Ask the Scholar
Page 1 of 1
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
The original documents are located in Box D19, folder "Los Angeles Junior Chamber of
Commerce, March 7, 1966" of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech
File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. The Council donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box D19 of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
"Balance in Government! An Analysis of the Legislative Process"
Presented by the Honorable Gerald R. Ford
Minority Leader
The House of Representatives
Congress of the United States
Los Angeles Junior Chamber of Commerce
March 7, 1966
In today's context, an issue of salient significance is whether an excess con-
centration of Federal sovereignty is to destroy state and local government, thus sup-
pressing individual freedom and opportunity.
This examination of the legislative process centers on the three branches of
government, their balance or lack of it, with particular emphasis on the Congress.
A responsible dialogue discussing the legislative process includes the three
cornerstones of our American political society, two of them constitutionally ordained,
the other a tradition of our Democracy.
The first cornerstone is the relationship of the Executive, Legislative, and
Judicial branches of government, best in balance when they guard against mediocrity---
always the danger of a society overly-planned.
These are relationships of paramount importance in government, which most
properly must create a social order permitting every individual to live in dignity,
respect law and receive justice, and exploit endlessly the best in himself.
In granting powers to the Executive Branch, drafters of the Constitution very
wisely decided to carefully delineate the authority establishing a Presidential
position of balanced strength.
Strength, too, was demanded in the Legislative Branch of Federal Government,
giving the Congress a vital role.
A strong judicial system under the United States Supreme Court was written into
the document.
It is most significant that those who authored the Constitution, insisting on
strength in each of the three branches, gave no superiority to any one branch.
The second cornerstone of the Republic is the Constutional provision that each
State shall retain a pluralistic degree of sovereignty in relation to the Federal es-
tablishment.
In their fidelity to detail, the patriots who created the Constitution sepa-
rate the powers and responsibilities of state and national governments.
Not Constitutionally-ordained, the third cornerstone of our Nation is a
strong two-party political system.
-2-
Early in America's history, out of the political experience of the early
years there developed two major political parties. This system has served the
best interest of the people. As a result, we have avoided the loss of freedom that
exists in one-party government. We have avoided the chaos and confusion that
accompanies multi-party government.
Perhaps the late Sir Winston Churchill best described the functions of the
American Republic when he said: "Democracy is the worst form of government except
for any other that has ever been tried."
Accepting the premise that the Constitution is to be a lasting bulwark
against the concentration of power in any one branch of government, let us examine
our political society in possibly history's most crucial and turbulent era.
The Executive branch increases in power and strength. Its manpower corps
numbers more than five million, approximately half of the personnel in the military
services. With this huge mass of personnel comes a total annual payroll of close to
$30 billion and the right to spend out of the Federal Treasury nearly $127 billion
each year.
The social implications of this awesome power come in disjointed phrases,
incomplete references, and an anachronistic comment.
Executive accomplishments are detailed to the Nation by the device of
"releases" at times distributed in flurries. Federal agencies are directed to pro-
vide information to the White House, which takes unto itself the credit. Often the
timing of disseminating the information to America at large has political overtones
and implications.
Congress, the legislative branch, has great strengths and great weaknesses.
The human equation is paramount in Congressional action and inaction.
It has been said that "Congress is a very human institution, part and parcel
of our American culture." The late Speaker of the House Sam Rayburn used to describe
"those rolling waves of sentiment" that dictate Congressional decisions.
Critics attempt to denigrate the Congress, demanding reform, seeking to
abolish certain prerogatives.
This dichotomy between the Congress and its critics has existed for decades.
The long estrangment will follow forward into history.
-3-
It is difficult for anyone to stand between the critics and the Congress for
he faces assault from one side as an apologist for alleged incompetence and from the
other for moralistic philosophastry.
Thus the disagreement prevents a meaningful dialogue between the Congress and
its society of critics.
The lack of responsible debate and dissent is the Nation's loss, for Congress
needs help from outside its own political community in meeting the challenges of the
present and the future.
Certainly, Congress needs the help of the academic, business, industrial,
commercial and cultural worlds.
However, the assistance and advice must be based on an understanding of Con-
gressional experience its depth and width and the psychology and logic of the
Congressional processes.
Too often critics seem more intent on seeking new ways to alter Congress than
to truly learn how it functions. They could turn to the advice of Thomas Huxley,
who said a century ago: "Sit down before facts as a little child, be prepared to give
up every preconceived notion or you shall learn nothing."
