Often the new member goes to Washington as the representative of a

particular line of policy, having been elected, it may be, as an

advocate of free trade, or as a champion of protection; and it is

naturally his first care upon entering on his duties to seek immediate

opportunity for the expression of his views and immediate means of

giving them definite shape and thrusting them upon the attention of

Congress. His disappointment is, therefore, very keen when he finds both

opportunity and means denied him. He can introduce his bill; but that is

all he can do, and he must do that at a particular time and in a

particular manner. This he is likely to learn through rude experience,

if he be not cautious to inquire beforehand the details of practice. He

is likely to make a rash start, upon the supposition that Congress

observes the ordinary rules of parliamentary practice to which he has

become accustomed in the debating clubs familiar to his youth, and in

the mass-meetings known to his later experience. His bill is doubtless

ready for presentation early in the session, and some day, taking

advantage of a pause in the proceedings, when there seems to be no

business before the House, he rises to read it and move its adoption.

But he finds getting the floor an arduous and precarious undertaking.

There are certain to be others who want it as well as he; and his

indignation is stirred by the fact that the Speaker does not so much as

turn towards him, though he must have heard his call, but recognizes

some one else readily and as a matter of course. If he be obstreperous

and persistent in his cries of "Mr. Speaker," he may get that great

functionary's attention for a moment,--only to be told, however, that he

is out of order, and that his bill can be introduced at that stage only

by unanimous consent: immediately there are mechanically-uttered but

emphatic exclamations of objection, and he is forced to sit down

confused and disgusted. He has, without knowing it, obtruded himself in

the way of the "regular order of business," and been run over in

consequence, without being quite clear as to how the accident occurred.

Moved by the pain and discomfiture of this first experience to respect,

if not to fear, the rules, the new member casts about, by study or

inquiry, to find out, if possible, the nature and occasion of his

privileges. He learns that his only safe day is Monday. On that day the

roll of the States is called, and members may introduce bills as their

States are reached in the call. So on Monday he essays another bout with

the rules, confident this time of being on their safe side,--but mayhap

indiscreetly and unluckily over-confident. For if he supposes, as he

naturally will, that after his bill has been sent up to be read by the

clerk he may say a few words in its behalf, and in that belief sets out

upon his long-considered remarks, he will be knocked down by the rules

as surely as he was on the first occasion when he gained the floor for a

brief moment. The rap of Mr. Speaker's gavel is sharp, immediate, and

peremptory. He is curtly informed that no debate is in order; the bill

can only be referred to the appropriate Committee.

This is, indeed, disheartening; it is his first lesson in committee

government, and the master's rod smarts; but the sooner he learns the

prerogatives and powers of the Standing Committees the sooner will he

penetrate the mysteries of the rules and avoid the pain of further

contact with their thorny side. The privileges of the Standing

Committees are the beginning and the end of the rules. Both the House of

Representatives and the Senate conduct their business by what may

figuratively, but not inaccurately, be called an odd device of

_disintegration_. The House virtually both deliberates and legislates

in small sections. Time would fail it to discuss all the bills brought

in, for they every session number thousands; and it is to be doubted

whether, even if time allowed, the ordinary processes of debate and

amendment would suffice to sift the chaff from the wheat in the bushels

of bills every week piled upon the clerk's, desk. Accordingly, no futile

attempt is made to do anything of the kind. The work is parceled out,

most of it to the forty-seven Standing Committees which constitute the

regular organization of the House, some of it to select committees

appointed for special and temporary purposes. Each of the almost

numberless bills that come pouring in on Mondays is "read a first and

second time,"--simply perfunctorily read, that is, by its title, by the

clerk, and passed by silent assent through its first formal courses, for

the purpose of bringing it to the proper stage for commitment,--and

referred without debate to the appropriate Standing Committee.

Practically, no bill escapes commitment--save, of course, bills

introduced by committees, and a few which may now and then be crowded

through under a suspension of the rules, granted by a two-thirds

vote--though the exact disposition to be made of a bill is not always

determined easily and as a matter of course. Besides the great

Committee of Ways and Means and the equally great Committee on

Appropriations, there are Standing Committees on Banking and Currency,

on Claims, on Commerce, on the Public Lands, on Post-Offices and

Post-Roads, on the Judiciary, on Public Expenditures, on Manufactures,

on Agriculture, on Military Affairs, on Naval Affairs, on Mines and

Mining, on Education and Labor, on Patents, and on a score of other

branches of legislative concern; but careful and differential as is the

topical division of the subjects of legislation which is represented in

the titles of these Committees, it is not always evident to which

Committee each particular bill should go. Many bills affect subjects

which may be regarded as lying as properly within the jurisdiction of

one as of another of the Committees; for no hard and fast lines separate

the various classes of business which the Committees are commissioned to

take in charge. Their jurisdictions overlap at many points, and it must

frequently happen that bills are read which cover just this common

ground. Over the commitment of such bills sharp and interesting

skirmishes often take place. There is active competition for them, the

ordinary, quiet routine of matter-of-course reference being interrupted

by rival motions seeking to give very different directions to the

disposition to be made of them. To which Committee should a bill "to

fix and establish the maximum rates of fares of the Union Pacific and

Central Pacific Railroads" be sent,--to the Committee on Commerce or to

the Committee on the Pacific Railroads? Should a bill which prohibits

the mailing of certain classes of letters and circulars go to the

Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads, because it relates to the

mails, or to the Committee on the Judiciary, because it proposes to make

any transgression of its prohibition a crime? What is the proper

disposition of any bill which thus seems to lie within two distinct

committee jurisdictions?

The fate of bills committed is generally not uncertain. As a rule, a

bill committed is a bill doomed. When it goes from the clerk's desk to a

committee-room it crosses a parliamentary bridge of sighs to dim

dungeons of silence whence it will never return. The means and time of

its death are unknown, but its friends never see it again. Of course no

Standing Committee is privileged to take upon itself the full powers of

the House it represents, and formally and decisively reject a bill

referred to it; its disapproval, if it disapproves, must be reported to

the House in the form of a recommendation that the bill "do not pass."

But it is easy, and therefore common, to let the session pass without

making any report at all upon bills deemed objectionable or

unimportant, and to substitute for reports upon them a few bills of the

Committee's own drafting; so that thousands of bills expire with the

expiration of each Congress, not having been rejected, but having been

simply neglected. There was not time to report upon them.

Of course it goes without saying that the practical effect of this

Committee organization of the House is to consign to each of the

Standing Committees the entire direction of legislation upon those

subjects which properly come to its consideration. As to those subjects

it is entitled to the initiative, and all legislative action with regard

to them is under its overruling guidance. It gives shape and course to

the determinations of the House. In one respect, however, its initiative

is limited. Even a Standing Committee cannot report a bill whose

subject-matter has not been referred to it by the House, "by the rules

or otherwise;" it cannot volunteer advice on questions upon which its

advice has not been asked. But this is not a serious, not even an

operative, limitation upon its functions of suggestion and leadership;

for it is a very simple matter to get referred to it any subject it

wishes to introduce to the attention of the House. Its chairman, or one

of its leading members, frames a bill covering the point upon which the

Committee wishes to suggest legislation; brings it in, in his capacity

as a private member, on Monday, when the call of States is made; has it

referred to his Committee; and thus secures an opportunity for the

making of the desired report.

It is by this imperious authority of the Standing Committees that the

new member is stayed and thwarted whenever he seeks to take an active

part in the business of the House. Turn which way he may, some privilege

of the Committees stands in his path. The rules are so framed as to put

all business under their management; and one of the discoveries which

the new member is sure to make, albeit after many trying experiences and

sobering adventures and as his first session draws towards its close,

is, that under their sway freedom of debate finds no place of allowance,

and that his long-delayed speech must remain unspoken. For even a long

congressional session is too short to afford time for a full

consideration of all the reports of the forty-seven Committees, and

debate upon them must be rigidly cut short, if not altogether excluded,

if any considerable part of the necessary business is to be gotten

through with before adjournment. There are some subjects to which the

House must always give prompt attention; therefore reports from the

Committees on Printing and on Elections are always in order; and there

are some subjects to which careful consideration must always be

accorded; therefore the Committee of Ways and Means and the Committee on

Appropriations are clothed with extraordinary privileges; and revenue

and supply bills may be reported, and will ordinarily be considered, at

any time. But these four are the only specially licensed Committees. The

rest must take their turns in fixed order as they are called on by the

Speaker, contenting themselves with such crumbs of time as fall from the

tables of the four Committees of highest prerogative.

