451. MAGNITUDE OF THE PROBLEM.—How can we insure the honest and efficient administration of American government? Civic education and the perfection of nomination and election devices will do much toward securing this end, but there remains a troublesome question. This has to do with reorganizing our legislative and administrative machinery, so that public officials may be allowed or encouraged to perform their duties in a responsible and effective manner.

The problem is a vast one, the adequate treatment of which would require volumes. In this chapter, therefore, it will be necessary to confine the discussion to a few of the more pressing aspects of the problem. Of these the following are perhaps the more important: First, the defects in legislative procedure; second, the reorganization of state administration; third, budget reform; and fourth, the reform of municipal government.

A. DEFECTS IN LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURE

452. AMERICAN LEGISLATURES ARE OVERWORKED.—It has frequently been pointed out that in the United States both state and National legislatures are overwhelmed with work. One reason for this is that the extension of government control over industrial corporations has rendered legislation more complex and greater in volume. The development of public interest in health, education, and related fields has 'of recent years markedly increased the amount of legislation. The custom which many legislators have of attempting to get as much special legislation for their respective districts as possible has likewise increased the number of laws upon the statute books. Lastly, it should be borne in mind that throughout our history we have tended to believe legislation a cure-all for the defects of American life. This attitude has led to an excessive number of laws on subjects which in European countries are ordinarily left to the discretion of administrative officials.

The combined effect of these developments has been to confront our legislatures with so much business that honest and efficient legislation has been rendered exceedingly difficult.

453 THE COMMITTEE SYSTEM.—The chief defects of American legislation appear in connection with the committee system which exists in both National and state legislatures. The committee system is the practice of dividing the legislative body into a large number of small groups or committees whose duty it is to consider various types of legislative business. The great merit of this device is that it expedites business. Indeed, the membership of our legislatures has become so large, and the amount of legislative business has increased so rapidly, that it is difficult to see how the committee system could be dispensed with. Without some such division of labor, chaos and endless delay would result. [Footnote: For the part played by the committee system in the actual making of a law, see Chapter XLIIL]

At the same time, the committee system has numerous faults. As Lord Bryce has pointed out, it destroys the unity of the legislature by breaking it up into a number of small groups among which there is no appreciable degree of coÖrdination. The committee system limits debate. Since most committee business is transacted in secret session, the public is deprived of light upon public affairs. So minutely does the committee system divide legislative labor that even the most important piece of legislation cannot secure the attention of the best men. There is a diffusion of responsibility when various committees work upon related problems without regard for the work being done by one another. Finally, the committee system throws power, unaccompanied by adequate responsibility, into the hands of the committee chairman.

454 LOG-ROLLING. Log-rolling is the trading of votes among individual legislators. Many of the faults of our state and National legislatures are connected with this practice. Some legislators are so intent upon securing the passage of bills in which they are personally interested that they are willing to vote for a fellow-legislator's pet bills, regardless of merit, provided that legislator will return the favor. In this way special legislation often displaces bills which are drawn in a wider interest,—taxation, education, and other vital matters being neglected so that members may pursue personal ends.

There is as yet no limit to the number of bills which may be introduced by state or National legislators. As a result there is a large number of unnecessary and hastily framed bills for which no one is definitely responsible. It is supposed to be the duty of all legislators to weed out bills which are poorly framed, or which are designed to promote special interests. But in this case everybody's business becomes nobody's business. Such machine-like formalities as repeated readings of a bill, and a series of committee reports upon it, are generally substituted for individual scrutiny of a measure.

455. LEGISLATIVE REFORM.—The reform of legislative procedure is attracting an increasing amount of attention among students of American politics. Many recent state constitutions define in detail the powers and procedure of the state legislature. A considerable number of states now have legislative reference bureaus, which enable legislators to keep track of legislation in other states, as well as to have ready access to important data bearing upon their own problems. There is a growing tendency for state legislatures to employ expert bill drafters to draw up laws on technical and highly-complex subjects. The expert bill drafter and the legislative bureau help materially to reduce the amount of defective and unwise legislation on the statute books.