It has been said that Congress is not as bad as many of its critics allege,
nor as good as many of its members believe. Only by a recognition of both its
weaknesses and strengths can we achieve a rational understanding of the Congress.
more
-4-
A sensitive description and an accurate appraisal of the Congress should have
as their base a personal and prolonged experience either as a member or as a
dedicated observer.
Those who criticize severely could well assume the responsibility of
ing
seek/public office, winning an election, assuming a legislative role, and trying to
be returned to office on a record of performance.
The neglected aspects of Congressional life demand appraisal, dissecting, and
change, Among them are the operation of lobbyists in the legislative processes,
some out-moded parliamentary procedures, the realities of the seniority system, and
day-to-day routines.
From Congress itself is emerging such a study. A joint bi-partisan committee
currently is conducting research in depth with the major goal of improving the
operations of Congress.
There will never be perfect agreement within or outside of Congress on the
scope of the problems and the methods of solving them. However, the present study
is a bold move toward dissolving much of today's criticism and dissent.
A contemporary examination of balance in the three branches of government
indicates a trend in the judicial system to arbitrarily elbow its way into areas
that were not intended by the authors of the Constitution.
In my opinion the views of the late Justice Felix Frankfurter were sound and
wise. He espoused the philosophy of judicial restraint, a course of action I
believe should be more closely followed by the courts.
Without over-indulgence in political partisanship, I can say that in this age,
an imbalance exists in the relationship of government's three branches.
The political party dominating the Congress by a two-to-one majority has one
of its own in the White House. The accelerated trend in the federal Judiciary is
upsetting well-established practices and taking action which makes new law adds to
the lack of balance.
The role of the minority power in this situation should be greater than that
of traditional *loyal opposition.'
With wisdom and foresight, the late President Theodore Roosevelt warned the
party out of power that "mere negation and obstruction and attempts to revive the
dead past spell ruin."
He was correct then and his words are just as correct and meaningful now.
The minority power has an obligation to its supporting electorate and the
entire nation to provide a system of checks and balances as intended in the
Constitution, the blueprint of our Republic.
-5-
In the national interest, the strength of the minority power must have the
necessary volume and substance to not only serve as a counter-weight but to
initiate positive and constructive legislative propesals.
The minority party must be imaginative, dedicated, and alert. If it fails to be
given needed strength and voice by the electorate, the true progress of our nation
is impeded, mis-directed, or stopped short of desirable goals.
Despite the present imbalance in government with an over-abundance of power in
the Executive branch, a steeply-tilted majority in the Congress, and the lack of
judicial restraint in the courts, there are reasons to be optimistic.
I have a strong abiding faith in the good judgment of the American people.
There is a growing realization that our political system is the finest in the history
of mankind.
I see strong indications of the American people seeking to fulfill a wish
expressed by Benjamin Franklin on the day work was completed in framing the
Constitution.
He was asked: "What have we -- a monardy or a republic?"
Franklin answered: "A Republic-- if you can keep it."
Americans by and large are dedicated to keeping our republic in the face of
criticism at home and abroad.
There is a growing realization in Americathat a government big enough to give
us everything we want is big enough to take from us everything we have.
######
"Balance in Government: An Analysis of the Legislative Process"
Presented by the Honorable Gerald R. Ford
Minority Leader
The House of Representatives
Congress of the United States
Los Angeles Junior Chamber of Commerce
March 7, 1966
In today's context, an issue of salient significance is whether an excess con-
centration of Federal sovereignty is to destroy state and local government, thus sup-
pressing individual freedom and opportunity.
This examination of the legislative process centers on the three branches of
government, their balance or lack of it, with particular emphasis on the Congress.
A responsible dialogue discussing the legislative process includes the three
cornerstones of our American political society, two of them constitutionally ordained,
the other a tradition of our Democracy.
The first cornerstone is the relationship of the Executive, Legislative, and
Judicial branches of government, best in balance when they guard against mediocrity---
always the danger of a society overly-planned.
These are relationships of paramount importance in government, which most
properly must create a social order permitting every individual to live in dignity,
respect law and receive justice, and exploit endlessly the best in himself.
In granting powers to the Executive Branch, drafters of the Constitution very
wisely decided to carefully delineate the authority establishing a Presidential
position of balanced strength.
Strength, too, was demanded in the Legislative Branch of Federal Government,
giving the Congress a vital role.
A strong judicial system under the United States Supreme Court was written into
the document.
It is most significant that those who authored the Constitution, insisting on
strength in each of the three branches, gave no superiority to any one branch.
