The refreshing case of Representative W. Frank James of the twelfth Michigan district is an excellent one : "He has done several things," says the Chicago Herald (May 15, 1916), “which violate all the traditional rules of conduct for a Congressman who desires to keep on being one." A Senate bill was introduced providing for a federal building in Mr. James' home town, Hancock. And instead of introducing a similar bill in the house, Mr. James wrote home that he would not introduce such a bill and would not vote for it unless the Treasury Department should certify after due investigation that a federal building was really needed in Hancock. "Whereupon," the news story runs, "a large number of his colleagues of the House told Mr. James that he was a very foolish person." In an interview Mr. James puts the case very well:

"I have made up my mind if I had to be a pork hunter to stay in Congress I would keep my self-respect and not try for a reëlection. I have been all through my district, making speeches, declaring my position, asking the people whether they thought I was right or wrong. They seem to think I am right. The result is that I am a candidate for reelection." (Chicago Herald, May 15, 1916.)

ALL PORK-BARRELS ARE NOT PORK

Of course it is not presumed here that all of the public buildings bill is pork, nor all of the river and harbors bill. Naturally there are some public buildings needed for the purpose of carrying on the public business, whatever might be said of these buildings inculcating "a spirit of patriotic pride which is not

measurable in dollars and cents," and of reminding the people of "the glory, the majesty and the power of this great republic." It is the fact that the pork-barrel is not all pork that makes it possible. Much needed projects are made to carry frauds and steals and as legislation is possible only on these conditions, honest men accept it, "eating their persimmons, declaring them good though puckery."

We must as a nation have a public building program, a comprehensive public building program. But such a program must not be a hand-to-mouth program. It must not be carried along by patch-work. It must not be a matter of tinkering. It must not be determined as an incident to politics. It must be determined by the legislature in the light of the public building needs of the nation to carry on the work of the nation. It must keep in mind not only this year's need, but next year's and the year after that and twenty years hence.

So with river and harbor improvement, with the inevitable shipping development, after the war, and with the ever present need for bona-fide river improvement as an adjunct of interstate commerce there is need, too, for a comprehensive program, well financed, and carefully planned, for river and harbor improvement for fifty years hence at least. And for this reason there must be taken out of river and harbor bills everything that "smells of pork." The actual industrial and commercial needs of the nation must be determining here, not political considerations. And it is for that reason that pork is here condemned so unreservedly.

It is the débris that must be removed before solid foundations can be laid for comprehensive national programs will be undertaken for river and harbor improvement, for necessary public buildings, and for necessary programs that are now infected with "pork."

WHAT IS THE REMEDY?

An indignant correspondent to Collier's Weekly suggests that Congress ought to set aside $20,000,000 "for graft, specifically and without frills."

Senator Ashurst himself suggests that the remedy for the pork-barrel lies in making it unpopular. How this is to be done deponent saith nothing. The fundamental trouble lies in the electorate itself, and a quality of civic education that would destroy the appetite for pork is the surest permanent remedy. A system of direct taxes might help to initiate the educational process. But both of these suggestions would take us too far afield from our present inquiries.

A "pitiless publicity" would do much to do away with the pork-barrel, particularly in these times of disgust and exasperation by some of the Congressmen and of refusal of communities to accept pork projects. The various remedies that will be proposed in this book have all of them important by-products in the way of publicity. These remedies are: the executive veto, local contribution to national public work projects, a system of election that will make Congressmen more representative of definite public opinion than of locality, the substitution of party for individual responsibility, and administrative commissions. An executive can stop the pork-barrel at any time by executive veto

if he has the courage, even though he cannot remove the causes of it. The plan of local decision and local contribution to national public work projects located in communities is a method of making these things subjects of public consideration in the community and affords new material of quite a different emphasis than similar news at present. The system of proportional representation changes the character of the account of stewardship to be rendered by the Congressman for reelection. And this would affect very much the character of the campaign and newspaper publicity in connection therewith. And the substitution of party responsibility for individual lack of responsibility with reference to budgetary matters is certain to increase publicity because of the larger interests involved. back of this publicity there must go constructive, technical determination in advance of Congressional action and upon which Congressional action must be based if it is to be intelligent.

But

All of these subjects will be treated in detail in the succeeding chapter.

ANY president of the United States who will may prevent the passage of a pork-barrel bill. The simple and effective remedy lies in the veto power. Any president who has the courage to veto a pork-barrel bill and raise the question thus publicly would create public opinion that would make subsequent pork items unlikely. A president who would advise the Congressional leaders in advance that he would refuse to approve any bills containing a certain item or items, could prevent their inclusion. This is also true of a governor.

THE EXECUTIVE VETO AS A REMEDY

1

The existing power to veto the bill would serve this purpose more effectively than the power to veto items. Instead of eliminating an item here and an item there - a power that may be used malevolently just as it may be used beneficently the veto of the bill raises the issue in a manner to secure public interest because it raises the whole question and not a fragment or fragments of it. It makes use of the governmental issue as an educational means. It makes for a permanent understanding and a cumulative public opinion in which 1.A broader discussion of the executive veto is given in Chapter XI.