Senator Hoar, of Massachusetts, whose long congressional experience

entitles him to speak with authority, calculates[19] that, "supposing

the two sessions which make up the life of the House to last ten

months," most of the Committees have at their disposal during each

Congress but two hours apiece in which "to report upon, debate, and

dispose of all the subjects of general legislation committed to their

charge." For of course much time is wasted. No Congress gets immediately

to work upon its first assembling. It has its officers to elect, and

after their election some time must elapse before its organization is

finally completed by the appointment of the Committees. It adjourns for

holidays, too, and generally spares itself long sittings. Besides, there

are many things to interrupt the call of the Committees upon which most

of the business waits. That call can proceed only during the morning

hours,--the hours just after the reading of the "Journal,"--on Tuesdays,

Wednesdays, and Thursdays; and even then it may suffer postponement

because of the unfinished business of the previous day which is entitled

to first consideration. The call cannot proceed on Mondays because the

morning hour of Mondays is devoted invariably to the call of the States

for the introduction of bills and resolutions; nor on Fridays, for

Friday is "private bill day," and is always engrossed by the Committee

on Claims, or by other fathers of bills which have gone upon the

"private calendar." On Saturdays the House seldom sits.

The reports made during these scant morning hours are ordered to be

printed, for future consideration in their turn, and the bills

introduced by the Committees are assigned to the proper calendars, to be

taken up in order at the proper time. When a morning hour has run out,

the House hastens to proceed with the business on the Speaker's table.

These are some of the plainer points of the rules. They are full of

complexity, and of confusion to the uninitiated, and the confusions of

practice are greater than the confusions of the rules. For the regular

order of business is constantly being interrupted by the introduction of

resolutions offered "by unanimous consent," and of bills let in under a

"suspension of the rules." Still, it is evident that there is one

principle which runs through every stage of procedure, and which is

never disallowed or abrogated,--the principle that the Committees shall

rule without let or hindrance. And this is a principle of extraordinary

formative power. It is the mould of all legislation. In the first place,

the speeding of business under the direction of the Committees

determines the character and the amount of the discussion to which

legislation shall be subjected. The House is conscious that time

presses. It knows that, hurry as it may, it will hardly get through with

one eighth of the business laid out for the session, and that to pause

for lengthy debate is to allow the arrears to accumulate. Besides, most

of the members are individually anxious to expedite action on every

pending measure, because each member of the House is a member of one or

more of the Standing Committees, and is quite naturally desirous that

the bills prepared by his Committees, and in which he is, of course,

specially interested by reason of the particular attention which he has

been compelled to give them, should reach a hearing and a vote as soon

as possible. It must, therefore, invariably happen that the Committee

holding the floor at any particular time is the Committee whose

proposals the majority wish to dispose of as summarily as circumstances

will allow, in order that the rest of the forty-two unprivileged

Committees to which the majority belong may gain the earlier and the

fairer chance of a hearing. A reporting Committee, besides, is generally

as glad to be pushed as the majority are to push it. It probably has

several bills matured, and wishes to see them disposed of before its

brief hours of opportunity[20] are passed and gone.

