You send important questions to a committee, you put into the hands of a few men the power to bring in bills, and then they are brought in with an ironclad rule, and rammed down the throats of members; and then those measures are sent out as being the deliberate judgment of the Congress of the United States when no deliberate judgment has been expressed by any man.

DIFFUSED LEADERSHIP IN CONGRESS

It is this procedure in Congress that causes leadership to become diffused, hidden, and often to pass outside of the government altogether into the hands of “bosses” and special “interests.”  There can be no well-conceived plan worked out by responsible leaders and approved by Congress as a whole.  There may be “plans,” worked out by leaders in Congress, but they are likely to be plans designed to serve party ends rather than to promote a well-thought-out program of national development.  Thousands of bills of the greatest variety are introduced by individual members and handled by different committees acting independently of one another and often at cross purposes.

RELATION BETWEEN EXECUTIVE AND LEGISTLATIVE BRANCHES

The legislative and executive branches of government are each extremely jealous of any encroachment upon its powers by the other.  It is not always easy to decide just where the dividing line lies between the powers properly exercised by each.  It is maintained on the one hand that Congress is encroaching on the rightful domain of the executive; and at least it is true that while it denies the President responsible leadership in determining the policies of the government, it has failed to substitute any other responsible leadership, and has even made leadership obscure.  On the other hand, it is maintained that the executive encroaches upon the powers of Congress.  While this chapter was being written a member of the House of Representatives made a speech in which he said: 

This bill presents a fine specimen of bureaucratic legislation. [Footnote:  “Bureaucratic legislation” here means lawmaking by bureaus in the executive branch of the government.] If the Congress ever intends, as it surely does, to regain the powers granted it by the fathers, of which it is now temporarily deprived by bureaucratic encroachment, now is the time to start upon such a campaign by defeating by a decisive majority the bill now offered for your consideration ...  Every time you weaken Congress by the establishment of a bureau in which the authority of Congress is lessened, you lay one more stone in the erection of the temple of autocracy ...  These bureaus are not only legislating by administrative processes but are usurping the power and prerogatives of the people’s courts ...

THE DUTY OF CONGRESS TO WATCH THE EXECUTIVE

It is the business of the people’s representatives in the law-making branch of government not merely to make laws, but also to watch and control the executive.  The great English philosopher, John Stuart Mill (1806-1873), thus stated the purpose of the English House of Commons: