92 Pt. 2 Cong. Rec. Sen. 2148-2231 APA T

Publish in

Others

12 views

Please download to get full document.

View again

of 22
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Share
Description
OF AMERICA UNITED STATES . (iongrcssional Rccord PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 79 th CONGRESS SECOND SESSION VOLUME 92-PART 2 FEBRUARY 19, 1946, TO MARCH 28, 1946 (PAGES 1443 TO 2780) Property of ANCMORACE COMMUNITY COLtICiI . o::l/ ~ tzs .. NpT TO LEAVE LIBRARY UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING O F F I C E ~ WASHINGTON, 1946 Attachment A - page 1 of 22 2148 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE· MARCH 12 H. R. 4884. An act to reli
Tags
Transcript
  OF AMERICA NITED STATES . (iongrcssional Rccord PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATESOF THE 79 th CONGRESS SECOND SESSION VOLUME 92-PART 2 FEBRUARY 19,1946, TOMARCH 28,1946 (PAGES 1443 TO 2780) Property of ANCMORACE COMMUNITY COLtICiI . o::l / ~ tzs .. NpT TOLEAVELIBRARY UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING O F F I C E ~ WASHINGTON, 1946 Attachment A - page 1 of 22  2148 CONGRESSIONALRECORD-SENATE· MARCH 12 H. R. 4884. An act to relieve certain em-· ployeeS of the Veterans'Administration from financialllllbUity for certain overpayments and atlow suchcreditthereforas Is necessary In the accountsofGuy F.Allen, chiefdisbursing o1Bcer.HOUSE BILL AND JOINT RESOLUTION REFERRED The following bill and joint resolution were each read tWice by theirtitles and referred,asindicated: H. R. 5605. An actmaking appropriations for the Departmentof Agriculturefor the. fiscal year ending June 30,1947, and for other purposes; to the Committee <.n Ap propriations. H. J. Res.307. Joint resolution toauthor ize the use of naval vesseis to determine the effect of atomic weapoils uponsuch ves sels: tothe Committee on Naval Affairs. ADMINIsTRATIVEPROCEDURE ACT TheSenate resumed the considerationof the bill(S. 7> to improve the administration ofjustice by prescribingfairadministrative procedure.Mr.McCARRAN. Mr.President, the unfinished businessbefore the Senate is S. 7, the administrativeprocedure bill, which has been so long considered and studiedby this body. In order that theSenatemay have apreviewof. whatit shallconsider in connection with the bill,I sendto the deska veryablearticle by Mr. Willis Smith, presidentof the American Bar Association, entitled Draftingthe ProposedFederalAdministrativeProcedure Act, and I ask that the clerkmay read the article,because it is brief, and will lendemphasisto the explana tion which I shallmake of the bill im mediately. The PRESIDINGOFFICER (Mr.TUN NELL in thechair). Without objection, the clerkwill read as requested. The ChiefClerk read as follows: DRAFTING THEPRoPOSED FEDERAL ADMINISTRA- TIVEPROCEDUllE ACT (ByWillis Smith 1) How to assure pUblic information, how to providefor rulemaking where no formalhearing isprovided, how to assurefairness in al1judlcatlons,how to confervarious incidental proceduralrights,how to limit sanctions, how tostateanthe essentials of a right to judicial review, and how to makeexaminers independent-these were themain ques tions. During the last 3 monthsof 1945 there tookplace a remarkable series ofevents in connection with the proposed statute regu latingFederal administrative procedure and conferring powers ofcourt review. On Oc tober 19,1945, the AttorneyGeneral of the United States issued a strong statement Insupportof It. On the fonowlng November 19 the Committee onthe Judiciaryof the UnitedStates Senateunanimouslyand favor ably reported It (S.7. Rept. No. 752). On December 10 It was Introduced in the House ofRepresentatives as H.R.4941 In the forJIl. reported by the Senate committee. On December 18 and 19, at the sixty-eighth an nual meeting of the AmericanBar Associa tion, Chairman HATTON W. SUMNERS, of the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representativesmade a favorable statement on It. AttorneyGeneral TOJIl C. Clark gave afUll address on the subject, and resolutionsIn favor ofIt were adopted. In these days, When so much legislationisdonepiecemeal and the demands ofspecial 1 The author Isa member of the Raleigh (N.C.) bar and president ofthe AmericanBar Association. interests hold . the center ot the stage,. the legislative proposalwhich hasmetwith Sl.