The second cornerstone of the Republic is the Constutional provision that each
State shall retain a pluralistic degree of sovereignty in relation to the Federal es-
tablishment.
In their fidelity to detail, the patriots who created the Constitution sepa-
rate the powers and responsibilities of state and national governments.
Not Constitutionally-ordained, the third cornerstone of our Nation is a
strong two-party political system.
-2-
Early in America's history, out of the political experience of the early
years there developed two major political parties. This system has served the
best interest of the people. As a result, we have avoided the loss of freedom that
exists in one-party government. We have avoided the chaos and confusion that
accompanies multi-party government.
Perhaps the late Sir Winston Churchill best described the functions of the
American Republic when he said: "Democracy is the worst form of government except
for any other that has ever been tried."
Accepting the premise that the Constitution is to be a lasting bulwark
against the concentration of power in any one branch of government, let us examine
our political society in possibly history's most crucial and turbulent era.
The Executive branch increases in power and strength. Its manpower corps
numbers more than five million, approximately half of the personnel in the military
services. With this huge mass of personnel comes a total annual payroll of close to
$30 billion and the right to spend out of the Federal Treasury nearly $127 billion
each year.
The social implications of this awesome power come in disjointed phrases,
incomplete references, and an anachronistic comment.
Executive accomplishments are detailed to the Nation by the device of
"releases" at times distributed in flurries. Federal agencies are directed to pro-
vide information to the White House, which takes unto itself the credit. Often the
timing of disseminating the information to America at large has political overtones
and implications.
Congress, the legislative branch, has great strengths and great weaknesses.
The human equation is paramount in Congressional action and inaction.
It has been said that "Congress is a very human institution, part and parcel
of our American culture." The late Speaker of the House Sam Rayburn used to describe
"those rolling waves of sentiment" that dictate Congressional decisions.
Critics attempt to denigrate the Congress, demanding reform, seeking to
abolish certain prerogatives.
This dichotomy between the Congress and its critics has existed for decades.
The long estrangment will follow forward into history.
-3-
It is difficult for anyone to stand between the critics and the Congress for
he faces assault from one side as an apologist for alleged incompetence and from the
other for moralistic philosophastry.
Thus the disagreement prevents a meaningful dialogue between the Congress and
its society of critics.
The lack of responsible debate and dissent is the Nation's loss, for Congress
needs help from outside its own political community in meeting the challenges of the
present and the future.
Certainly, Congress needs the help of the academic, business, industrial,
commercial and cultural worlds.
However, the assistance and advice must be based on an understanding of Con-
gressional experience its depth and width and the psychology and logic of the
Congressional processes.
Too often critics seem more intent on seeking new ways to alter Congress than
to truly learn how it functions. They could turn to the advice of Thomas Huxley,
who said a century ago: "Sit down before facts as a little child, be prepared to give
up every preconceived notion----or you shall learn nothing."
It has been said that Congress is not as bad as many of its critics allege,
nor as good as many of its members believe. Only by a recognition of both its
weaknesses and strengths can we achieve a rational understanding of the Congress.
more
-4-
A sensitive description and an accurate appraisal of the Congress should have
as their base a personal and prolonged experience either as a member or as a
dedicated observer.
Those who criticize severely could well assume the responsibility of
ing
seek/public office, winning an election, assuming a legislative role, and trying to
be returned to office on a record of performance.
The neglected aspects of Congressional life demand appraisal, dissecting, and
change, Among them are the operation of lobbyists in the legislative processes,
some out-moded parliamentary procedures, the realities of the seniority system, and
day-to-day routines.
From Congress itself is emerging such a study. A joint bi-partisan committee
currently is conducting research in depth with the major goal of improving the
operations of Congress.
There will never be perfect agreement within or outside of Congress on the
scope of the problems and the methods of solving them. However, the present study
is a bold move toward dissolving much of today's criticism and dissent.
A contemporary examination of balance in the three branches of government
indicates a trend in the judicial system to arbitrarily elbow its way into areas
that were not intended by the authors of the Constitution.
In my opinion the views of the late Justice Felix Frankfurter were sound and
wise. He espoused the philosophy of judicial restraint, a course of action I
believe should be more closely followed by the courts.
Without over-indulgence in political partisanship, I can say that in this age,
an imbalance exists in the relationship of government's three branches.
The political party dominating the Congress by a two-to-one majority has one
of its own in the White House. The accelerated trend in the federal Judiciary is
upsetting well-established practices and taking action which makes new law adds to
the lack of balance.