Much remains to be done, however. Important public bills ought invariably to be given first consideration by legislators, instead of, as is still many times the case, being put off until the end of the session in order to allow time for log-rolling. Filibustering and other time-wasting tactics should be curbed, because they tend to obstruct legislation. Many students of government advocate the extension of a plan already adopted in Massachusetts and a few other states, whereby all bills are given a public hearing. It is also clear that some method ought to be devised whereby the work of the various committees dealing with related subjects could be correlated and harmonized. Lastly, any measures which will reduce the amount of unnecessary and ill-advised legislation must prove of great value.

B. THE REORGANIZATION OF STATE ADMINISTRATION

456. DEFECTS IN STATE ADMINISTRATION.—Originally the state administration consisted of the Governor and a few elective officers, notably a Secretary of State, a Treasurer, and an Attorney-General. With the rapid development of the country, education, health, dependency, corporations, and similar matters have required more and more attention from state governments. To perform a host of new functions the state administration has expanded to include numerous commissioners, boards, and departments, some of them elected by the people, and some of them appointed by the Governor.

This development has been haphazard, rather than orderly and planned. As a result, the administrative department is in most states a confused and tangled mass of boards and commissions, departments and single offices, often duplicating the work of one another, and largely working without any appreciable degree of coÖrdination. In most states numerous administrative officers are elective, rather than appointive. This situation has two drawbacks: In the first place elective officials are responsible to no one but the people at large, and therefore these officials cannot be efficiently directed or supervised by the Governor. In the second place, no definite person or persons can be held responsible for the conduct of this numerous body of elective administrative officials.

457. THE REFORM OF STATE ADMINISTRATION.—The reorganization and consolidation of state administrative offices is attracting an increasing amount of attention. In New Jersey, Massachusetts, Illinois, and several other states, administration has been notably simplified and systematized. The Illinois Administrative Code of 1917, for example, consolidated the work of more than a hundred administrative offices into nine main departments. Each department is in charge of a director, appointed by the Governor, and each department is responsible to the Governor. CoÖrdination of this type economizes time and energy, and saves the state's money by reducing the number of salaried officials. The centralization of the entire administration under the Governor not only allows efficient supervision, but permits the people to hold this official strictly accountable for the administration.

The need of reform in state administration is recognized throughout the Union, but in most states the reorganization of administrative offices is retarded in two ways: First, the movement is opposed by officeholders who fear that their positions will be abolished by a consolidation of departments; second, in many states the consolidation of administrative offices is impossible without substantial amendments to the state constitution.

C. BUDGET REFORM

458. THE QUESTION OF A BUDGET.—In contrast to the leading countries of Europe, our National government until very recently had no budget system. Some of the estimates were prepared by the administrative departments, under the direction of the President, while other estimates were prepared by various committees in the House of Representatives. In Congress there was little or no coÖrdination between the various committees considering different appropriations. Nor were these committees properly coÖrdinated with the administrative departments which were responsible for the original estimates.

After appropriations had been granted, Congress had no scrutiny over the actual expenditure of the money. Thus the administrative departments might waste their appropriations, and then secure the passage of deficiency bills to make up the shortage. At no time did the various departments and committees considering appropriations take into careful account the amount of government revenue. For this reason it was purely an accident if appropriations kept within the limits set by available revenue.

A similar situation formerly prevailed in many of the states. The various administrative departments transmitted to the legislature an estimate of what each required for the coming year. These estimates, together with an unlimited number of appropriation bills introduced by individual members, were referred to various committees. Whether particular appropriations were granted depended, not upon the amount of state revenue, but upon the political pressure brought to bear in favor of those measures. As in Congress, neither the executive nor legislative branch of government, neither particular committees nor individual legislators, could be held wholly responsible for any appropriation measure. Excessive waste of public funds was the result.

459. BUDGET REFORM.—The last two decades have witnessed a growing demand for a national budget. Under the direction of President Taft a commission investigated the general question of responsibility in the handling of Federal finances. The report of the committee favored a national budget, but the unfriendly attitude of Congress checked the movement. Interest in a national budget increased during the two terms of President Wilson, stimulated, especially, by the wave of postwar economy which swept the country after the signing of the armistice in November, 1918. In the spring of 1921, a bill establishing a budget system for the National government passed both houses of Congress, and on June 10, 1921, the bill became law by the signature of President Harding. This system is expected markedly to improve Federal finances.

