February 12, 1932

$5 per day •----- ------- ---------------------­ Do.2

60 days •---------­ $500 per year-------------------------------- Do. None. _. __ -------- $2,400 for 2 years ______ ---------------------- Do.

$12 per day ____________ -----·-·······-------- Do. year is shown if annual sessions a re held. '£he salary for 2 years is shown if sessions are biennial. incidental expenses was held unconstitutional.

vote in each house, in Virginia by three-fifths vote in each house for not more than 30 more days.

Mr. GIFFORD. I yield t~ gentlenmn from Wisconsin one additional minute that I may ask him a question.

Remarks have been made dir.ected to the point that if these amendments are carried the resolution will be defeated. Is it a fact that if the amendment is not incorporated that we may not get two-thirds vote for the resolution itself?

Mr. FREAR. Every gentleman who has risen in his place, I believe, and made remarks about the resolution has said, if I remember correctly, that he would vote for the resolution ­ ti-on whether the amendments were there or not . There may be those who would not .

Mr: BANKHEAD. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FREAR. I yield. .

Mr. BANKHEAD. Is it not the gentleman's conception that the really material part of this proposed amendment, as far as the "lame-duck" feature .of it is .concerned, is in making the terms of Members of Congress begin just a few monthS after election?

Mr . FREAR. Yes.

Mr. BANKHEAD. And the amendment that may be proposed does not go to the very essence <>f 'the proposition?

Mr. FREAR. Well, I believe the resolution does -and meets the present .difficulty it is intended to remedy.

[Here the gavel fell.]

Mr. JEFFERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma LMr. CARTWRIGHT].

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, .as a member of the committee that brought out this resolution, I want to say I have given it some study. While it has been changed a little, it is essentially the Norris amendment. I introduced the same resolution in the last Congress, but, of course, such bills get the name of the chairman. This has passed the Senate several times, and this will be the second time to pass the House. So, after years of fighting and agitation, I be- · lieve the " lame-.duck " Congresses with legislation by men who have been repudiated by their people is near the end. It should have passed years ago.

Senator NoRRIS is to be congratulated for his fight. For a long time be has been crying in the wilderness, but I believe the American people have been with him all the time. Mr. Chairman, lf nothing further were to be accomplished by the amendment than to .do away with the absurdity of electing Members of Congress 13 months bef-ore they are allowed to become full-fledged Congressmen, that alone would be enough to justify prompt action on -our part.

There was some justification for such a provision in the days of the ox cart and tar bucket, when the average rate of travel was 5 or 6 miles an hour; there is none to-day in this wonderful age of scientific achievement and .material progr.ess---the age of flying ma-chines and fast automobiles. In times like these it is a travesty on democratic government to elect Representatives to serve the people in the transaction of business of vital importance and then not allow them to begin that service for more than a year . 'Think o1 engaging anyone to begin work more than a year hence. Imagine a farmer buying -seed or work animals or imple ­ ments and not be . allowed to use them for more than a year. Imagine a bank electing directors to do nothing but watch other directors transact .the business for over a year. Fellow Members, nowhere except in the United States a1 · e the elected representatives of the people put into a political morgue and kept there for over a year before they can take action. For generations it w.as our .boast that in America we had established a government “‘ of the people, by the people, and for the people." To-day the Government of England and several other governments are far more responsive to the will Qf the people.

First. This amendment will free Congress of the dead hand of the so-called"' lame du-ck." Df -course it is no disgrace to be a "lame duck," but they have been "crippled," their responsibility to the people has been lessened, they have been rejected by the peopl~yet they often hold the balance of power in both Houses, and so have it in their power to decide matters of the greatest importance to the Nation. It is well known these "lam-e ducks" have often been influenced by expectations of favors to come from the White House.

Second. It is also during th~ so-called "lame-duck" session that the filibuster flourishes. It is also during this session that the undemocratic cloture is made use of to jam measures through Congress without adequate debate or understanding.

Mr. WARREN. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. I yield.

Mr. WARREN. The gentleman says that this resolution will do awa-y with filibustering. I call the gentleman's attention to the fact that there have been good filibusters and bad filibusters.

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. I admit that. But one of the main purposes of the amendment is to do a way with the short session. By so doing it increases by a big percentage the chances of legislation being given the fullest consideration and being decided by representatives who are fresh from the people and who look directly to the people and nowhere else for their reward.

Third. Under this amendment each Congress would organize itself. At present the dying Congress provides by caucuses the offices and organization for the newly elected Congress. A dead Congress seeks to -control the machinery of a Congress that is yet to come into being. The proposed amendment would put a stop to that undemocratic practice. Fourth. This resolution should pass - because it has received the approval of the American Bar Association and of a great many farm, labor, and women's organizations . The press throughout the whole country is for it. I do not know of anybody m· group that is openly against it, and I believe the States will vote a ratification of the proposed constitutional amendment at the first opportunity. [Applause.] Mr . .JEFFERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia rMr. MONTAGUE]. [Applause.]

Mr • .MONTAGUE. Mr. Chairman, I have never seen the necessity of this legislation. I have felt that to embark upon amending the Constitution in order to meet the presidential aspect of this resolution was too nebulous and too obscure and might involve us in more difficulties than we are now in. I doubted our wisdom and capacity to bring in any .amendment that would meet the difficulties . that nobody can foresee, but which will develop in time in connection with the election of a President if it should fall into this House. But can not I say, as some consolation to those with whom I agree on this subject, that we have .not been hurt by the present practice? What President has this House elected, lame-duck Congresses or brand new Congresses? Was not Thomas Jefferson elected by a · "lameduck" Congress? Is ther.e .any large public sentiment . ent in America which regrets that election? Was not John Quincy Adams elected by .a" lame-duck" Congress? Our Republican friends, I am sure, do not regret the election of Mr. Jefferson or Mr . Adams. [Applause.]

I now leave that aspect of it, with the repetition, if you please, that the game is not worth the candle; that a constitutional amendment is too big a weapon to wield in order to -achieve the small results -contemplated by this resolution.

