THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS SATURDAY, MARCH 31, 1934 PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21763, 31 March 1934, Page 10

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS SATURDAY, MARCH 31, 1934 PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS

The decided rebuff Mr. Roosevelt has suffered at the hands of Congress is more marked because of the readiness with which up to the present it has endorsed the many measures he has recommended in connection with his recovery programme. The constitutional validity of some can be sharply questioned. The way in which others have been diametrically opposed to what was previously claimed to be the American tradition, the American conception of liberty, is beyond question. Yet Congress accepted them and appeared to be asking for more. Now, on the highly contentious issues of veterans' pensions and cuts in Federal salaries, it has reasserted that power to over-ride the President's veto which seemed almost to have been forgotten. The weapon of the veto and the manner in which it can be countered are features of American constitutional practice on which there has been ample comment, because they represent the division of ultimate power between the Executive and the Legislature. The President is given the right to refuse assent to any bill of which he disapproves. Unlike the similar power with which the British monarch is theoretically invested, that of the President is frequently used. Concerning this power under the British Constitution, Viscount Bryce remarked, "The British Crown virtually parted with its right of dissent from the Houses two centuries ago, though that right has never been extinguished by statute." In another context he says: "The veto of the President in the United States was suggested by the power, already long disused before 1787. which had formerly belonged to the British Grown." There is. however, this difference between the two cases. The British prerogative, while it existed, was absolute. The American veto can be overcome if the bill refused assent be passed again by a twothirds majority in each House of Congress. Thus Mr. Roosevelt's veto has been brought to naught.

The defeat of the veto is remarkable, because, as stated, it is the first piece of self-assertion by Congress that Mr. Roosevelt has met. It is not common at any time, for resort again to Bryce shows that after stating the majority required to defeat the president, he adds, "but as such a majority is seldom attainable, and the President is likely to have some good reason for his action, he is rarely over-ruled." This being the case, it is worth examining the circumstances in which Congress has broken from its attitude of almost subservience to the President —though only momentarily, as its acceptance, immediately afterwards, of measures carrying plenty of material for controversy proves. That subservience is hardly too strong a term is proved by the phrase of a dispassionate American commentator —"rubber-stamp legislators." In March last year, almost immediately after his inauguration, Mr. Roosevelt asked Congress for authority to effect considerable economies. While veterans actually disabled in the late war, and Spanish-American war veterans suffering the effects of old age were to be retained on the pension rolls, the President was given power to make regulations for granting other pensions, fixing the degree of disability and the amount of service required as a qualification. Civil War pensions were reduced by 10 per cent. Thus Mr. Roosevelt proposed to deal boldly with the demands of ex-servicemen, which were more extensive than in any other country affected by the war, and in many instances based on the mere fact of having been called up for service. There were other provisions curtailing privileges granted to ex-soldiers. The bill further provided for the lowering of the salaries of members of Congress, and, for the reduction of all Federal salaries up to a maximum of 15 per cent, on the basis of a decline in the cost of living. Thesalary cuts were limited to a period ■ending June 30, 1934. This measurewas passed by the House of Representatives by 266 votes to 138. Tt met stouter opposition in the Senate, but was eventually carried there without changes of any moment. The President had scored an important point. Though Congress obediently gave Mr. Roosevelt the economy legislation, a challenge to its operation came later. Reduced appropriations in accordance with hie policy were contained in the Independent Offices Bill of last year, which was considered at the end of May and the beginning of June. The Senate passied this bill in a form which reduced by some 170,000,000 dollars the economies proposed at the expense of the soldier pensioners. White House immediately joined issue with the Senate, Mr. Roosevelt offering to stay in Washington all the summer if neeessai-y to have his Budget plans carried out. The dispute was settled when the House of Representatives rallied to his support and the Senate gave way. Battle was joined on the same question early this year. The Independent Offices Bill was passed by the House in January after members had attempted a measure of restoration to both veterans and Federal employees. The President gave way to the extent of increasing the veterans' grants, and this apparently satisfied the House. The Appropriations Committee of the Senate then set to work, producing proposals that one-third of the 15 per cent salaries cut should be restored immediately and another third on July 1. This year, instead of helping the President to reverse what has been done against his wishes, the House has taken the lead in defeat-

ing his veto. It is a dramatic rebuff, but the motive can be found without much searching. At the end of this year the whole House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate must face an election. The President is secure in office for two years longer. Tt is natural those who have to submit themselves to the country in this way should be particularly apprehensive about the measure they have contested. Regarding other features of the Roosevelt programme they might plead for time and patience, urging that the full effects were not yet manifest. There is no ambiguity about the consequences, to the individual, of the economies. In those circumstances can be found the motive inspiring Congress in its defiance of the Presidential will.