е

the Senate in shaping revenue legislation has been steadily on the increase, until it now frankly assumes, under its power to make amendments, what is for practical purposes the right of initiating revenue measures. For example, in 1871, the House passed an act repealing the existing duties on tea and coffee — a brief measure only a few lines long; and the Senate substituted for this proposal of a slight change, "an act to decrease existing taxes," designed to bring about a general revision of the laws imposing duties and internal taxes—in all a measure of some twenty printed pages. The House protested against this action on the part of the Senate, declaring it to be in conflict with the true intention and purpose of the clause of the Constitution which requires revenue bills to originate in the lower branch of the legislature. During the debate on the subject in the House, Mr. Garfield said: "It is clear to my mind that the Senate's power to amend is limited to the subject-matter of the bill. That limit is natural, is definite, and can be clearly shown. If there had been no precedent in the case, I should say that a House bill relating solely to revenue on salt could not be amended by adding to it clauses raising revenue on textile fabrics, but that all the amendments of the Senate should relate to the duty on salt. To admit that the Senate can take a House bill consisting of two lines, relating specifically and solely to a single article, and can graft upon that bill in the name of an amendment a whole system of tariff and internal taxation, is to say that they may exploit all the meaning out of the clause of the Constitution which we are considering, and may rob the House of the last vestige of its rights under that clause." In spite of the protest on the part of the House, the Senate was able to force the adoption of a considerable portion of its plan of revision.

Again in 1894, the Wilson tariff bill as it came from the House of Representatives was sadly mutilated in the Senate. In fact, "its revenue reform principles were hardly recognizable"; but in the conference committee the House of Representatives was forced to yield on almost all the points. Again, in 1909, when the Payne tariff bill came from the House of Representatives, it was referred to the finance committee of the Senate, of which Mr. Aldrich was chairman, and when reported back from that committee it was in many important respects a new bill.' As it

In fact the Senate Committee had virtually prepared its own bill before the House bill was referred to it.

finally passed the Senate it contained a number of radical departures from the provisions of the House bill and in spite of the intervention of President Taft many of them were adopted during the sessions of the conference committee. It is generally believed that Mr. Aldrich exerted a far greater influence in the drafting of this revenue measure than did Mr. Payne, chairman of the ways and means committee in the House of Representatives.

The actual work of preparing revenue bills in the House is assigned to the committee on ways and means. Tariff measures are drawn up by the members of the committee representing the party which has a majority in the House. When it becomes apparent that the temper of the country is demanding a revision of the tariff, the House of Representatives generally authorizes the committee to gather information preparatory to the adoption of the new schedules. For example, in the spring of 1908, the committee on ways and means was authorized, on the motion of its chairman, Mr. Payne, to sit during the recess of Congress and hold hearings to collect information upon which to base a revision of the tariff; and at the same time the Senate adopted a resolution authorizing its finance committee to secure expert assistance in making tariff investigations both before and after the introduction of the tariff bill in the House of Representatives.

It is a common practice for the committee to hold many sessions which are attended by the representatives of the various industries of the nation as well as by consumers and other persons interested in the tariff, who advance their respective claims for protection or for reduction.' When the majority members of the committee have taken all the evidence that they desire and thoroughly considered the issues involved, they draw up a complete bill which is sometimes discussed in the full committee. Inasmuch as a tariff bill is always a political measure, the minority members on the committee are generally not consulted at all, and may in fact know nothing about the exact provisions of the bill until it is reported to the House. The minority, of course, may present

1 See Readings, p. 333, for the interesting extract from Mr. Dingley's Memoirs, describing the preparations of the Dingley bill. The hearings are always one-sided. It is the "interests" who prosecute their case with great zeal. Few consumers have the personal interest or knowledge to make their appearance before the committee effective.

a report of their own by way of protest, but it seldom amounts to anything.

When a revenue bill is reported to the House by the chairman of the committee on ways and means, it is debated in the committee of the whole on the state of the Union. The discussion at first is quite general, so that practically every member who has anything to say about the proposed measure is given an opportunity. The general debate is then followed by a debate on details under the five-minute rule. From time to time as the discussion proceeds, the committee on ways and means will report changes, the chairman of that committee as an astute party leader being quick to perceive the points on which it is expedient and necessary to yield. The bill as modified under the pressure of debate is generally passed by the House under "the previous question."