\ch general acceptance·iseven morenotable be- > cause It dealsbroadly with the prob1emot . admlnlstrationand Isa measure forgood government. It deals With procedure, not privileges, and provides a generalmethodofassuring that government will operate ac cording to law. A bill of that character In these daysrequired a backgroundof prepara tion to achieve such acceptance. .. The proposed statute involves almost all administrativeoperations. It deals With the very lmportant problem of the. relation of courts to administrative agencies. It is ob viously not such a statute as may easilybe drawnand simply . submitted tothe usual legislative routine.Themethodof proce_ dure adoptedby the senate Judiciary Com mittee. underthe chairmanship of Senator PATMCCAIlilAN, of.Nevada,. recognized the nature oithe task. That method Is not only tmportant for this bill but opens possibilities for the future. . LEGISLATIVE HISTORY For more than 10 yearsCongress has con alderedproposalsforgeneral statutes respectlngadmlnistratlve law and procedure. Tenor more important bills have been Intro.-. duced In C o ~ g r e s s , and. mostof tl1emhave receivedwidespread consideration. In 1937 the President'sCommitteeon Ad ministrative M8.nagement· recommended the completeseparation ofinvestigative-prose cuting functions and personnelfrom de cidingfunctions and personnel in adminis trative agencies, but the significance ofIts report was lost In the turmoilof other Issues. In 1938 the 6eI).ate Committee onthe Ju diciaryheldh earlngson a proposal·for the creationof an administrativecourt. In 1939 the Walter-Logan administrative pnJ!:edure bill was favorably reported to the Senate. In 1940 It waspassedby the Congress but vetoed by the President In parton the ground that action shOUld await the then Imminent fiIlal reportby a committeeappointed in the executive branch. Early in 1941 that committee,popUlarly. knownas the AttomeyGeneral's Committee· onAdministrative :Pro cedure,made Itsextensive report. . Growing out· of the work of the AttorneyGeneral'sCommitteeonAdministrativeProcedure, severalbills were Introduced Iii1941. Senate hearings were· held on these bills during April,May, June, and JUly of that year. All Interestedadministrative agencies were heard at lengthand the proposals then pending involved the basic Issues. Further ·conslderatlon was postponed for three war years. Bills were againIntroduced In June 1944 and reintroduced Withrevisions in 1945. TheCommitteeon the Judiciaryof the House of Representatives heldhearings In June 1945, but It seemedclear that the real problemsweredetailed and technical. It had come to be widely accepted that such legislationshould be functional Inthe sense that it should apply to kinds of opera tionsrather than to formsof agencies.Ac cordingly, the proposed statute dealt primarilywith the legislative and judicial functions ofadministrative agencies. Within eachofthose functions, however, it was necessary to defineprocedures and except SUbjects which were either not regulatory in characteror weresoundly committed to Executive discretion. TECHNICALREVISIONS Anticipating that this would be thesituation, the chairmenof the Judiciary Com mittees of the Senate and Houseof Repre sentativeshad requested administrative agencies to SUbmit their views and sugges tions Inwriting.The AttorneyGeneralwas requested toact as a liaison o1Bcer between the legislative committee and the several administrative agencies. Representatives of the staffof the senate committee, withtheaid of the representativesof the AttorneyGeneral and ~ t h e r interested parties, engagedIn an el'tenslveseriesofconferences at Which pOints made were.dlscussed . ~ d alternative proposalS.as·· to language were debated.Then, In May 1945, thesenate committee ISSUed a committee printinwhichthetext . of S. 7 appeared in one columnand a tenta tivelyrevised text In the parallelcolumn. The reVised text soproposedwas then again submittedto administrative agencies andother interestedparties for theirwritten or oral comments, wblchwere analyzed by the committee's staff and a further com mittee print was Issued In June 1945. In four parallel columnsIt set forth (I) the text