Double Dare

At Munich, Mr. Chamberlain and Mr. Hitler very ably appeased each other. Mr. Chamberlain by giving in, Mr. Hitler by declaring his good intentions. The big unsettled question about President Roosevelt's business-appeasement policy is whether it is the Chamberlain or Hitler kind. Last week it looked more like the Hitler kind when the head of the Federal Reserve Board, Marriner Eccles (the New Deal's prime advocate of spending for recovery), appeared before a Senate committee and gave Congress a lusty double dare. He challenged it to try economy. Said he:

"A great majority of people appear to believe*. . . that business confidence would be restored if the Budget were balanced and that the spurt of economic activity that would result would accomplish our common aim of recovery. . . .

"A majority in both houses of Congress have indicated that they also hold this view. While I am convinced that such a policy of retrenchment under present conditions would have disastrous results, we live in a democracy, and, therefore, I believe that the viewpoint of the majority should promptly be made effective. . . .

"If balancing the Budget will bring about recovery, then Congress can instantly do so by reducing expenditures to the level of receipts. . . . Such items as work-relief projects, CCC camps, roads and public works of all kinds, veterans' benefits, all farm benefit payments and national defense, some or all of these would have to be drastically curtailed.

"This would not be my program, but if, as would appear, it is the program of the majority, they should assume full responsibility for it and put it into effect without delay and without compromises for the benefit of any special groups."

Like Mr. Hitler at Munich and after, daring Mr. Eccles had his adversaries on the hip. Said Chairman Pat Harrison of the Senate Finance Committee, who knows perfectly well that Congress will not economize in a big way: "If the statement of Mr. Eccles represents the views of the President and is endorsed by him, and he desires Congress to determine the issue, I shall be glad to assist in the formulation of a reasonable program." Said Chairman Adams of the Senate sub-committee which cut $150,000,000 from WPA's deficiency appropriation, only to have the President demand it again: "If there was some cooperation by the Administration, we might get something done."

Meanwhile a committee of the House, where eight consecutive appropriation bills had been cut symbolically but not substantially below Budget figures, voted to undo all that economy with a farm bill to provide parity payments $244,098,376 above Budget figures. A $400,000,000 log-rolling bee between farm Congressmen and WPAdvocates hove into view. And the World War Veterans' Legislation Committee prepared to add heavily to the Government's overhead, to ask regular pensions of $40 a month for 65-year-old World Warriors--a cost of $31,000,000 a year to start with, $13,000,000,000 eventually.

* He cited "a recent Gallup Poll," "innumerable resolutions of trade associations," "bankers' groups," "newspaper editorials."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.