Consequently, it is the established custom of the House to accord the

floor for one hour to the member of the reporting Committee who has

charge of the business under consideration; and that hour is made the

chief hour of debate. The reporting committee-man seldom, if ever, uses

the whole of the hour himself for his opening remarks; he uses part of

it, and retains control of the rest of it; for by undisputed privilege

it is his to dispose of, whether he himself be upon the floor or not. No

amendment is in order during that hour, unless he consent to its

presentation; and he does not, of course, yield his time

indiscriminately to any one who wishes to speak. He gives way, indeed,

as in fairness he should, to opponents as well as to friends of the

measure under his charge; but generally no one is accorded a share of

his time who has not obtained his previous promise of the floor; and

those who do speak must not run beyond the number of minutes he has

agreed to allow them. He keeps the course both of debate and of

amendment thus carefully under his own supervision, as a good tactician,

and before he finally yields the floor, at the expiration of his hour,

he is sure to move the previous question. To neglect to do so would be

to lose all control of the business in hand; for unless the previous

question is ordered the debate may run on at will, and his Committee's

chance for getting its measures through slip quite away; and that would

be nothing less than his disgrace. He would be all the more blameworthy

because he had but to ask for the previous question to get it. As I have

said, the House is as eager to hurry business as he can be, and will

consent to almost any limitation of discussion that he may demand;

though, probably, if he were to throw the reins upon its neck, it would

run at large from very wantonness, in scorn of such a driver. The

previous question once ordered, all amendments are precluded, and one

hour remains for the summing-up of this same privileged committee-man

before the final vote is taken and the bill disposed of.

These are the customs which baffle and perplex and astound the new

member. In these precedents and usages, when at length he comes to

understand them, the novice spies out the explanation of the fact, once

so confounding and seemingly inexplicable, that when he leaped to his

feet to claim the floor other members who rose after him were coolly and

unfeelingly preferred before him by the Speaker. Of course it is plain

enough now that Mr. Speaker knew beforehand to whom the representative

of the reporting Committee had agreed to yield the floor; and it was no

use for any one else to cry out for recognition. Whoever wished to speak

should, if possible, have made some arrangement with the Committee

before the business came to a hearing, and should have taken care to

notify Mr. Speaker that he was to be granted the floor for a few

moments.

Unquestionably this, besides being a very interesting, is a very novel

and significant method of restricting debate and expediting legislative

action,--a method of very serious import, and obviously fraught with

far-reaching constitutional effects. The practices of debate which

prevail in its legislative assembly are manifestly of the utmost

importance to a self-governing people; for that legislation which is not

thoroughly discussed by the legislating body is practically done in a

corner. It is impossible for Congress itself to do wisely what it does

so hurriedly; and the constituencies cannot understand what Congress

does not itself stop to consider. The prerogatives of the Committees

represent something more than a mere convenient division of labor. There

is only one part of its business to which Congress, as a whole,

attends,--that part, namely, which is embraced under the privileged

subjects of revenue and supply. The House never accepts the proposals of

the Committee of Ways and Means, or of the Committee on Appropriations,

without due deliberation; but it allows almost all of its other Standing

Committees virtually to legislate for it. In form, the Committees only

digest the various matter introduced by individual members, and prepare

it, with care, and after thorough investigation, for the final

consideration and action of the House; but, in reality, they dictate the

course to be taken, prescribing the decisions of the House not only,

but measuring out, according to their own wills, its opportunities for

debate and deliberation as well. The House sits, not for serious

discussion, but to sanction the conclusions of its Committees as rapidly

as possible. It legislates in its committee-rooms; not by the

determinations of majorities, but by the resolutions of

specially-commissioned minorities; so that it is not far from the truth

to say that Congress in session is Congress on public exhibition, whilst

Congress in its committee-rooms is Congress at work.

