The intro- sidered. However, while the Speaker can prevent the House from considering a bill, he can never force it to pass a bill against its wishes. On the other hand, all the Speaker's powers come from the majority, and are held only at its will. And whenever a majority of the House is sufficiently determined to pass a measure, it can always do so, sooner or later, notwithstanding all the Speaker can do. However the Speaker and his party almost always work together. When they disagree, nine times out of ten the Speaker has to yield. 106. How the House Disposes of Its Business Mr. Dalzell has given in an article in the Independent the following brief account of the way in which the mass of business before the House is handled. In the last Congress (59th) there were 386 members (in this Congress there are 391), and there were introduced a total of bills and resolutions numbering 27,114. It goes without saying that not all of these bills could be considered nor could all of these members have a hearing. Theoretically every member of the House is the equal of every other member; every constituency is entitled to equal recognition with every other constituency, but practically there cannot be 391 Speakers; there cannot be 391 chairmen of committees, nor equal recognition for debate given to 391 members. The real purpose, then, to be accomplished by the rules is the selection from the mass of bills introduced those proper to be considered. There is no limitation on the right of a member to introduce bills; as many as he likes and of whatever character he pleases. Every bill introduced goes to an appropriate committee for consideration, and whether or not it gets upon a House calendar for action depends upon its being reported by the committee. It may never be reported, and, of course, if not reported can never be considered in the House. In the last Congress, of the 27,114 bills and resolutions introduced there were 7,839 reported; the others remained in the pigeon-holes of the various committees. Of the bills reported, 7,423 were considered and passed. priation bills. Bills when reported go upon certain calendars of the House 1. Revenue according to their character. Revenue and appropriation bills: and approthese are few in number, not to exceed perhaps twenty. They come from the Committee on Ways and Means, whose office it is to provide revenue for the Government, and from the Committee on Appropriations, and from the several committees having to do with the maintenance of the Government in its various arms, such as the Naval Committee, the Military Committee and others. These bills when reported go to a calendar known as the Union Calendar, but they are highly privileged, as they ought to be, for without their passage the Government wheels would stop. They can be called for consideration at any time. They take precedence of all other bills, and the Speaker has no alternative but to recognize the member calling them up. These bills are considered, not in the House, but in Committee of the Whole; the Speaker leaves the chair and another member takes his place. 2. General bills carrying no appropriations. Another class of bills are such as relate to some public purpose, but carry no appropriation, such, for instance, as bridge bills and the like. To a large extent bills from the important committees on the Judiciary and on Interstate and Foreign Commerce are of this class. These bills go on the House calendar and are entitled to consideration in the morning hour. There being no privileged bills for consideration, the morning hour is the regular order. The Speaker must call the committees in their alphabetical order, and then the chairman of the committee which has the call is entitled to recognition by the Speaker as of right. The House then proceeds to the consideration of such bill reported by the committee in question and then on the House calendar as the chairman calls up, and continues its consideration until a vote is had, subject only to a possible interruption at the end of sixty minutes, to which I will refer hereafter. But even if interrupted its consideration is continued thereafter, when business of that character 3: Private is in order, until it is finally disposed of. bills and measures for the District of In addition to public bills such as I have enumerated, some carrying an appropriation and others not, there is another class of Columbia. 4. General bills involving appropriations. Unanimous consent. bills, the most numerous of all private bills providing for the relief of private individuals or corporations. These have a calendar of their own called the private calendar, and are in order on every Friday of each week. They are, generally speaking, bills from the Committee on Claims, from the Committee on War Claims and from the Committee on Pensions. As to these bills the Speaker has no independent right of recognition. When addressed by the chairman of the appropriate committee on a Friday he must recognize him, and unless the House declines to consider these bills the Speaker must leave the chair and nominate a member to preside in his place. In the last Congress there were reported 6,834 private bills; 6,624 were passed, leaving 210 undisposed of. There is another class of bills that, like private bills, have a day of their own under the rules, viz., District