of the billas Introduced, (2) tile text of the tentatively revised bill prevlousiypUblished,(3) a general explanation of pro-· visions with references to the report of the AttorneyGeneral'sCommitteeonAdminis trative Procedure and ot-her authorities, and (4) a summary ofviews and suggestions received. About this time Tom C. Clarkbecame AttorneyGeneral and addednewrepresenta tives to· the conferencegroup. Senator Me CAlIJlAN, chairman of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, asked that they screen and correlateany further agency views. After thishad beendone and representatives ofprivate. organizations had SUbmitted their additional views, the bill as further revised waamade a committee print underdateof October 5,1946.. This final draft was submitted tothe At-. toriley General for hls formal perusal.He not onl 1 reported that the proposalwas not objectionable. but recommended its enactmentin a, strongstatement on OCtober19,i945.A month later tbe Senatecommitteereported the measure. Its reportof 31· pages plUS appendiXrefiects tbe long and painstaking consideration given the bill. The process of. that consideration was not only well adapted to the technical nature of the job at handbut It was truly democratic, forprivateas Well asgovernmentalrepresenta tivesweregiven every opportunity to SUbmit their views and suggestions, PARTICIPATION 01 LEGAL PIl0FESSION .The organized bar hadthe sa.me. oppor tunities forpresentationof Views. and sug gestlons.Bar associations had adopted reso lutions and had presentedreports tothe congreSSional committees. The American Bar Association'sspecial committee onad ministrative law took an active part,culminating in a full day'smeeting of the 13 man committee at Washingtonon October2. The . committeeunanimously approved the final draft of the bill and certified its position to the chairmen of the .congresslonal com mittees.Contrary tothe Impression whichsome people seem to have, the proposed AdminIstrativeProcedure Actis not a compromise. Theproblem was not howmuch but how. How to assure ,Public Information,how to prOVide forrulemaking where no formalhearing Is provided,how to assure fairness In adjUdications,how to confer various Inci dental proceduralrights, how to limit sanc tions, how tostate all the essentials of a right to·judicial review, and how to make examiners Independent-these were the main questions.There were two reasons why the legal pro fession COUld not engage In trading foradvantageIn the details. First, If the statute should .proVe unworkable. Itmight prejudiceprocedural legislationforalltime.Secondly. onerous reqUirements, such asthoserespectIng eVidence, might aidone privateInterest In one case-that Is, where prohibitoryordersare issued-but would harmthemin an other-e. g.,Wherealicense Is sought. Mainly, however, It was a· simple matterof good citizenship and good statesmanship to seek the best and fairest provisionsfor eaChSUbject. CONCLUSIO.N The draftof bill asreported by the SenateCommitteeon· the JUdiciaryolfersa means Attachment A - page 2 of 22  1946 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 2149 of securing and mainta.1ninga government aecording to law, Its wOl'kability ~ a s been testedby the elaborateprocedure discusset.above. Its utility has been approvedby the representativesof mostofthelegalprofes sion. Its desirability is admitted by public olflcers of the highestrank. The necessity for Ithas been attested by the responsibleMembers of the National Legislature. If It isadopted. as it sh(luldspeedilybe. the result will be due to the baekgr(lund of stUdy andcare With which Its terms havebeendrafted and tested. Mr.McCARRAN.Mr.President. it has beensaid that the lawisajealousmistress. I regretexceedingly that I cannot havebeforeme at this momenteveryMemberof the Senate of the United States so that each might listen to the explanationofa b1ll which to my mind and to the mind of thebarof Americaisoneof the most important measures that has beenpresented to the Congress of the United States in its history.Wehave set up a fourth Order in the tripartite planofGovernmentwhichwasinitiatedby the foundingfathersof our democracy. They set upthe executive, the legislative, and the judicialbranches; but since that time