Habit grows fast, even upon the unconventional American, and the nature

of the House of Representatives has, by long custom, been shaped to the

spirit of its rules. Representatives have attained, by rigorous

self-discipline, to the perfect stature of the law under which they

live, having purged their hearts, as completely as may be of all desire

to do that which it is the chief object of that law to forbid by giving

over a vain lust after public discussion. The entire absence of the

instinct of debate amongst them, and their apparent unfamiliarity with

the idea of combating a proposition by argument, was recently

illustrated by an incident which was quite painfully amusing. The

democratic majority of the House of the Forty-eighth Congress desired

the immediate passage of a pension bill of rather portentous

proportions; but the republican minority disapproved of the bill with

great fervor, and, when it was moved by the Pension Committee, late one

afternoon, in a thin House, that the rules be suspended, and an early

day set for a consideration of the bill, the Republicans addressed

themselves to determined and persistent "filibustering" to prevent

action. First they refused to vote, leaving the Democrats without an

acting quorum; then, all night long, they kept the House at roll-calling

on dilatory and obstructive motions, the dreary dragging of the time

being relieved occasionally by the amusement of hearing the excuses of

members who had tried to slip off to bed, or by the excitement of an

angry dispute between the leaders of the two parties as to the

responsibility for the dead-lock. Not till the return of morning brought

in the delinquents to recruit the democratic ranks did business advance

a single step. Now, the noteworthy fact about this remarkable scene is,

that the minority were not manoeuvring to gain opportunity or time for

debate, in order that the country might be informed of the true nature

of the obnoxious bill, but were simply fighting a preliminary motion

with silent, dogged obstruction. After the whole night had been spent in

standing out against action, the House is said to have been "in no mood

for the thirty-minutes' debate allowed by the rules," and a final vote

was taken, with only a word or two said. It was easier and more natural,

as everybody saw, to direct attention to the questionable character of

what was being attempted by the majority by creating a somewhat

scandalous "scene," of which every one would talk, than by making

speeches which nobody would read. It was a notable commentary on the

characteristic methods of our system of congressional government.

One very noteworthy result of this system is to shift the theatre of

debate upon legislation from the floor of Congress to the privacy of the

committee-rooms. Provincial gentlemen who read the Associated Press

dispatches in their morning papers as they sit over their coffee at

breakfast are doubtless often very sorely puzzled by certain of the

items which sometimes appear in the brief telegraphic notes from

Washington. What can they make of this for instance: "The House

Committee on Commerce to-day heard arguments from the congressional

delegation from" such and such States "in advocacy of appropriations for

river and harbor improvements which the members desire incorporated in

the River and Harbor Appropriations Bill"? They probably do not

understand that it would have been useless for members not of the

Committee on Commerce to wait for any opportunity to make their

suggestions on the floor of Congress, where the measure to which they

wish to make additions would be under the authoritative control of the

Committee, and where, consequently, they could gain a hearing only by

the courteous sufferance of the committee-man in charge of the report.

Whatever is to be done must be done by or through the Committee.

It would seem, therefore, that practically Congress, or at any rate the

House of Representatives, delegates not only its legislative but also

its deliberative functions to its Standing Committees. The little public

debate that arises under the stringent and urgent rules of the House is

formal rather than effective, and it is the discussions which take place

in the Committees that give form to legislation. Undoubtedly these

siftings of legislative questions by the Committees are of great value

in enabling the House to obtain "undarkened counsel" and intelligent

suggestions from authoritative sources. All sober, purposeful,

business-like talk upon questions of public policy, whether it take

place in Congress or only before the Committees of Congress, is of great

value; and the controversies which spring up in the committee-rooms,

both amongst the committee-men themselves and between those who appear

before the Committees as advocates of special measures, cannot but

contribute to add clearness and definite consistency to the reports

submitted to the House.

There are, however, several very obvious reasons why the most thorough

canvass of business by the Committees, and the most exhaustive and

discriminating discussion of all its details in their rooms, cannot take

the place or fulfill the uses of amendment and debate by Congress in

open session. In the first place, the proceedings of the Committees are

private and their discussions unpublished. The chief, and unquestionably

the most essential, object of all discussion of public business is the

enlightenment of public opinion; and of course, since it cannot hear the

debates of the Committees, the nation is not apt to be much instructed

by them. Only the Committees are enlightened. There is a conclusive

objection to the publication of the proceedings of the Committees, which

is recognized as of course by all parliamentary lawyers, namely, that

those proceedings are of no force till confirmed by the House. A

Committee is commissioned, not to instruct the public, but to instruct

and guide the House.

Congressional government · 第 4 / 20 段