Practically unknown a few years ago, the budget movement among the states has spread so rapidly that at the present time almost all of the commonwealths have some sort of budget system. Three methods of preparing the budget are found among the several states. In some states, as in New York, budget-making is in the hands of the legislature; in other states, as in Wisconsin, both legislature and executive participate in budget-making; in still other states, as in Illinois, the executive alone is responsible for the preparation of the budget. Many authorities claim that the last-named type of budget preparation is preferable but, in many states it is objected to as giving too much power to the executive.

D. THE REFORM OF MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT

460. MUNICIPAL REFORM: CHANGES IN THE MAYOR-COUNCIL PLAN.—Until the opening of the twentieth century practically every American city was governed under what is known as the mayor-council plan. This plan provides for a council to make the laws, and a mayor to act as executive. Formerly the council of the larger cities was very often composed of two chambers, a board of aldermen and a common council, but of late years the single-chambered council has become more and more common.

The mayor-council plan still prevails in most American cities, particularly in the larger municipalities. But everywhere the growing demand for honesty and efficiency in government is leading to the reform of this system. In order to reduce the length of the ballot, the appointive power of the mayor is being increased. In the interests of economy and responsibility the administrative offices are in many cities being consolidated, coÖrdinated and centralized under the mayor. To guard against the abuse of financial power there is in many commonwealths a tendency for state constitutions and statutes to limit the debt-incurring and franchise-granting powers of city councils.

461. MUNICIPAL REFORM: THE COMMISSION PLAN.—In September, 1900, a tidal wave seriously demoralized the mayor-council form of government in Galveston, Texas. To meet the emergency, the state legislature authorized the establishment of a new type of government, known as the commission plan. Instead of selecting a mayor and councilmen, the voters of Galveston now choose a commission of five officials. All of these commissioners are equal in power, except that one presides as mayor-president. The commission form of government spread rapidly, chiefly among the smaller cities, until in 1921 there were more than 300 municipalities governed under this plan. In every case the commission has both legislative and executive powers. Collectively the commissioners act as a legislative body for the city, individually they head the various administrative departments.

A number of important advantages are claimed for the commission form of city government. Responsibility is no longer divided among mayor and councilmen, but can be definitely placed upon the small group of commissioners. It is believed by many that commission government allows a greater harmony of action than is possible under the mayor- council plan. Finally, it is declared, a group of five or seven commissioners can administer city government with more efficiency than can a mayor and a numerous council.

The opponents of commission government maintain, on the other hand, that the plan is undemocratic and oligarchical because it centralizes great power in the hands of a small group. The plan is said to increase the danger of corruption, since appropriating and spending powers are placed in the same hands. The opponents of this form of government also maintain that it renders easier the corruption of the city administration, since party bosses may easily gain control of a few commissioners. A final, and perhaps the most serious, objection is that commission government does not go to the logical conclusion in concentrating responsibility. There is no head to the administration, and no way of preventing the diffusion of responsibility among the commissioners. Jealousy among the commissioners has often led to friction and to working at cross-purposes. [Footnote: Of recent years a number of cities have abandoned commission government for either the mayor-council or the city manager plan.]

462. MUNICIPAL REFORM: THE CITY MANAGER PLAN.—A recent modification of commission government is the city manager plan. This provides for a small elective commission, which does not itself administer the government of the city, but which chooses, instead, an experienced executive or city manager. The city manager is supposed to be a non- partisan expert whose duty it is to administer the city in accordance with business principles. As the agent of the commission choosing him, the city manager enforces all ordinances, prepares annual estimates, and appoints all other city officials and employees. He also accepts full responsibility for the administration of the city's affairs.

The first city to apply the city manager plan was Dayton, Ohio, which began the experiment on January 1, 1914. Since that date the plan, or some variation of it, has been established in about a hundred cities. The city manager plan is an improvement over the commission plan, in that it allows a greater concentration of responsibility. Another advantage over commission government is that the city manager plan insures a high grade of professional skill at the apex of the city's administration. The plan appears to work well in the smaller cities, provided a high grade manager can be found, and provided, also, that his position can be safeguarded against corrupting political influences.

