in some cases embraces subdivisions where practices prac-tices in business and living traditions are as different as day and night A regulation as to the fairness of hours or wages in New England may be, and probably would be, wholly inapplicable inap-plicable in Alabama or Georgia. A regulation that would operate satisfactorily sat-isfactorily in Pennsylvania may be, and probably would be, completely sour in the Pacific coast states. Yet this board cannot administer its regulations on a piece-meal basis; they must apply to the whole country coun-try and it is only fair to assume from the existing facts that whereas where-as rulings may be advantageous to some sections of labor, they might completely destroy other sections of labor. The same results can be expected ex-pected from the effects of these rulings rul-ings on the employers, except that where the effect is adverse on employers em-ployers businesses can be driven into bankruptcy and the jobs they provided disappear. I think there can be no argument that no law will be successful unless it has the co-operation, the active support, of a very large majority of the people. If proof be needed, it is only necessary to recall how the prohibition laws were not enforced in those areas whe,re public sympathy sym-pathy with them was lacking. It does not require very much time to determine whether a law is popular. popu-lar. During the life of the NRA. those who opposed such impossible regulations as General Hugh Johnson John-son dictated were branded by President Presi-dent Roosevelt at first as "chisel-ers." "chisel-ers." It was a biting criticism. Yet, within a few months there were more chiselers than there were those who believed that the law could possibly be made to work. I am very much afraid that there will be more chiselers under the wages and hours law than there are those who believe in its efficacy. The initial operations of the board and the law probably will not create a great deal of Both Sides dissension. But Will Buck 'here will be disgruntled dis-gruntled groups of workers and there will be dissatisfied dissatis-fied employers who will seek exemption ex-emption or changes or special consideration con-sideration by regulation. In some cases, obviously, the. board will issue is-sue new rules. As likely as not those new rules will upset some other oth-er group or region or section and they will demand consideration. Just here, it might be recalled how under the AAA crop control law, wheat, cotton and corn were originally considered but tobacco had to have protection and rice and potatoes and peanuts, and every other farm product had its champions cham-pions battling for consideration before be-fore the Supreme court held that the law with its processing taxes was an invalid delegation of power by congress. Therefore, while I may be "seeing things" concerning the labor standards board and the new proposal for crop control, the records surely support my statement state-ment that anytime the federal government gov-ernment starts a new policy it begins be-gins at the same time to enable expansion ex-pansion of federal power far beyond the original concept of a program. Western Newspaper Union. |