THE CONGRESS: The Struggle to Reform the House

• Share

For all of their complaints about the shift of power from Capitol Hill to the White House, most Congressmen realize that the nature of Congress itself, which sometimes resembles a collection of medieval fiefdoms, is largely to blame. Major legislation is frequently blocked by intramural squabbling between competing committees of the House, and some Congressmen hold too many important committee assignments to be effective in any of them. Far more than the Constitution intended, the President initiates—and the Congress, hampered by its unwieldy machinery, merely reacts.

Last year, in an effort to modernize its structure and procedures for the first time since 1946, the House of Representatives created a select committee headed by Missouri's tough-minded Democrat Richard Boiling to produce ideas for reform. Last week, as the House began debate on the Boiling committee's proposals, it was clear that everyone favored reform — for everyone else — and that many Congressmen were sorry they had even mentioned the word. Many members, said Michigan Democrat John Dingell, felt like the little boy who had shot a skunk: "After you've shot it, you're not quite sure what to do with it."

With a budget of $1.5 million, a staff of 14, and a membership of ten evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans, the Boiling committee labored for more than a year. It listened patiently to committee chairmen, academics, businessmen and labor leaders. It analyzed the 22 standing committees of the House and the 125 subcommittees.

The Boiling group concluded that: some committees have too little to do and others too much (simply because of its overload, for example, Ways and Means is often unable to consider measures that should have top priority); some important fields, like energy or the environment, are split between two or more committees; the House itself has no firm leadership, and the Speaker little real power; though the House is responsible for continuous overseeing of the Executive Branch, it has made little effort to do this job; though committees have expanded their staffs, the House still has no good way of obtaining information independent of the Executive.

In a 90-page package, the reformers offered these solutions:

— An area of concern—the environment, for example—should be handled by only one committee, and duplication should be avoided.

— No member should serve on more than one major committee.

— The powers of the Speaker should be expanded by strengthening his authority to refer legislation to committees.

— Committees should be formally given the continuous task of overseeing the Executive departments for which they are responsible.

— An information commission should be set up to recommend ways of giving the House more complete data for drafting laws.