Let us go back a bit. What is the source of this legislation? What is the cause of this legislation? I think "lameduck Members " is a capitalistic terminology to destroy the usefulness of the legislative br.anch of our Government, which is the -desire of some people . It is unfortunate that the election of Members and the service of Members should be at times so far -separated. I do not undertake to justify that; but if that is the trouble to be cured, I ask you why go to a constitutional amendment to remedy it? Why have we stood here .all these years, with a constitutional principle and provision in the existing legislative power for immediate exercise? We have an existing concrete remedy in the Constitution itself.

I will read the section of the Constitution which supports this contention:

The Congress shall assemble at least once in -every year, and such meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by law -appoint a different day.

That is as plain as a pikestaff. That is as plain as your hand. bef?re your eyes. Having that p~wer. why do we not exerciSe 1t rather than to pursue the crrcmtous route of a constitutional amendment in order to cure some imaginary difficulties, especially as relating to the presidential election?

Mr. TILSON. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MONTAGUE. Yes.

Mr. TILSON. As a matter of fact, during the period im-- mediately following the Civil War did not the Congress, by statute, appoint the 4th of March, or soon thereafter, for the meeting of each succeeding Congress, and for about six years this was the law, until the passions of the Civil War had somewhat cooled, when the law was repealed and Congress went back to the original provision of the Constitution regarding the meetings of Congress, from which no subsequent Congress has departed?

Mr. MONTAGUE. I thank the gentleman for the suggestion. I did not intend to go into any complete history of this. However, I couple his suggestion with the observation that war, civil or otherwise, always wrenches governments out of their sockets, and it takes a long time to outlive the · evils that war brings upon us. I say we now have this power. If I had my own way I would not rush a Congress here immediately upon its election. I am not afraid of the words "cooling time/' I would bring them quicker than now provided for, but I would give them some time to make physical preparations to come here to discharge their duties, and I would give them some time to get free of the atmosphere of partisanship, which is the most insidious disease any of us possesses, and those who possess it most think they possess it least. [Applause.]

Mr. GIFFORD. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MONTAGUE. Yes.

Mr. GIFFORD. The gentleman says that this could be done by law rather than by constitutional methods, but does not the gentleman recognize that we could not well get rid of the" lame-duck" session at which the votes for a President might be cast, except through this constitutional provision?

Mr. MONTAGUE. If the gentleman will recall I stated that the only instances in which we did not get rid of them we eleeted . Jefferson and John Quincy Adams.

Mr. PARSONS. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MONTAGUE. Yes.

Mr. PARSONS. Under the present arrangement, could the Congress enact legislation that would permit the Members elect to elect a President and the Members elect of the senate to elect . a Vice President in case the President elect or the Vice President elect sh~uld become disqualified in any way?

Mr. MONTAGUE. I have not thought of that sufficiently or maturely to give the gentleman an opinion

Mr. PARSONS. That is the only virtue or the only advantage in this proposition.

:Mr. MONTAGUE. I think s 0 . b t I think I th t . • .u .' as say, . 18 very attenuated and very negllgible, and the Instances we have had have not proved harmful but have proved beneficial to the American people.

Now, about Congress. I have bee? here a good, long while. I hav~ seen so~e of the. most emment men go. We .seem to think that if a. man ~ defeated f?r dongress he IS no longer fit for public serv~ce or a~thing else; t~at he has ~uffer~d some ~last to hiS reput~t10n, and he lS suddenly me~~1ent ~nd mcompete_nt to discharge an.y public trust. Th1s IS_ a VIolent assumption and the record lS full, and the proo~ 1s ample, }o the con!:"ary. Representative. Willi_am McKinl~y was a lame-~uck and came back to thiS Ca~1tal as President of the Umted States [applause], and I might name rna~ others who have come back to this Capital, not as President, ~ut have come ba~k to the Senate or l}~ck to ~~e House agam or to the Cabmet or some other high position.

_Mr. B~KHE~. Champ Clark was a "lame-duck," I Will remmd my fnend.

Mr. MONTAGUE. ::. ~am Lincoln · was, also.

I have observed some ;?t'h~~;en in the House after their defeat, and I ask you . .to remember this if you forget everything else I may saf. They have one factor of legislative equipment; they are free from the hope of reward or the fear of punishment. [Applause.] They live, I ~epeat, in an atmosphere of legislative calm. They are free and independent legislators, and it is well for us to have a small class of men of this character in this House who after the storm of battle will stand up and vote with the future not in view.

Mr. LOZIER. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MONTAGUE. Yes.

~ Mr. LOZIER. Admitting the high character of some lame-duck " Representatives, does the gentleman think it is a sound and wholesome policy for a man who has been repudiated by his constituents to come back and enact legislation against their will-is that Americanism?

[Here the gavel fell.] .

Mr. JEFFERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman five additional minutes.

Mr. MONTAGUE. Suppose a man is defeated in the primary? Do you think we should get rid of him and never allow him to run for office again?

Mr. LOZIER. That is not the question.

Mr. MONTAGUE. The same principle is involved.

Mr. LOZIER. Does the gentleman think it is Americanism, Democracy, or Republicanism to allow a man who has been rejected at the polls, and his policies repudiated, to come back and have 13 or 14 months' time in which to legislate and to put into effect those same policies?

Mr. MONTAGUE. I would not give him 13 or 14 months.

Mr. LOZIER. Well, he has them now.

Mr. MONTAGUE. I do not say that I would not make a change, but I say we have ample power now to change that. Mr. O'CONNOR. Will the distinguished gentleman from Virginia yield?

Mr. MONTAGUE. For a question; yes.