When the measure reaches the Senate, it is promptly referred to the committee on finance which has, as a matter of fact, been busy on its own bill and has watched with close scrutiny the progress of the discussion in the House. After making amendments or substituting practically a new bill, the committee makes its report to the Senate. The debate in that body, as we have seen, is unlimited; and the tariff measure usually receives far more penetrating criticism there than in the House.

After its passage, the bill purporting to be the original measure with Senate amendments is returned to the House, which promptly votes not to concur in the Senate amendments and asks for a conference. The Speaker, thereupon, appoints the chairman of the committee on ways and means and some other members to represent the House, and the presiding officer of the Senate selects the chairman of the committee on finance and certain other members to represent that body. The conference committee immediately begins a series of sessions which always end in a compromise, the Senate receding from some of its amendments and the House yielding on others. Sometimes the conference committee takes into its confidence the President, whose views as party leader with regard to the tariff cannot be neglected. As is well known, President Taft exerted a considerable influence in the conference committee discussions in 1909 which led to an adjustment of the differences between the two houses. Throughout these various operations on the bill, it must be remembered, many provisions are framed with a certain knowledge that a

compromise will ultimately result. A compromise, therefore, is frequently no compromise. When the conference committee has come to an agreement, its report is immediately submitted to the House, where it is passed without amendment and then sent to the Senate, where it is likewise speedily accepted. Thereupon the bill goes to the President for his signature.

This method of drafting revenue measures is attended by some serious drawbacks. In the first place, no man or group of men can assume full responsibility for it. The President, who may have been elected on a platform favoring the reduction of the tariff, can do nothing more than exert such influence as his position and party leadership may give him. His veto of a tariff bill would be an extremely drastic measure of control, resulting in great confusion to the business interests awaiting a settlement. In the House, the chairman of the committee on ways and means might be held at least partially responsible, were it not for the fact that the Senate has such an unlimited amending power.

In actual practice the most important points of contention are settled in the conference committee, so it may be said that the final word on tariff policy and revenue measures is said by a committee unknown to the Constitution. This is especially true because both houses are in practice constrained to accept the measure as reported from this committee, fearing to reopen a long and tedious debate and thus delay the conclusion of the matter indefinitely. The complete bill is, therefore, not a measure which has received in every point careful consideration by a responsible legislature; it is a series of compromises rushed through in its final form without deliberation. The great defects of this system are two: absence of precise responsibility and a tendency to cause the prolongation of an outworn tariff policy on account of serious obstacles in the way of a speedy and effective revision.

Appropriation Bills

The preparation of appropriation bills, unlike the preparation of revenue bills, is not concentrated in the hands of any single committee in the House of Representatives, but is intrusted to a number of committees. In the beginning of our history, when expenditures were relatively small, they were practically all prepared by the committee on ways and means, thus affording

some coördination between the taxing and spending branches of the government; but in 1865, in view of the extraordinary expenses incurred by the war, a standing committee on appropriations was created. On the ground that no single group of men can give a speedy and careful scrutiny to the whole range of appropriation measures, one class of appropriations after another has been taken away from this committee and intrusted to other committees until, as a result, the work of preparing appropriations in the House of Representatives is broken up so that there are now no less than fourteen general appropriation bills prepared by seven different committees.

The committee on appropriations has charge of the legislative, executive, and judicial bill, the sundry civil, District of Columbia, fortifications, pension, urgency deficiency, and general deficiency bills. The agricultural bill is reported by the committee on agriculture; the army bill and military academy bill, by the committee on military affairs; the naval bill, by the committee on naval affairs; the diplomatic and consular bill, by the committee on foreign affairs; the post-office bill, by the committee on the post-offices and post-roads; the Indian bill, by the committee on Indian affairs. Each of these appropriation bills must be prepared and passed annually, for a general appropriation bill, except in the matter of deficiency, merely provides for the coming fiscal year, dating from July first. There are, in addition, large "permanent " appropriations for fortifications, river and harbor improvements, etc., which are paid out under a general law as long as authorized.

The basis for appropriations is afforded by the Book of Estimates transmitted to the House of Representatives by the Secretary of the Treasury. This bulky volume of figures embraces the estimates compiled by the several departments which are supposed to indicate their respective needs. These estimates are placed in the hands of the several committees having charge of appropriations, but up to the present time they have been regarded as little more than useful suggestions.

In the preparation of their bills the committee on appropriations and the other committees in charge of appropriations are really compelled to work more or less blindly. Sometimes they hold extensive hearings endeavoring to get a complete grasp of

1

1 For the character of an appropriation bill, see Readings, p. 341.