Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (Jan. 1, 1917)
The Commoner JANUARY, 1917 cnues of the federal' government frhen yom remember how mafty-en it take toconduet this federal government, you can see that yon are either going to build up an enormous bure&a with a multitude of officials or else you are go ing to attempt to do this enormous work with a few men, who can not possibly -attend to it The first suggestion is, therefore, that In the very nature of things there can not be an effi ciont regulation from this central source with out the creation of machinery that is far be yond the calculation, so far as I -have seen it stated, of those who have considered it from that side. The second objection is a fundamental one, namely, that the further you remove the work of regulation from the people the more difficult it is for the people to control their representa tives. If there is any virtue in representative government, it must be admitted that the rep resentation is best when the representatives are nearest home and most completely submissive to the will of the people. The tendency that we have observed throughout this country is already sufficient to have impressed itself upon several states which have put back into) the hands of the people a power with which they had parted that is, reclaiming the . govern ment through the process of the initiative and referendum. In that we see evidence of a con fidence in the people, and a distrust of the peo ple's representatives. ONE DIVISION BETWEEN MEN Now, this distrust rests upon several founda tions; that is, there are several things that con tribute to this distrust. In the first place, there is the natural bias of the man. Every man has a natural bias. If the word "natural" is objected to, I possibly ought to say that it is a bias that Is CONTROLLING whether it comes in youth or comes after maturity. It is a bias on one side or the other of the great line that runs through society. There is just one division, as I understand it, between men, and that is the line that separates the man who is at heart a democrat from the man who is' at heart an aristocrat, and I need not toll you gentlemen that I am not using the word 4ldem ocrat" in a partisan sense. The word is 2,0 Q0 years older than the democratic party. It is a word which describes an attitude of the hu man heart, and that attitude which it describes is just the opposite of the attitude described by the word aristocrat. They do not differ in hon esty, the democrats and aristocrats. They differ in bias, in point of view. The democrat be lieves in a society built from the bottom. The aristocrat believes in a society suspended from the top, and because of this difference of opin ion the democrat believes that legislation ought to come up from the people; the aristocrat be lieves it ought to come down from the few. To illustrate it, the man who is at heart a democrat believes that legislation should be for the masses. His philosophy is that if you make the masses prosperous that prosperity will find its way up through all the classed that rest upon the masses. The aristocrat, because of his point of view, n&mely, that society is sus pended from the top, says, and he says it hon estly, for he believes it, legislate for the well-to-do, and then be patient and wait until their prosperity leaks to those below. Now, when you are choosing a representative everythingo"epends upon the point of view. He way be just as honest a man as you could find, but if he really believes that the well-to-do must take care of the rest of the people his de cisions are going to be entirely different from the decisions of the man who takes the other point of view, and believes that society is built from the bottom and that good comes up from the masses. Now, it is not always easy to know a man's fundamental bias imtl you test h'm, and the further he is from you the more difficult it is for you to follow him and judge whether he rep resents you or somebody "else. A democrat taking the word in its fundamental sense believes that the representative ought to ACT for the people. The ar'stocrat believes he ought to THINK for the people. If you take all this railway business to Washington you have to de pend for all your .regulation upon the men who are elected to congress and to the senate, WUo como a long distance from home ajid who are so remote from their constituency that the constituency is not able to watch them, and to measure their fidolity la the matter of repre sentation go that when you aurrendor this power that the states now have and put it all here In Washington you make it moro difficult for the people to watch the mon who are their exponents and their spokesman. The second la that the temptations are much greater If you put the power here than If you kept It at home, because If an act of congress ft to affect these railroad systems to the extent of $50,000,000 a year or $100,000,000 a year, the railroads And It to their Interest to bring pressure to bear on the members of congress and the senators who are to act. I hope you will not think I am reflecting on the railroads when I say they may yield to temptation to exert an influence. I have known thorn to do so. You may remember that a few years ago some money was appropriated for the building .of the Washington depot. Some of you may bo able to tell me how much it was. Was It not two or throo millions? Mr. Esch. I think the District appropriated about three millions and tho government about an equal amount. Mr. Bryan. Congress appropriated some thing Mr. Cullop. The same as the District one half. Mr. Bryan. At that time two of tho leading railroads that enter into this place had their lobbyists in tho corridor of tho capltol issuing passes to tho members, and I know of two cases where the railroad lobbyists refused passes to men who had voted against the rail roads' interest. One was a lobbyist of one of the roads and one was the lobbyist of the other. If they will send their lobbyists to the capitol with their pass books of course they can not do it now, because the pass business has been prohibited; that is, tho issuing of passes has been stopped if they will send their lobbyists to the corridors of the capitol with their check books to purchase, by passes, tho votes of men on so small an appropriation as $3,000,000, what will be tho temptation when a brief stat ute may mean $50,000,000 