w.e haveset up a fourth dimension, if I may SO termit, whichisnowpopularlyknown as admin- istrative in nature. So we have the legislative, the executive, the judicial, andthe administrative. .. , Perhapsthereare reasonsfor thatar rangement.'Wefound that the legislativebranch, althoUghlt might enact law,could not verywenadminister it. ' So the legislati\'e branch enunciated the legalprecepts and ordained that commissions or groupsshould be establtshed by the executive branch with power to promulgaterules and regulations.Theserules and regulations arethe very things that impinge upon, curb, or permit the citizenwho is touchedby the law, ¥ everycitizenof this democracy is. . The billcomes from the committeeon the Judiciaryof thesenate of the United States, and I think it shouldbeexplained to everyMember of the Senate,because the Committee on the Judiciarydesires that there shouldbeafull understand ing ofitsprovisions and purposes. The Committee onthe Judiciary is the lawcommittee ofthis body, and the law is the thing which makes democracy Vital. This is 'not a. Governmentof men. It Is a Governmentoflaw; andthls lawis a thing whieb,every day from its enactment until the end of time 80 far as this Governmentisconcerned, wUl touch ev ery citizen of the Republic. So I pro- ceedwith a detailedexplanationof a bill whichshould be listened to byeveryMember of the Senate. Mr.President, Calendar No. '158, Sen ate bill '1, the purposeofwhich Is to lm prove the administration of' Justice by prescribing fair administrativeprtJcedure,isabillof rights for thehundreds of thousands of' Alner1cans.whose aJfairs are controlled or regulated in one way or another byagencies of the Federal Gov ernment.It is designed' to provide guaranties of due process tn a.dm1D'lstrativeprocedure. The demand forleglalatiotlof thla ~ p e to settle and regulate the fieldofPecleral administrative law and procedure has beenwidespread and consistentoveraperiooof many' years. Today thereare noclearlyrecognizedlegalguides foreither the public or the administrative omcialsofGovernment departments. The subjectofadministrativelaw and procedure is not expressly mentioned in the Constitution, and thereisno recognizablebodyofsUchlaw, as there is for the courts in the JudiclalCode.Even the ordinaryoperationsof ad ministrativeagencies areoften di1llcult to know, and undoubtedly therehave beenlitigantsbeforeQ{)vemment agen cieswhohavereceivedless than Justicebecause they were not fullyadvised oftheir rightsor' of the procedureneces sary to protect them. The Committeeon the Judiciaryhas beenconvineed that there shouldbeasimple and standardized plan of admin istrativeprocedure.Thisbill is intended to put such a plan intOetfect.Proposalsforgeneral statutes respect ing administrativelaw and procedure have beenbefore the Congress in oneform or another, and havebeen consid· eredby the CongreSsoveraperiodofmore than 10 years. I call the attentionof the senate to thechart on page 2 of the Judicial'l'Committee's repOrt on Cal endar No. 758, Senatebill 7. This is Sen ate Report !'fo. 752, which is onthe deskS ofall senators. This chart clearlyshows the chronologyof the main bills on this subjectwhich have beenintroduced.Eachof the blllssliownon thischart has receivedwidepublic attentionand long and seriousconsideration in the Congress.ProblentSofadministrativelaw and procedure have beenincreased and aggravatedby the continuedgrowthof the Government,particularly in the ex ecutive branch. By the middleof the 1930's the situation had becomeso seri ous that the President then in ofDce ap pointed a committee to make a comprehensivesurveyofadministrative meth ods, overlappingfunctions, and diverseorgan1Za.t1ons,aneitosubmitsuggestionsforimprovement. While that commit tee was not primarilyconcerned with the moredetailedquestions of administra tivelaw and procedure as theterm is now understood, the committee inevita blywas brought face to face with the fundamental problemof the inconsistent union ofprosecuting and decldin'g func tionsexercised by many executiveagencies. In 1937· the President'sCommittee on Adm1JiJstrative Management issued its report.Iquoteexcerpts from that report: The executivebrandl of the Go'Vemment of the United' States bas ããã grown up 'Without plan or ~ e s l g n ã ãã ã To look at it now, no one woUld everrecognise the stl'ucture whlct1 the tound1ng fathers erected a century and a half ago. ãããC<lmmlssions have'beentheresultof legisla tive groping ratber than tbe pursUit of a consistent policy.