Mr. O'CONNOR. If the argument of the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. LoziER] were carried to its logical conclusion, after election day, on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, the President should not be entitled to function any more. That . is the gentleman's theory. -

Mr. LOZIER. The President can not enact legislation. Mr. O'CONNOR. The theory is that because a man is ?efeated in election he is going to sacrifice his Government lS not good 4mericanism either. . . Mr. MO!fTAGU~. I ask now not to be. mt~rrupted until I have finished this thought. I would brmg, if you please, the legislators elect into the discharge of their duties sooner than they now come, but I am simply arguing that it is a mere bu~aboo to say that what we have been doing all these years Wl.ll now sudden_ly destroy the country, and I have been trymg to emphasiZe the fact that when men are free from any ulterior consideration, if they have any patriotism or any character whatever-a:n~ many men have been defeated who had as much patnot1sm and as much character a as those who were not defeated-these men are then freer t0- exercise their attributes of statesmanship and to exercise therr· pnn· · 1 f tri ti h' hI th ClP es o pa o sm, w lC am sure ey poss~ss, than many of us who stand here day by day crowded With letters, oppressed with propaganda, hardly able to find 10 uninterrupted minutes in any day in which to study any governmental subject, with department work which makes almost every Representative a slave, with all the modern appliances of American ingenuity and mechanism, if you please-telegraph, telephone, and what not-to press and press and drive us on to a conclusion which sometimes if we were independent, we know we wotDd not do. so I h~ve seen some of these so-called "lame-ducks," if I may repeat an expression which I did not intend to use when I did use it I have seen them run farther and fly farther than they did before they ever were injured. [Laughter and applause.] I desire to pay my great respect to the gentlemen who have brought forward this bill; they have labored diligently, intelligently, and ably, and the House, I am sure, gives full credit to them.

Now, one thing further. My esteemed friend from Wisconsin [Mr. FREAR] made some comparisons. There is no possible analogy between this system and the English system. This is to save the President in an emergency. Their Government does not have a President. They have one ruler in the form of a King.

Their whole system for years has been a cabinet system, picked from a legislative body. If it is not sustained by the house or the chamber or the parliamentary institution under which they function, they go out and enter upon another election. It is pretty near a democracy.

After the revolution in the seventeenth century, they came out a limited monarchy. After our Revolution in the eighteenth century we came out a limited democracy.

Mr. FREAR. If the gentleman will pardon me, I had ref- model 8 car. erence to the parliamentary situation.

Mr. MONTAGUE. I appreciate that; but it is not analogous to the proposition that now confronts the House. [Applause.] _

[Here the gavel fell.]

Mr. GIFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Goss].

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I had not intended to speak on the bill to-day, but inasmuch as so much has been said chinery. about the Longworth amendment I want to take time to read it. It is as follows:

SEC. 2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year. In each odd-numbered year such meeting shall begin at noon on the 4th day of January , unless they shall by law provide a different day. In each even-numbered year such meeting shall be on the 4th day of January, and the session shall not continue after noon on the 4th day of May.

I remember when the late Speaker came down into the well of the House and ~aid that he desired to call our ~tter;- t10n ~o wha:t I~ hiS mmd wa:s a fundamental objection 0 the bill, which ~ the same bill w.e have to-day, an~ m the same form. This fundamental obJection wa:s that this would 1 allow the Congress to be m perpetual sessiOn, and that he felt the Congressmen should be able to .go home and have some fo~r months to prepare for the coming election.

That IS my own feeling. I want to see this amendment adopted. It is very simple. I happen to be on a committee where other members do not want to report out a bill because .a gentleman a~ the other end of the capital does not want It to come out m that way.

This same gentleman is telling us, in the bill sent over here for. us to consider, that he does not want this House to have its way ~ this matter. .

I think 1t Is high tune. that the House should act. independently and do what It WIShes m the consideratiOn of these matters regardless. of what the other body may do wit~ the legislatiOn. In my JUdgment, we ought not to pass this bill without the amendment, and thus become subservient to the Senate. [Applause.]

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. GIFFORD. Chairman, I yield five minutes to the another great gamble. gentleman from Michigan [Mr. CLANCY].

Mr. CLANCY. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from New York [Mr. O’Connor], during the discussion of the rule, reminded the House of its pressing duty to always keep in mind the relief of unemployment and the distressed people of this country. That precipitated a rather humorous debate between, among others, " the two gentlemen from Harlem,":-Mr. GAVAGAN and Mr. LAGUARDIA-but not inform the House of the all-important question, and we are still waiting to hear which of those gentlemen represents the two famous Americans-"Amos 'n' Andy," of Harlem. Of course, . we Members of Congress are but doctors or physicians in taking care of or curing the country. We can give the people medicine-that is, a law-but the vitality of the patients-the people of the country-and their virility are the main things. In the last analysis the people must help themselves .

To-day has been a rather noteworthy day · on the floor of this House in that Mr. Winston Churchill, one of the strong men in the World War and one who helped England to go through the postwar period, has been on the floor of the House. - We also had a brilliant oration on Abraham Lincoln by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. CHIPERFIELD]. and he told us that Lincoln talked faith and courage as Henry Ford does to-day.

I think in view of these developments and the fact we are discussing a change in the model of our laws, the Constitution of the United States, it is pertinent to announce that the newspapers of the country in prominent headlines today call attention to precedents in changing models, and to the fact that the foremost American business man, Henry Ford, has enlisted on a vast business program and a crusade to help cure this depression which the gentleman from New York has brought to our attention.

Mr. Ford is gambling on better times by getting out a new The whole automobile industry itself was already enlisted in a great gamble. It is the only industry to-day in the United States - that dares to teach and preach and act optimism. Other industries are yelling for Government aid for money or for tariffs, and so forth.

A change in 218 auto models means the expenditure of millions of dollars for machinery alone, in the junking of practically new machinery and installing still newer rnaWall Street has been perked up by this news that was given to the country yesterday by Henry Ford, on the birthday anniversary of his old friend, Thomas Edison, for Wall Street sees great aid to labor, to raw materials, and to other industries. Mr. Ford, himself quite an aged man, has been working with his coat and vest off and in his shirt sleeves for several months to get out his new model.