or $100,000,000? I was In congress for a couple of years, and I know vfiiat difficulty we had whenever any question affecting tho railroads came up. You will recall that it took 10 or 15 years'to secure a change in tho law relating to the interstate commerce commission, enlarging its powers. It took 10 or 15 years to secure it, after tho com mission liad askcl year after year that this power be granted. What was it that prevented it? ''It was the influence of the railroads in your national capital. Your railroads were powerful enough to thwart the will of the peo ple on that subject and to influence the sen ators and members of congress. I remember that the president of one of the railroads was elected to congress, and he came, after he was elected, under the privileges of our rules, and, sitting on the floor of congress, he directed the fight against the measure that the railroads were opposing. Now, I only mention these as some of the things you have to consider. When you take from the states tho power that they have and put it all here you make every congressional contest a fight with the railroads of this whole country, for, remember, that the railroads of the' whole country will be Interested in the election of overy congressman In every district. They wlfl be interested in the election of every senator from every' state, because one vote may decide a nuest'on that mav mean $10,000,000 or pvon SI 00,000.000 to them. CORRUPTING FORCE IN NATION'S POLITICS So, it seems to me the direct result of this will be to bring into national politics a corrupt ing force greater than we have ever known be fore, and that every congressman will be sub jected to pressure after ho gets here, and that we will find these raMroads picking out the men who are to run and furnishing them the means with which to secure nominations, and with the means with which to secure elections not necessarMy doing things which violate the stat utes. They may not furnish money, because under our present law that would have to be accounted for and corporations can not con tribute to campaign funds; they can not furnish passes, because that has been prohibited; but remember that the railroads run into all the towns of any importance, and have their agents there they have their attorneys; they have their station agents and their adjusters ak4 thoy havo tho mon whom they call, upon to' tes tify, If damage Is done; if there Is an Injury, thoro aro certain physicians who testify as te tho oxtont of tho Injury. They have their en tire working forco, and when you put the e tlro working forco of all the railroads behind a candidato for nomination and, aftor he Is nom inated, behind the candidate for election, yon bring Into politics a tremendous special inter est that can not but have its Influence upon the politics of the country. And when you send to Washington a man who comes as tho repre sentative of any special interest, ho Is open to tho solicitations of every othor special Interest, for tho special interests havo to stand together, and any man who comes with a commission a secret commission from any special interest is here to trado his voto on nny subjoct with the representative of any other special interest that needs his holp. Now, that, t-orny mind, Is a consideration that can not bo overlooked by thoso who are dealing with this subject in a largo way. Tho third point is that tho absorption of legislative power by tho federal government and tho surrender of all legislative power by tho stato governments will practically obliterate the lines of tho states and weakon thorn in the discharge of their duties, while It will tremend ously increaso tho centralizing forces that are at work In our government. I bcliovo that no ono has better stated tho merits of tho dual form of government than Webster when he spoke of an indissoluble union of indestructible states. PRESERVATION OF LOCAL UNIT NECESSARY Now, it is Just as necessary that tho states should be indestructible as it is that tho Union shall bo Indissoluble, for our government rests lor its success upon the plan that onables the units to take care of tho things that relate to them, leaving to tho federal government the control of tho things that relato to all the states. It is Just as necessary, to my mind, that the local unit shall be preserved and shall be safeguarded as it Is that wo shall act as a unit ""on all matters that affect tho nation. And that is necessary for exactly the same reasons that I havo mentioned before. Tho pooplo at home can better attend to tho things at home, and If this federal government attempted to take caro of all matters It would so enormously Increaso tho work to be done at Washington that it would be absolutely impossible to do it with any scrutiny. What do you find here? I havo not scon the statement for two or three years, but I remem ber when wo had 10,000 bills introduced in one congress. Mr. Adamson. It has got to 30,000 now. Mr. Bryan. Well, gentlemen, you see my service is of a very ancient kind, and thero has been a great growth since. Thirty thousand bills. What congressman or senator attempts to consider, to examine, or to understand any large percentage of the 30,000 bills that are introduced? Of course you say that tho com mltttes sift these out. Mr. Adamson. If you will permit me to an swer that question, I will tell you that some congressmen are so wise that they pretend to study all of them and pretend pn tho floor of tho house to know more about-'them than the committees that unanimously reported 'them. Mr. Bryan. I notice you say "pretend." Mr. Adamson. Yes, sir. Mr. Bryan. That would express an opinion. According to your judgment it Is mere pre tense? Mr. Adamson. I think generally so. There is not one case in ton thousand that a man knows more about them than the committee. Mr. Bryan. I think you are right Mr. .Sims. In the recent congress, there were over 40,000 bills and joint resolutions intro duced in both houses. ( Mr. Bryan. So you see how conservative I am, gentlemen, In my statement. When it comes to the committees you hare a number of committees, and whenyou divide 40,000 bills and resolutions among the com mittees of the senate and house ypu can see what a number of them go to oner committee. How many committees hava you in) the senate or house? u , - Mr. Esch. About 58. in the houst i. Mr. Bryan. That would mean an average of IV .. ,ttl.) ..I .Ul.ifl, .d&