QUESTIONS ON THE TEXT

1. What four questions are discussed in this chapter?

2. Why are American legislatures overwhelmed with work?

3. What are the merits and defects of the committee system?

4. What is log-rolling, and why is it objectionable?

5. What is the purpose of the legislative bureau?

6. What is the function of the expert bill drafter?

7. What are the chief defects of state administration?

8. What has been done to correct these defects?

9. Discuss the movement toward a national budget.

10. What are the three forms of budget making in state government?

11. What is the mayor-council plan, and what changes are being brought about in it?

12. What is the commission plan of city government? How did it arise? What can be said for and against it?

13. Compare the commission plan with the city manager plan.

14. What is the chief merit of the city manager plan?

Required Readings

1. Williamson, Readings in American Democracy, chapter xxxvi.

Or all of the following:

2. Bryce, The American Commonwealth, vol. i, chapter xlv.

3. Munro, The Government of the United States, chapter xxxi.

4. Reed, Form and Functions of American Government, chapter xli.

5. Illinois Efficiency and Economy Committee, Report, 1915, pages 18- 24 and 74-77.

QUESTIONS ON THE REQUIRED READINGS

1. What are the chief defects of state government in general? (Bryce, page 556.)

2. What is a book of estimates? (Reed, page 483.)

3. Describe the procedure in Congress with regard to appropriation bills. (Reed, page 484.)

4. How are provisions against special legislation evaded in some states? (Bryce, page 559.)

5. Enumerate and briefly characterize the chief administrative offices in the various states. (Munro, pages 447-457.)

6. What are the two distinctive features of state administration? (Munro, pages 457-458.)

7. What are the chief defects of state administration? (Illinois Report, pages 18-24.)

8. Summarize the advantages of a reorganized and consolidated state administration. (Illinois Report, pages 74-77.)

9. What is the purpose of a "state auditing" system? (Reed, page 489.)

10. Explain the need for uniform accounts for cities and counties? (Reed, pages 491-492.)

TOPICS FOR INVESTIGATION AND REPORT

I

1. Interview any citizen of your community who has served in the state legislature. Ask for his personal opinion concerning the amount of legislative business to be transacted, the workings of the committee system, and the practice of log-rolling.

2. Status of the expert bill-drafter and the legislative reference bureau in your state. If these devices have not been adopted, interview or write to a member of the state legislature concerning his opinion of these legislative aids.

3. The enactment of appropriation bills in your state legislature.

4. The development of the administrative department in your state.

5. Make a diagram showing the relations of the various boards and commissions embraced in the administrative department of your state. Point out instances of duplication and lack of coÖrdination. Draw up a plan for consolidating these boards and commissions.

6. The budget in your state.

7. Form of government in your municipality.

II

8. The business of Congress. (McCall, The Business of Congress.)

9. The faults of state legislatures. (Kaye, Readings in Civil Government, pages 282-295.)

10. The legislative reference bureau. (Reinsch, Readings on American State Government, pages 63-74.)

11. History of state administration. (Illinois Constitutional Convention Bulletins, 1920, pages 623-709.)

12. The reorganization of state government. (Munro, The Government of the United States, chapter xxxvi.)

13. A National budget. (Cleveland and Buck, The Budget and Responsible Government, chapters xviii-xx.)

14. State budgets. (Cleveland and Buck, The Budget and Responsible Government, part iii; Munro, The Government of the United States, pages 466-469.)

15. Revenues and expenditures of cities. (Beard, American City Government, chapter v.)

16. Home rule for cities. (Beard, American City Government, chapter ii.)

17. The mayor-council plan. (Munro, The Government of American Cities, chapters viii and ix.)

18. The commission plan of city government. (Munro, The Government of American Cities, chapter xii; Massachusetts Constitutional Convention Bulletins.)

19. The city manager plan. (Munro, The Government of American Cities, chapter xv; Massachusetts Constitutional Convention Bulletins.)

20. The civil service as a career. (Foltz, The Federal Civil Service as a Career.)

FOR CLASSROOM DISCUSSION

21. Would shortening the length of the legislative session improve the quality of legislation? (See Bryce, The American Common-wealth, vol. i, chapter xlv.)

22. Should there be a limit to the number of bills which a legislator may introduce?

23. Methods of coÖrdinating committees in your state legislature.

24. Advantages and disadvantages of the commission form of government. (See the Debaters' Handbook Series.)

25. Advantages and disadvantages of the city manager plan. (See the Debaters' Handbook Series.)