CONSTITUTIONAL ABSURDITIES

In all the hullabaloo over the organization of the new Senate and House, it is easy to lose sight of a situation of great significance in American government which has long been crying for correction. Like every other Congress in the history of the federal government, this present one is holding its first session no less than thirteen months after its election. To be specific, the eighty-ninth Congress was elected in November, 1924, at the same time that Mr. Coolidge defeated Davis and LaFollette, one of whom has since died while the other has passed far beyond the pale of popular memory.

The "Founding Fathers" made few worse blunders than this one, which permits a Congress to legislate for a people over a year after its leadership has been rejected, while it holds its successor waiting on the sidelines for a chance to execute the popular mandate.

Like the Boston American which publishes its evening edition in the morning and its morning edition in the evening, the people of the United States elect a flew Congress before the old one has fairly become old and retain the old long after the new one has ceased to be new.

This anomaly in a representative government has received the almost unanimous condemnation of American students of political science. It has been shown, for instance, that we require our Congressmen to work four years for two years' pay, which may possibly help to explain the uniformly low calibre of the men who are willing to accept our terms. And there is always, besides, a delay of thirteen months in the operation of a popular referendum.

Suppose that Mr. LaFollette and a Progressing House had been chosen in 1924. He would have been handicapped during one-quarter of his term by a hostile Congress, and died before the first session of the friendly one. Had Mr. Wheeler then continued his policies with the disastrous consequences which the old guard foretold, not until 1927 could the people have placed in office representatives who could put an end to their operation.

Mr. Dawes, it is reported, is still concerned over silencing the senatorial filibusterer. His reforming would be to better purpose were it directed toward securing a constitutional amendment to provide for a change of president and Congress immediately after the people have named their successors.