This means much to my State but also much to the whole 48 states in which there are subsidiary agencies, factories, and branches. The news is so great and wonderful that it should give some satisfaction to anxious Members of the House, because not only is the Ford Co. putting on tens of thousands of workmen and buying hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of raw material, but also the Hudson, the Packard, the Graham-Paige, the Hupp, the Chevrolet, and other General Motors companies are employing many more men and buying vast quantities of - steel lumber glass rubber, cloth, copper, and so forth. ' ' ' About two years ago the President called in the leaders of the automotive industry and told them that they represented the key industry of the country and if they started work on a great scale all the country would benefit and a general revival would result.

They told the President that their surveys indicated to them that the people could not buy the cars, and that they would lose a great deal of money if they did turn their factory wheels on a large scale. They turned them, nevertheless as a patriotic measure on the insistence of the President, and they took losses 'of millions and millions of dollars.

But now they are riding forth majestically again on Mr. Ford has asked those who control the raw materials not to raise the pr i ces of the raw materials to the manufacturers, because that will throttle the patriotic effort. We, as Members - of Congress, were also incidentally asked by these men and by Mr . . Ford's own representative a couple of weeks ago to give the auto industry a chance to get out of ­ the " red " and aid all industry without a crushing handicap they did of additional sales taxes. The Ways and Means Committee was implored not to place upon them an increased burden of taxation which would throttle their glorious endeavor, for the industry is already overtaxed. May the House have mercy, for mercy is wisdom in this case.

[Here the gavel fell.]

Mr. GIFFORD. Mr. Chairman, several members of the committee have asked if this debate would continue after to-day. I would like to ask the chairman or anyone in - charge when this debate is supposed to continue?

Mr. JEFFERS. It will go on to-morrow, and the bill is supposed to be finished to-morrow up to the point of a vote. That is the agreement, as I understand it. Debate is continued, and the vote is to be taken on Tuesday.

Mr. GIFFORD. May I inquire about what time we intend to close the debate to-day?

Mr. JEFFERS. I think all gentlemen who have asked for time and who are here present should be given an opportunity to speak to-day.

Mr. GIFFORD. · I suppose the gentleman would be willing to have an understanding that we would not sit longer than 5 o'clock?

Mr. JEFFERS. As a matter of fact, the leadership very much desire to have general debate finished to-day, if possible, and we will run along as long as it is necessary to conclude that.

Mr. GOSS. When does the gentleman expect to go under the 5-minute rule?

Mr. JEFFERS. To-morrow, as soon as we arrive at that point.

Mr. GOSS. There may be a vote if there was a motion made to recommit.

Mr. JEFFERS. Well, we will only go to the previous question to-morrow afternoon.

Mr. HASTINGS. When will the three hours' general debate provided under the rule expire?

Mr. GIFFORD. That would take us until after 6 o'clock.

Mr. JEFFERS. Mr. Chairman, we are going along out of order now.

I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. GLOVER].

Mr. GLOVER. Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, we have before us to-day one of the most important questions that this Congress will be called upon to consider. There is a Senate joint resolution, No. 14, by Senator NoRRIS proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States and fixing the commencement of the terms of the President, Vice President, and Members of Congress, and also fixing the time of the assembling of Congress.

It was my privilege to serve on the Committee on Election of President, Vice President, and Representatives in Congress for the first two years of my service in Congress, and we had before us this proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States and conducted hearings and drafted in practically the identical words contained in this proposed substituted amendment the amendment that is proposed to be adopted in lieu of the Senate joint resolution. I heartily agree with the sentiment expressed by many on the floor of this House and in the press that the Constitution of the United States should be amended only when it became absolutely necessary for the same. The necessity for the change as proposed in this amendment to the Constitution is so plain and urgent that there should not be any opposition to it whatever on the floor of this House. · Practically this identical joint resolution was passed by the House in its last session with one amendment, known as the Longworth amendment, which · limited the short term of Congress to four months. I supported that amendment because I thought that there should be a limit of time placed on the short session. But I am going to support this resolution without any amendment to it in order that there may be no question of it being accepted by the other body. Section 1 provides:

The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 24th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 4th day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified, and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

Under the law that we have now we meet on the first Monday in December, and the day fixed for adjournment by the Constitution is fixed as March 4 for the short session, and by the time the Congress is organized the Christmas holidays are on, and then there is usually an adjournment of two weeks, and there is practically nothing done by Congress until they reconvene after the holidays in January. So this would eliminate that expense of holding Congress in session during the time that very little or nothing is usually accomplished.

Beginning with the 4th day of January Congress will have ample time for the completion of all its work, and plause.] Congress could easily discharge all of its duties by the 1st of June unless some emergency should arise that would require a longer term.

Section 2 provides as follows:

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 4th day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Under this provision of the Constitution the Congress would not be required to forever meet on the 4th of January, but could, if after discussion thought wise, change . nge the time of meeting to a different day in the year.

As the Constitution now is the meeting day is fixed bY the Constitution and Congress can not change it.

Section 3 provides as follows:

If the President elect dies, then the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President is not chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect fails to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President has qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case where neither a President elect nor a. Vice President elect has qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which a qualified person shall be selected, and such t parson shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President has qualified.

This provision should have always been in our Constitution. When this amendment is adopted Congress could then pass an act that would clarify this situation and would provide who shall act as President in a case of this kind.

Section 4 provides:

The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever the right of ch.oice devolves upon them and for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever the right of choice devolves upon them.

When this amendment to the ConStitution is adopted, then Congress can provide by an act of Congress who shall be selected in cases of this kind and which might arise at any time.

The last section, section 5, simply provides that sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 30th day of November of the year following the year in which the article is ratified.

This amendment has been freely . referred to by the press and others as the 41 lame-duck amendment." Under the present Constitution when a Representative in Congress is elected unless there is a special session called by the President' about 13 months elapse before he can act for his people who elected him to represent them in Congress. Conditions of this kind should never have existed. When people elect their Representative to Congress on important issues the issues should be considered at the earliest possible moment in order that these issues may be enacted into law by Congress, if Congress thinks wise to do so. At .least. the people are entitled to hearings at the earliest possible time. As stated by the committee in its report, a serious emergency would exist in the event of the death of th~ President elect or both the President elect and VICe President elect, for the present Constitution contains no applicable provision, and the following situations are possible:

(1) A party nominee may die before the November elections.