The role of the minority power in this situation should be greater than that
of traditional *loyal opposition."
With wisdom and foresight, the late President Theodore Roosevelt warned the
party out of power that "mere negation and obstruction and attempts to revive the
dead past spell ruin." "
He was correct then and his words are just as correct and meaningful now.
The minority power has an obligation to its supporting electorate and the
entire nation to provide a system of checks and balances as intended in the
Constitution, the blueprint of our Republic.
-5-
In the national interest, the strength of the minority power must have the
necessary volume and substance to not only serve as a counter-weight but to
initiate positive and constructive legislative propesals.
The minority party must be imaginative, dedicated, and alert. If it fails to be
given needed strength and voice by the electorate, the true progress of our nation
is impeded, mis-directed, or stopped short of desirable goals.
Despite the present imbalance in government with an over-abundance of power in
the Executive branch, a steeply-tilted majority in the Congress, and the lack of
judicial restraint in the courts, there are reasons to be optimistic.
I have a strong abiding faith in the good judgment of the American people.
There is a growing realization that our political system is the finest in the history
of mankind.
I see strong indications of the American people seeking to fulfill a wish
expressed by Benjamin Franklin on the day work was completed in framing the
Constitution.
He was asked: "What have we -- a monardy or a republic?"
Franklin answered: "A Republic-- if you can keep it."
Americans by and large are dedicated to keeping our republic in the face of
criticism at home and abroad.
There is a growing realization in Americathat a government big enough to give
us everything we want is big enough to take from us everything we have.
######
Page data
- Page
- 1
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- 2451de779b4b08b1
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 4525913
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "4525913",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4525913",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Los Angeles Junior Chamber of Commerce, March 7, 1966",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4525913",
"collections": [
"Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers",
"Speeches"
],
"subjects": [
"U.S. Congress. 1789-"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642080/4525913.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642080/4525913.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642080/4525913.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "4525913",
"label": "Los Angeles Junior Chamber of Commerce, March 7, 1966",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4525913"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "4525913",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4525913",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Los Angeles Junior Chamber of Commerce, March 7, 1966",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4525913",
"collections": [
"Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers",
"Speeches"
],
"subjects": [
"U.S. Congress. 1789-"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642080/4525913.pdf",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642080/4525913.pdf",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642080/4525913.pdf",
"imageCount": 1,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/4525913",
"naId": 4525913,
"coverageEndDate": {
"logicalDate": "1966-03-31",
"month": 3,
"year": 1966
},
"coverageStartDate": {
"logicalDate": "1966-03-01",
"month": 3,
"year": 1966
},
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 1,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "document",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0054/642080/4525913.pdf",
"mediaId": "2451de779b4b08b1",
"ocrText": "The original documents are located in Box D19, folder \"Los Angeles Junior Chamber of\nCommerce, March 7, 1966\" of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech\nFile at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.\nCopyright Notice\nThe copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of\nphotocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. The Council donated to the United\nStates of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.\nWorks prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public\ndomain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to\nremain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid\ncopyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.\nDigitized from Box D19 of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library\n\"Balance in Government! An Analysis of the Legislative Process\"\nPresented by the Honorable Gerald R. Ford\nMinority Leader\nThe House of Representatives\nCongress of the United States\nLos Angeles Junior Chamber of Commerce\nMarch 7, 1966\nIn today's context, an issue of salient significance is whether an excess con-\ncentration of Federal sovereignty is to destroy state and local government, thus sup-\npressing individual freedom and opportunity.\nThis examination of the legislative process centers on the three branches of\ngovernment, their balance or lack of it, with particular emphasis on the Congress.\nA responsible dialogue discussing the legislative process includes the three\ncornerstones of our American political society, two of them constitutionally ordained,\nthe other a tradition of our Democracy.\nThe first cornerstone is the relationship of the Executive, Legislative, and\nJudicial branches of government, best in balance when they guard against mediocrity---\nalways the danger of a society overly-planned.\nThese are relationships of paramount importance in government, which most\nproperly must create a social order permitting every individual to live in dignity,\nrespect law and receive justice, and exploit endlessly the best in himself.