ããã Theyare in reality minlature Independent governments setup to deal withthe· railroadproblem, thebllDJWJgproblem, or the radio problem. The)' C0118titute a. ~ fourthbraneh H of tile Ga9enunent, .. baphU&1'd deposit of kresponsible sgenc1ea and uncoordinated pOWers. ããã There I' a confiict of prin ,ctple Jnvolvedin t h e l r m a k e ~ u J J and tunc UonII.ããã They are vested wIth du tIM of admtnlstratlOD.',.ãã ,and at th9 sametimethey aregiven important judicial work.ãã .. The.evils resulting from this confusion of principlesareInsidious andfar reaching. ã .,. Pressures and influ ences properl' enough directedtowardof ficers responsible forformulatingandadministering polIc)' constitute an unwhole some atmoapbl!! e in Which to adjudicate privaterights. But the mixedduties of the commissions render escape from these sub versiveIn1luencesImpossible. Furtherlllore, the 6&me men are Obliged to serve both asprosecutOl'S and as jUdges, This not only undermines judicialfairness; It weakens pub lie conildence In that fa.1rness. Commission decisions alfectingprIvatefights and conduct lIe under the InlsplCion of beingrationalIzationsof the prellmimiry tlndii:!gs which the COmmiBeion, in the role of prosecutor, presented to itself. Mr.President, I havebeenquoting from the report of the President'sCom mittee Oft AdministrativeManagement,issued in 1937. In transmitting that report to the Congress, President Roosevelt added a comment ofhisown,fromwhich I alsowish to quote.Hesaid: I haveexamined this report carefully andthoughtfully. and amconvinced thatit is a greatdocument of permanent impor tance. .. ãã The practiceof creating Independent regulatory commlssklns, who perform ~ t n J s t J ' 8 t l v e work in additionto JUdicialwork, threatens to deve1(lp a fourthbranch of the Government forwhich there is no sanction in the Constituti.on. Ill'. President,those are the wordsof the late, beloved President of the United States.Franklin DelanoRoosevelt. The remedyproposed by that committee. back in 1937, wasa very drasticone.namely,complete separation of in vestigative and prosecutingfunctions and personnel from decidingfunctions and personnel. That remedy hadin herentadministrative difficultieswhich,while not so great as the fault which it sought to remedy,were in themseivesserious. The pending bill does not go as far as that 1937 recommendation.A'proposalfor creation of an admin istrative coUrt came before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1938 and extensivehearingswereheld. In connection with thosehearings, the JudiciaryCom mittee issuedacommittee print elabo rately analyzing the administrativepow ers conferredby statute. That was in the third sesslon of the Seventy-fifthCongress. In the folloWingyear, 1939, the Walter-Loganadministrative proce dure billwasfavorablyreported totheSenate from the Committee ontheJudi ciary. That was during the Seventy sixth Congress, llrst session, and the re Port I havementioned was senate Re port 422 of that Congress,reporting o ~ Senate bill 915 of that Congress. In the third session of the Seventy-sixthCongress, the Walter-Logan' billwasre partedto the House of Representatives withamendments. The billeventuallywaspassedby the Congress. but wasvetoed by the President iii 1940. partly on the ground that actionshouldawait the final report of a committeewhich had been apPointed 2 yearsearliel' to stUdy the entire situation. The committeeWhich the President had In mind' was the so-calledAttorneyGeneral'scommittee,which had beenappointed in December 1938. The backgroundof that committeewasarenewed Attachment A - page 3 of 22  2150 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE MARCH 12 suggestionfrom the AttorneyGeneralconcerning the needforprocedural re formin the wide and growingfieldofadministrativelaw. The President had concurred in the AttorneyGeneral's rec ommendationfor the appointmentofacommissionto make athoroughsurveyofexistingpractices and procedures, and to point the way to improvements, andhad