(2) A party nominee may die after the November electiOns and before the electors vote.

(3) The President elect may die after the electors vote and before the votes are counted.

( 4) If the election of the President 1s thrown into the House, one or more of the three highest may die before the House chooses.

(5) The President elect may die before the date :fixed for the beginning of his term.

(6) The Vice President elect may die.

(7) If the election of the Vice President is thrown into the Senate, one or both of the two highest may die before the Senate chooses. .

(8) Both the President elect and the Vice President elect may die.

When this proposed constitutional amendment is adopted by Congress and ratified by the States every emergency that could arise could be taken care of by act of Congress.

It is my hope that this constitutional amendment may receive the unanimous indorsement of this Congress. [Ap­

Mr. GIFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. STOKES].

Mr. STOKES. Mr. Chairman, on this anniversary of the birth of Abraham Lincoln, who has justly been called the most American of all Americans, it is a pleasure to briefly review a few of his words and catch the trend of his 1 thoughts, for his great achievements have filled with admiration not only America but the entire civilized world.

He was a Member of this House for two years and during the term made numerous speeches on various topics, which he illustrated with humorous stories, which kept the House in roars of laughter.

He was a deep student of the works of the founder of our country and of those principles which were embodied in the Declaration of Independence and . the Constitution. He made it his duty to fight with all his might against anything he believed to be an infringement of the blessings them. of liberty as stated in the Declaration of Independence or of these self-evident truths--that all men are created equal and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights-life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

On his way from Springfield to Washington to assume his duties as President, he was invited by the citizens of Philadelphia to raise the :flag of the United States over old Independence Hall. On this occasion he said:

I have never bad a feeling, politically, that did not spring from the sentiments embodied in the Declaration of Independence. I have often pondered over the dangers which were incurred by the men who assembled here and framed and adopted that declaration. I have pondered over the toils th-at were endured by the officers and soldiers of the Army who achieved that independence. ·

I have often inquired of myself what great principle or idea it was that kept this Confederacy so long together. It was not the mere matter of separation of the Colonies from the motherland, but that - sentiment in the Declaration of Independence which gave liberty, not alone to the people of this country, but hope to all the world, for all future time. It was that which gave promise that In due time the weight would be lifted from the shoulders of all men and that all should have an equal chance. This is the sentiment embodied in the Declaration of Independence.

President - Lincoln wisely called about him the best minds that were available in the country, among whom were Seward; Chase, whom he later appointed Chief Justice; and Stanton; most of whom were his political enemies, but he always put the Nation's interest before his own feelings. While he was a lawyer by profession, he became deeply interested in politics and the important questions of the It was in this field that he made his great impression on the people of the State of Illinois.

It was his reputation for rugged honesty, courage, intelligence, patience, perseverance, and fair play, combined with a great capacity for hard work, which so effectively inspired the people of his State to present his name as a candidate for President of the Republican Party in 1860. He was previously comparatively unknown, but he had engaged in a series of debates with Senator Douglas in 1858, which brought him prominently before the country.

At 51 years of age he found himself elected President of the Republic.

In the words of Emerson-

He grew according to the need; his mind mastered the problem of the day; and as the problem grew, so did his comprehension of it. In the war there was no place for holiday magistrate nor fair-weatber sailor. The new pilot was hurried to the helm in a tornado. In four years-four years of battle days-his endurance, his fertility of resource, his magnanimity were sorely tried and never found wanting. There, by his courage, his justice, his even temper, his fertile counsel, his humanity, he stood a heroic figure in the center of a heroic epoch.

He had plenty of common sense, and desired just as we do to-day to reduce expenses of government, as illustrated by the following story: He was shown a telegram from the War Department to the effect that the southern army had captured a brigadier general and 12 Army mules : "I don't mind the brigadier general," he said. - " I can replace him in five minutes, but those ' Army mules cost the Government · $200 apiece."

Many are the stories that are told of his wit, humor, and kindly sarcasm. But I will recall only one to-day about General Grant, who always found plenty of critics to urge the President to oust him from his command. They repeated the gossip that General Grant drank.

"What does he drink," said the President.

"Whisky, of course," was the reply.

"Just find out what brand he uses and I will send a · barrei to each of my other generals," answered the President. Mr. Choate said:

He led public opinion, but did not march so far in advance of it as to fail of its effective support in every great emergency.

He knew the heart and thought of the people as no man not in constant and absolute sympathy with them could have known it, and so holding their confidence he triumphed through and with The rough backwoodsman, who had never seen the inside of a university, became in the end the master of the finest literary style.

Loyal, strong, and brave,

Type of the plan,

Great nature offers

When God builds a man;

Great fame, great aim, great soul · were thine,

A chosen vessel for a task divine.

[Applause.]

Mr. JEFFERS. Mr. Chairman, before yielding further time I wish to state that we are anxious to finish the debate on the pending measure this afternoon. So far as this side of the House is concerned, we have all our time allotted and the gentlemen are here to use it. I would advise the ranking minority Member to let his speakers know about this, so if they are not present at this moment they can be advised that they must be here so that we may finish the debate this afternoon if possible.

Mr. GIFFORD. Mr. Chairman, in reply to the gentleman I will say that I have requests for the full amount of time. One Member is sick and two other Members insist on going on to-morrow morning and have informed me they will doubt the presence of a quorum if it is insisted that they ga on now. In any event, we have got to stay here until 6 o'clock if we use up all the time . . i have other speakers that can use the time.

Mr. R_Al\JISEYER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield to me?

Mr. GIFFORD. I yield.