of Columbia bills. As is well known, there is no right of suffrage in the District of Columbia, and the Senate and House act as its Select and Common Councils. District of Columbia bills are in order on two Mondays of every month. As to these bills, again the Speaker has no alternative but to recognize the Chairman of the District Committee when, on his allotted day, he calls up his business. A fourth class of bills provide for various matters of public concern and are such as involve a charge upon the Treasury. These go to the Union Calendar, and when considered must be considered in Committee of the Whole. At the end of the morning hour (sixty minutes) a motion may be made to go into Committee of the Whole for the consideration of bills on the Union Calendar or for the consideration of some particular bill thereon. This motion the Speaker is bound to entertain. Then a large part of the business of the House is done wholly outside of the rules, by unanimous consent. Some gentleman, for instance, arises in the House and, being recognized by the Speaker, asks "unanimous consent for the present consideration of the following bill." Unless objection is made the bill is considered and voted on. It is in connection with this practice and because of it that autocratic power is without any reason ascribed to the Speaker. But the rules have nothing at all to do with this. The applicant for recognition asks that all rules be set aside. To this any member of the House may object. Why should complaint be made if the Speaker exercises his right of objection by refusing to recognize an applicant for recognition in any particular case? Because he is Speaker he is no less a member of the House; no less a Representative of his Congressional District. If he were on the floor he could interpose an objection to any request for unanimous consent. Should he be less able to interpose that objection because he is in the chair? Certainly not. 107. Congress and Presidential Influence In a reply to an attack made by Senator Tillman on President Roosevelt for his insistence in forcing measures upon Congress, Senator Beveridge made this defense: of the President's Mr. President, why was it that Andrew Johnson had no influ- The basis ence with Congress and that Theodore Roosevelt has infinite influence with Congress? It is because one of them had not the influence. confidence of the people, and the other one has the entire confidence of the people. It is one of the most beautiful, as well as one of the most beneficent, workings of our popular form of government that any branch of it that at any particular period best represents the people has the confidence of the people. lost control. Why was it that in the last Democratic Administration its Presi- Why Cleveland dent lost the control of Congress almost as completely as did Andrew Johnson, and that the Senator's own party, together with his colleagues on this side had the confidence of the people? It was because they more accurately represented the people's thoughts, needs, demands, and aspirations. There is no subserviency upon this side of the chamber to any power on earth except to the public opinion of the American people. What the Senator thinks is subserviency to the demands of the President is only our Repub Popular support vs. patronage. The President voiced popular wisdom. lican harmony with those demands which are nothing more than the demands of the American people. Mr. President, strange to say the Senator indulges as politicians in search of any issue no matter how able they are, must unfailingly indulge, — in a paradox, one side of which destroys the other. The Senator described the President's power as coming from his appeals to "the ignorant masses" and in the same breath he said that that power comes from his use of patronage. Was it the use of patronage, Mr. President, that impressed Congress with the necessity of a single law that the President has recommended in the last seven historic years, the passage of which his recommendation helped to secure? Was it the use of patronage that got through the law establishing the Department of Commerce and Labor, perhaps the greatest and most important piece of legislation that has been passed by an American Congress since the Constitution was adopted, with perhaps the single exception of the Platt amendment? The Senator denounces us for voting for the very laws which the Senator and his colleagues seeking every excuse they could find for not voting for, yet were compelled to vote for. Take all of these great laws, which are a part of this mighty structure of righteousness which the wisdom of the American people, as voiced by the President, has enacted into statutes by this Congress on both sides does the Senator disagree with one of them? Would he repeal a single line of any of them? Does the Senator, speaking for his side propose to go before the American people with the proposition to abolish the Department of Commerce and Labor? No. To repeal the railway rate law? No. To repeal the pure food law? No. To repeal the meat inspection law? No. To repeal the irrigation law? No. To repeal or mangle a single one of those great laws which constitute the Republican legislative record, every one of which was passed upon the recommendation of the President made in his messages? No. |