authorized the AttorneyGeneral to appointacommitteefor that purpose, The committeewascomposedofGovern ment officials,teachers,judges, andpri vatepractitioners. The AttorneyGeneral'scommitteemade an interim report in January 1940. The staffof that committeeprepared, and during 1940 arid 1941 issued,aseriesofstudiesof the procedures of theprin .cipaladministrativeagencies and bureausin the FederalGovernment.Executivesessionsof the committeewereheldoveralongperiod, and representativesofFederalagencieswere heard at suchsessions. The committeealsoheldlengthypublichearings. It thenpre pared and issuedafinal report whichwasexhaustive and voluminous. The Senateshouldbeinformed that the Judi ciaryCommittee, in framing the billwhich is nowbefore the Senate, hashadthe benefitof the factualstudies and analysespreparedby the Attorney Gen eral'scommittee.Severalbillswereintroduced in 1941, as the outgrowthof the workof the AttorneyGeneral'scommittee.Hearingsonthesebillswereheldduring the spring and earlysummer of that year.The matter waspostponed,however,becauseof the international situation then eXisting,and theapparent needforconcen trating on matters of national defenseand,soonafterward,ofactualwar.However,allinterestedadministrativeagencieswere heard at length during the 1941 hearings, andthe proposals then pendinginvolved the samebasicissuesasdoes the presentbill.On the basisof the studies andhear ingsinconnectionWithpriorbillson the subject, andafter severalyearsofconsultationwithinterestedpartiesin and outofofficialpositions,identicalbills on thissubjectwereintroduced in June 1944, Senatebill 2030 of the Seventy-eighthCongress in the Senate, and Housebill 5081 in the House.Introductionofthesebillsbrought forth alargevolumeof further suggestionsfromeveryquarter. As a reSUlt, arevised and simplifiedbillwasintroduced at the openingof the presentCongress,on January 6, 1945. ThisbillwasSenatebiil 7, introduced intheSenate by thechairman of the Judiciary Committeeof the Senate; andan identi calmeasure,Housebill 1203, was intro ducedon January 8 inthe HouseofRepresentativesby thechairman of the JudiciaryCommitteeof that body.Agreatdealofinformaldiscussionwithinterestedpartiesfollowed thein troductionofthesetwobills. In the latter part of June 1945 the JudiciaryCommitteeof the Househeldhearingson the Housebill. Prior to thosehearings the Housecommittee and theSenate Committeeon the Judiciary had requestedadministrativeagencies tosubmit their viewsinwriting.-Allsubmissionswerecarefullyanalyzedand,with the aidofrepresentativesof the AttorneyGeneral and interestedprivateorganizatiOns, in May 1945 there wasissuedaSenatecommittee print setting forthin parallelcol umnsthebilI asintroduced and .a tenta tivelyrevisedtext.Oncemoreinterestedparties inandout ofGovernmentwereinvited to submit, and didsubmit,commentsorally or in writing onthe revisedtext.Thesewereanalyzedby the staffof the SenateCommittee onthe Judiciary, and a fur ther committee print wasissued inJune 1945.Thiscommittee print setforth, in four parallelcolumns,first, the text of the billasintroduced;second, thetext of the tentativelyrevisedbillpreViouslypublished;third,ageneralexplanationofprovisionswithreference to the report of the AttorneyGeneral'scommitteeonadministrativeprocedure andother au thorities;and,fourth,a summary ofviews and suggestionsreceived.After the preparation and publicationofthiscommitteeprint, the AttorneyGeneralagaindesignatedrepresentatives to hold further discussionswith i n t e r ~ estedagencies and toscreen and further correlateagencyviews,someofwhichweresubmitted in writing and someQrally.Privatepersons and representatives-ofprivateorganizationsalsoparticipated in the discussions at that time.Aftercompletionofthosediscussions the committeedrafted the billin the form in which it has beenreported and isnowbefore the Senate. The Attorney Gen eral has reportedfavorablyonthisbill, and Icall the attention of theSenate to thetext of the AttorneyGeneral'sreport,whichappearsasAppendixBof the committee'sreport.Mr.President,Ihavegone rather fuIly intothe backgroundofthisbill andthe variousstepswhichwere taken priorto its presentationto the Senate,becauseIwisheveryMemberofthisbodytoknow and realize that not only the generalSUbject, but