Mr. RAMSEYER. There are some proposals of a serious nature that ought to be discussed, and they ought to be discussed when there are more Members here. The gentleman, of course, knows that I shall endeavor to incorporate an amendment known as section 6 in the concurrent resolution that passed last year. Here we are with only a few dozen Members present. It seems to me that when a constitutional amendment is up for consideration we ought to have the Members here, and it was thought that some of the time for general debate would be saved for to-morrow and we could then have plenty of time to consider the few amendments in an orderly way.

With respect to making speeches for the RECORD, I am not interested. When time is allotted to me I want to make an argument to the membership of the House on an important amendment. ·

· Mr. JEFFERS. I might suggest to .the gentleman that if we finish general debate t~ afternoon we will have a better opportunity for discussion under the 5-m.inute rule tomorrow, whereas if we consume time to-morrow in general debate that will cut down our time under the 5-minute rule.

Mr. RAMSEYER. Well, it will not be a lot of time. It will probably be · 40 or 50 minutes to finish the general debate, and then the Members will be here and it will just save that much time under the 5-minute rule.

Mr. JEFFERS. Forty or fifty minutes at the beginning of the day usually runs into an hour or so. I think it would be wise to finish general debate this afternoon, which will give us an entire afternoon to-morrow for consideration and discussion under the 5-minute rule, when amendments can be offered.

Mr. LOZIER. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. JEFFERS. Yes; certainly I yield to my colleague.

Mr. LOZIER. I may say that I recognize that the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. RAMSEYER] has an important amendment, an amendment which I think should be presented when we have as full a membership of the House as possible here. · May I make this suggestion? I think it will be the disposition of the majority, when the gentleman comes to offer his amendment, to have sufficient time, and I am quite sure the House will give him ample time to present his amendment and not hold the gentleman down to the rigid requirements of the 5-m.inute rule.

Mr. JEFFERS. Why, yes, of course; I shall assist the gentleman along that line. Now, Mr. Chairman, at this time I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. TAYLOR].

Mr. RAMSEYER. Does the gentleman think we ought to go on with general debate with the few Members we have here now?

Mr. JEFFERS. I intend to give to the gentlemen who are here present and who have patiently waited for their time to speak the opportunity to . be heard.

Mr. JEFFERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. NoRTON].

Mr. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen of the House, when a resolution similar to the pending Norris resolution was being considered by the House four years ago, I had the privilege, as a member of the committee which had framed the resolution, to speak in its support on the floor of this House. I am equally grateful for the opportunity now afforded to urge favorable consideration of this proposed constitutional amendment.

It is easy to understand the causes which were mainly responsible in the writing of the constitutional provision which this measure seeks to amend. Since conditions have very materially changed since that time, those causes no longer exist. Then why continue a provision of the Constitution which is not in harmony with the conditions and requirements as we find them to-day? To be more specific, if we did not have our modern means of communication, if we had no telegraphs, no telephones, no radios, and no fast-mail service, we would be compelled to wait, as they were in those days, for weeks before the result of an election in one part of the country could be known in another part thereof. As then, it would take considerable time to gather the election returns in order to determine the result. Even after the result had been ascertained, it would take time for that information to become generally known throughout the country. If conditions were now what they were 145 years ago, we would not have our present system of good roads-, but would have roads that would be almost impassable; there would be no automobiles, no train service, no airplanes, and we would be compelled to rely on the stagecoach and the saddle horse for our travel. Under such conditions it would take weeks, and perhaps months, even after the result of the election had been learned, before the Congress could assemble and become organized.

Another most important change has been made in our Constitution which affects this matter. Following the ratification of the Constitution, and in fact until quite recently, the United States Senators were elected by the legislatures of the various States. The State legislature did not meet until in January, and since contests often developed, it was considerably later than that before selections were announced. Senators so elected could not have attended a session of Congress convening in the month of January.

Nor have we a right to say, or even to assume that the framers of the Constitution would not have decided, as we now propose, if they could have foreseen developments in the years to follow. I am not one of those who believe that since the work of the Constitutional Convention was so well done, we should not tamper with the Constitution; that we should refrain from making changes for fear that we might err in ow- efforts. Apparently that was not the viewpoint of those who framed the Constitution; for they provided ways of amending it. Although they could not possibly have foreseen the tremendous changes which time has wrought, they were wise men who realized that the changing conditions of the years to come would require changes in the fundamental law of the land. It must also be remembered that the Constitution was, at least in some of its provisions, the result of compromises. Then as now men differed in their viewpoints with reference to government.

Apparently that fundamental difference of viewpoint, wherein some of our people believe that government exists for the benefit of the privileged few who alone are qualified to decide the policy to be pursued, while others cling to the view that government exists for service to the masses and that the people as a whole are competent to govern themselves, has always existed. That difference of viewpoint is in evidence in various debates of the constitutional convention; it exists to-day. Those who believed in popular government, in the rule of the masses, then as now maintained that even though the people in the exercise of their rights might make mistakes, they had a fundamental right to. do so, for in that way alone could they best learn the functions of government and, profiting by their mistakes, more wisely direct the course their government should pursue.

However that may be, our country has adopted 19 amendments in the manner provided for such changes by the Federal Constitution since its adoption. Five additional amendments, I believe, have been submitted by Congress which have not been ratified by a sufficient number of States to become a part of the Constitution. Of the 19 amendments ratified, the first 10 were submitted by the first session of the first Congress. In fact, several of the Colonies had ratified the Constitution with the distinct understanding that the first session of the first Congress would submit those 10 amendments, which since have become known as the "bill of rights."

Therefore, in the last 145 years the Congress has submitted, and the required number of States have ratified, only nine additional amendments to the Constitution. It has been with caution that Congress has submitted amendments, and it has been with equal caution that the legislatures of the various States have ratified them. That is as it should be. But there may be times when that caution may be carried too far, when the exercise of it may defeat the will of the people and prevent changes which the people demand. To further delay the submission of the pending resolution would, as I view it, be a case of that · kind.

What are some of the benefits to be realized in the event of the submission and ratification of the pending resolution? In the first place, it would provide for the assembling of the Congress and the inauguration of the President and Vice President in January following their election. The amendment to the resolution which is proposed by the House committee would also provide for the election of a President in certain emergencies. In the brief period of time which has been allotted _ me I shall speak only with reference to that part of the resolution which provides for the elimination of the so-called " lame-duck " session of Congress. Nor shall I attempt to speak of all advantages to be realized, but only those which appear to be of the greatest importance. The first result would be the taking over of the offices by those chosen in the preceding election. As we say, they would be fresh from the people. The result of the election and the issues discussed therein would be fresh in - their minds, and they would be anxious to carry out the promises Which they had made to the people in the course of the campaign. To this there· are those who would reply that we need a cooling-off period, so that the actions of the Congress may not be too hasty or ill-advised. Apparently that was not the view of the framers of the Constitution, for they provided 2-year terms for the Representatives. In that way each Member is compelled to return frequently for further indorsement and instructions. Besides, I fear that the country suffers more from too much, rather than too little, cooling-off. As everyone knows, there are forces constantly at work in an effort to cool the ardor and the enthusiasm of the people's Representatives in Congress, and for that reason it is only logical to assume that the greater the delay and the less apt becomes the Member to correctly register his therefor vote in keeping with the wishes and interests of his constituents and the more apt will he be to register the wishes, if not the demands, of these cooling-off influences.

In answer to those who may be fearful lest sufficient check wish is not provided, I need only to point to the fact that we have short so much check now that the enactment of legislation in the of the interest of the great masses seems at times almost impossible. be to What greater check can be needed than that which is pro- If the vided in our two branches of Congress, each checking the other, and the Chief Executive checking them both. If this session does not provide a sufficient check, how can certain other nations with a single legislative branch of government, and would in which the representatives of the people meet almost immediately after election to administer the affairs of govern- Not ment, function with safety to their people? · A further objection to the present arrangement is to be involving found in the fact that the new Member of Congress is of not generally sworn in until 13 months after his elec- many tion. Almost immediately thereafter he finds himself in the desirable, midst of a campaign for renomination. Up to that time he that has had insufficient time to carry out the promises which length he has made to his constituents, and but little opportunity existence. to demonstrate his capabilities in other respects. Likewise the people whom he has been chosen to represent have not approval had a proper chance to properly weigh hiS qualifications, so sary as to know whether he comes up to their expectations, be- my fore they are called upon to vote for or against his renomi- to it, nation. In such an emergency a new Member of Congress has must choose between two alternatives, either that of making of the a thorough and aggressive campaign, or of remaining on the the job, giving the best service of which he is capable, and per- proposed rnitting the campaign to take care of itself. If this amend- dorsed ment should become a part of our Federal Constitution, favorable newly elected Members of Congress would in the future have zations the necessary time to demonstrate their capabilities and Labor. properly register their views with reference to legislative League matters before engaging in another campaign, and their women's constituents would likewise have time to better judge their supporters qualifications.

The third point which I desire to stress, and the one to want, which has probably been discussed more than any other in gle connection with this proposal, involves the present situation tion, wherein a defeated Member of Congress continues to serve rangement during the short session. It is not fair to him to ridicule body. his position or his activities, or to merely refer to him as a a more "lame duck," since he is not to blame for the situation. He does not only have the right but it is his solemn duty and responsibility to continue his service to the best of his ability in his capacity as a Member. However handicapped the and humiliated he may be in his public efforts following Congress; his defeat, his is not the fault. Neither can the blame be placed upon the people of the Nation, since the sentiment may for this proposed constitutional change is overwhelmingly favorable and has been so for a considerable length of time. Mr. Nor can it be charged to the State legislatures, since these Mr. bodies have not been given an opportunity to ratify the pro- gentleman posed change, which I have every reason to believe nearly Mr. all of them favor. The blame then, if such there be, must the rest with the Congress for its failure to act sooner in this laboratory very important matter.

But even if the defeated candidate is not at fault the Our present situation is a most undesirable one. During the ditions campaign the Member who has been a candidate for re- Some election may have advocated certain legislation which after of the his defeat he is in a position to continue to support, con- we trary to the verdict and the wishes of his people. Further- The more, in the event of an emergency wherein the election of criticism. a President is thrown into the House of Representatives. he of would be in a position to vote for a minority candidate, seek likewise contrary to the verdict of his constituents. It has of the been charged at times that a defeated Member of Congress translated is often influenced in his voting through some promise of no an appointment which he is later to receive. Whether that tions, is true or _ not, the present provision ma.kes such a charge llic will such an arrangement possible, and the opportunity should be removed through a change in the Constitution.

Finally, the proposed change would result in the elimination of the short session of Congress. In this connection I to say that I am not in favor of providing for another session by fixing a definite date for the adjournment last session of any given Congress. To do that would continue a situation which this proposal seeks to end. last session of a Congress, one in which the regular appropriation measures must be considered, is made a short by constitutional limitation many of the evils now complained of in connection with the present short session be permitted to continue. I refer il\ particular to the opportunity for filibustering in such sessions of Congress. only that, but a short session of Congress makes impossible the proper consideration of appropriation measures, the expenditures of not only millions but billions dollars. Besides, in the rush which naturally follows, important measures are sidetracked, while ' others, less are given approval and are passed. It is my view

Congress should be left to be its own judge as to the of each session during the 2-year period of its

In conclusion may I ask what opposition is there to the and submission of this proposal? Why has necesaction relative thereto been so long delayed? Many of constituents have expressed themselves as being favorable and none have spoken in opposition. I assume that been the experience of many, and perhaps nearly all other Members. As to indorsements, the press of country is known to be overwhelmingly in favor of the change. The American Bar Association has init. Business and professional men are everywhere to it, and the same is true of leading farm organizations likewise true of the American Federation of

The proposal has received the approval of the of Women Voters, women's clubs, and many other organizations. Many are they who are enthusiastic of the proposal.