everydetailedprovisionof the bilI, hashad the mostcarefulconsiderationpossible. The bill hasthe approvalof the JudiciaryCommittee of the Senate. It hasthe activesupportof the AttorneyGeneral.Not_oneagency inthe executive branch of- the Governmentisonrecordasopposingit. The American Bar Association hasen dorsed it wholeheartedly.ThebilIhas, in short, the kindofVirtuallyunanimoussupportwhichwouldbeexpectedin the caseofabillwhich has receivedsuchverylengthy, and veryfull, and meticulousconsideration. It has been the purposeof the Com mittee on the JudIciary,throughout the lengthyprocessofconsiderationwhichIhaveoutlined,tomakesure that nooperationof the Governmentwouldbeundulyrestrictedby the bilI. The com mitteehas alsotaken the position that the bill must reasonablyprotectprivate parties even at the riskofsomeincidentalorpossibleinconvenienceto,orchangein,presentadministrativeoperations. The committeeisconvinced,however, that noadministrativefunc tion isimproperlyaffectedbythisbill.Admittedly, this isacomplicatedbilI, but it dealswithacomplicatedsubject.Iwish to say-and I take nocreditfor it-that this billrepresentsoneof the finestpiecesoflegislative draftsmanship in myexperience. That is the natural resultof the lengthyprocessof writing and rewriting,involvingcareful atten tion to everydetail, and toeverynicetyofexpression,whichIhavealready out linedto the Senate.Perhaps it mightbewell at this time to e m p h a s i z ~ that this billisa coherent whole;nosectionor paragraph of the bilIiscompletelyindependent;all parts of it are closelyinterrelated. The bill must bereadandconsidered asa whole, and inthiscase the whole is considerablymore than the sumof its parts, Mr.President,without attempting to minimize themany problemswithwhich the committee dealt,I wantto point out to the senate the fourprincipal-problems Which had to besolved.Thesewere,first,todistinguishbetweendifl'er ent types of administrativeoperations;second,toframegeneralrequirementsapplicable to eachsuchtypeof opera- .tion;third; to setforth thoserequirementsinclear and simple terms; fourth,- to makesure that the billwascompleteenoughtocover the wholefield. As it has.beenreportedto the Senate,_ the committeefeels that it has avoided the mistakeof attempting tooversimplifythismeasure. It hasnothesitated,therefore, to state functionalclassifications and exceptionswherethosecouldberesteduponfirmgrounds. In so-doing, the committee has followed the undeViatingpolicyofdealingwithtypes of functionsassuch and innocase deal ingwithadministrativeagenciesbyname. That pointisimportant, and Iwillrepeat it if Imay.Thecommittee hasnot deViatedfrom the policyofdealingwithtypesoffunctionsas SUCh, andthe bill inno casedealswithadministrativeagenciesbyname. For example,certain warand defensefunctions are exemptedunder the bill, but thereisnoexemptionof the Waror NavyDepartmentsin the performanceoftheir other functions.Obviously it wouldbefollyfor the committeeto pre sumetodistinguishbetween good agencies and bad agencies, andthere isno attempt in the billtomakesuchadistinction.Tocite another example, the legiti mate needsof theInterstate CommerceCommissionhavebeenfullyconsidered, but the Commission hasnot beenplaced in afavoredpositionoverotherGovern ment agencies by exemptionfrom the bilI.To state the matteranother way, the committeefeels that administrativeoperationsshouldbetreatedasawhole,lest the neglectofsomelinkshould de featthe purposesof the bill. In thisconnection,Iwishtocallthe attention ofSenatorsto the chart onpage9of the committee'sreport,whichemphasizes the committee'sapproach,by shOWing, indiagramform,how the principalsectionsofthebill are interrelated.I think it will bewell at thispointtogive the Senateabriefcomparisonbetween the pendingbilland the WalterLoganbill, and between it and the recommendationsof the AttorneyGeneral'scommittee.TheWalter-Loganbill.whichwasvetoedby the President,differedmateriallyfrom the billnowbeforetheSenate,The Attachment A - page 4 of 22
Related Search

Previous Document

soal ujian Ayat Ahkam

We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks
SAVE OUR EARTH

We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

More details...

Sign Now!

We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!

x