It does seem strange that a change which everyone seems no one seems to be able to bring about. Not a sincivilized nation in the world permits of a similar situaand not a single State in the Union has such an arwith reference to the assembling of its legislative As I view it, the change would be in the interest of efficient, a more direct, and a more representative administration of governmental affairs. It would bring the Constitution into harmony with the present conditions and requirement.s of our times. I most earnestly hope that resolution may be approved and submitted by this that it will be ratified at an early date by the legislatures in the required number of States so that it become a part of the fundamental law of the land. [Applause.]

Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

GIFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the from New York [Mr. BLACK].

BLACK. Mr. Chairman, this is an important era in life of parliamentary governments. Europe is a civic testing out new theories of government, but time only will tell their worth. _ representative system has been workable for our conand our people. Lately it has been under attack.

writers of responsibility advocate the adoption of one ­ many European systems. We, to protect a system believe in, should remove the point of " proper attacks. hold-over Congressmen have been an inspiration to Their very presence, after repudiation, is a denial representation. It would be wise for the confidence we that we change our times of meeting. The expression people at the polls as readily as possible should be into official action. The Congress has done well, matter which political party has controlled its deliberations, it can be more tmmediately responsive to the pubby this amendment.

After all, a Congressman. •tame-duck " or live, is human. Some will doubt this. The " “lame-duck,” anxious for his future, will be more amenable to Executive suggestions than he might otherwise be.

Congress, as the legislative body, has suffered by contrast with the Executive head of the Government. It is quite natural, because of the manner in which we proceed, that that should be. A bill comes into Congress; it goes to a committee; it is deliberated upon; hearings are held; the press carries s t ories about the hearings and there is editorial reaction. The bill goes to the White House or to the governor's office, as may be, in the case of a State legislature, and the executive head has had the benefit of the debates in the legislative branch, the hearings, the editorial reaction, and all the proceedings, and he frames his message of approval or disapproval.

He is able to give out a statement which has been carefully prepared, and the people say: What a wonderful President we have or what a wonderful governor we have and what a terrible Congress or terrible legislature we have. That is all due to the manner in which these things are carried on. The public can come into our galleries. The press is in our galleries. They report everything that goes on on the floor of the House and the public sees everything. Now and then, in the friction of debate, outrageous things may be said, and, of course, the high lights are carried throughout the country. The careful work that is done in the committees is seldom apparent, so that the representative body suffers generally because of these high lights . Of course, we can not blame the press, for it is news.

On the other hand, you never see a Capitol guide go over to the White House and you never see a guide in a State capitol go into the governor's office and say, " My friends, here is a President at work " or " Here is a governor at work." So the executive branch of our Government does not have the high lights sent all over the country by the press, and much that goes on in the executive branch of the Government is kept from the public eyes . That is one thing we can not help; but it is a point of attack and it is being used . as I say, by those who advocate executive control of the Government of the United States, and there is no small movement on foot for some kind of a dictatorship in this country.

Now, as to the "lame-duck" situation, we can not cure the other situation, but we can cure the presence here of hold-over Congressmen after they have been repudiated by the people of their own districts. It is a thing we can do and that we ought to do. In view of the convulsions going on all over the world-the civic convulsions, the upsetting of governments, the establishment of new rules and new doctrines of government, and the advocacy of new theories. some of them with a fairly intellectual support-! think it is well for us at every place we can to cure anything that may give rise to criticism, and I know of nothing that gives rise to more criticism than the u lame-duck " situation. Therefore, I hope this resolution will prevail. [Applause.]

Mr. GIFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time, up to 15 minutes, as the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. NoLAN] may care to use.

Mr. NOLAN. Mr. Chairman, I do not know that any discussion of this question at this time is anything but a waste of time. I think the attendance here this afternoon indicates that so far as the membership of this House is concerned everyone has made up his mind how he is going to vote upon this question when it comes up for final action. It has been :before the Congress for a number of years. It has been discussed in the pub~c press and by those who are interested in our Government.

It is a change in the Constitution that does not in any way affect any of the fundamental rights contained in that document. It does not in any way change the structure of our Government. It is merely a mechanical change or a change in our procedure. It makes our representative Gove r nmen t more representati v e and more directly responsive to the will of the people as expressed in a.n election.

When the Constitution was adopted we were living in a period of the stage coach, poor roads, no adequate means of communication. Conditions have changed now. We are living in a period of highways, electricity, steam, telegraph, telephone, and other means of communication, and all that. this amendment of the Constitution will do will be to bring the Constitution itself up to date, so that it will conform with the times in which we live and make our Government more in harmony with the theory and practices of responsible, representative government. [Applause.]

Mt. GIFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself three minutes on the matter of the Longworth amendment as it may possibly be amended.

I am one of those who fear, unless the Longworth amendment is adopted in this House, we will be unable to get a two-thirds vote in favor of the resolution; but, in the event the Longworth amendment is defeated, I am extremely anxious that we understand the other amendment that will be offered.

The limitation of May 4 in the second session of Congress would remain in that amendment, with the words added u unless the Congress shall by law appoint different dates." This removes any question of the President's failing to call a special session if needed, but both branches of Congress by joint action could call the extra session. If, a few days before the session was to be concluded, it was found that the business could not be properly transacted, the Congress itself could vote a different date for adjournment, but it would be by joint action. I want to impress upon the Members the fact we are not yielding our rights to the Executive, and all the argument I have heard up to this time has been based upon the fact that the President might fail to call us in special session if needed. We can continue ourselves in session; but, I repeat again, it must be by joint action of both branches, and I am very anxious and very desirous that the Members who have been opposing the Longworth amendment should give consideration to this amendment, if and when proposed.

This is the purpose for which I yielded myself the three minutes, Mr. Chairman, and I trust now that we may be able to agree upon a time for adjournment for the day.

Mr. JEFFERS. Mr. Chairman, I move that the committee do now rise.

The motion was agreed to.

Accordingly the committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, Mr. BULWINKLE, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that that committee, having had under consideration the Senate Joint Resolution 14, had directed him to report that it had come to no resolution thereon.