\nIn granting powers to the Executive Branch, drafters of the Constitution very\nwisely decided to carefully delineate the authority establishing a Presidential\nposition of balanced strength.\nStrength, too, was demanded in the Legislative Branch of Federal Government,\ngiving the Congress a vital role.\nA strong judicial system under the United States Supreme Court was written into\nthe document.\nIt is most significant that those who authored the Constitution, insisting on\nstrength in each of the three branches, gave no superiority to any one branch.\nThe second cornerstone of the Republic is the Constutional provision that each\nState shall retain a pluralistic degree of sovereignty in relation to the Federal es-\ntablishment.\nIn their fidelity to detail, the patriots who created the Constitution sepa-\nrate the powers and responsibilities of state and national governments.\nNot Constitutionally-ordained, the third cornerstone of our Nation is a\nstrong two-party political system.\n-2-\nEarly in America's history, out of the political experience of the early\nyears there developed two major political parties. This system has served the\nbest interest of the people. As a result, we have avoided the loss of freedom that\nexists in one-party government. We have avoided the chaos and confusion that\naccompanies multi-party government.\nPerhaps the late Sir Winston Churchill best described the functions of the\nAmerican Republic when he said: \"Democracy is the worst form of government except\nfor any other that has ever been tried.\"\nAccepting the premise that the Constitution is to be a lasting bulwark\nagainst the concentration of power in any one branch of government, let us examine\nour political society in possibly history's most crucial and turbulent era.\nThe Executive branch increases in power and strength. Its manpower corps\nnumbers more than five million, approximately half of the personnel in the military\nservices. With this huge mass of personnel comes a total annual payroll of close to\n$30 billion and the right to spend out of the Federal Treasury nearly $127 billion\neach year.\nThe social implications of this awesome power come in disjointed phrases,\nincomplete references, and an anachronistic comment.\nExecutive accomplishments are detailed to the Nation by the device of\n\"releases\" at times distributed in flurries. Federal agencies are directed to pro-\nvide information to the White House, which takes unto itself the credit. Often the\ntiming of disseminating the information to America at large has political overtones\nand implications.\nCongress, the legislative branch, has great strengths and great weaknesses.\nThe human equation is paramount in Congressional action and inaction.\nIt has been said that \"Congress is a very human institution, part and parcel\nof our American culture.\" The late Speaker of the House Sam Rayburn used to describe\n\"those rolling waves of sentiment\" that dictate Congressional decisions.\nCritics attempt to denigrate the Congress, demanding reform, seeking to\nabolish certain prerogatives.\nThis dichotomy between the Congress and its critics has existed for decades.\nThe long estrangment will follow forward into history.\n-3-\nIt is difficult for anyone to stand between the critics and the Congress for\nhe faces assault from one side as an apologist for alleged incompetence and from the\nother for moralistic philosophastry.\nThus the disagreement prevents a meaningful dialogue between the Congress and\nits society of critics.\nThe lack of responsible debate and dissent is the Nation's loss, for Congress\nneeds help from outside its own political community in meeting the challenges of the\npresent and the future.\nCertainly, Congress needs the help of the academic, business, industrial,\ncommercial and cultural worlds.\nHowever, the assistance and advice must be based on an understanding of Con-\ngressional experience its depth and width and the psychology and logic of the\nCongressional processes.\nToo often critics seem more intent on seeking new ways to alter Congress than\nto truly learn how it functions. They could turn to the advice of Thomas Huxley,\nwho said a century ago: \"Sit down before facts as a little child, be prepared to give\nup every preconceived notion or you shall learn nothing.\"\nIt has been said that Congress is not as bad as many of its critics allege,\nnor as good as many of its members believe. Only by a recognition of both its\nweaknesses and strengths can we achieve a rational understanding of the Congress.\nmore\n-4-\nA sensitive description and an accurate appraisal of the Congress should have\nas their base a personal and prolonged experience either as a member or as a\ndedicated observer.\nThose who criticize severely could well assume the responsibility of\ning\nseek/public office, winning an election, assuming a legislative role, and trying to\nbe returned to office on a record of performance.\nThe neglected aspects of Congressional life demand appraisal, dissecting, and\nchange, Among them are the operation of lobbyists in the legislative processes,\nsome out-moded parliamentary procedures, the realities of the seniority system, and\nday-to-day routines.\nFrom Congress itself is emerging such a study. A joint bi-partisan committee\ncurrently is conducting research in depth with the major goal of improving the\noperations of Congress.\nThere will never be perfect agreement within or outside of Congress on the\nscope of the problems and the methods of solving them. However, the present study\nis a bold move toward dissolving much of today's criticism and dissent.\nA contemporary examination of balance in the three branches of government\nindicates a trend in the judicial system to arbitrarily elbow its way into areas\nthat were not intended by the authors of the Constitution.\nIn my opinion the views of the late Justice Felix Frankfurter were sound and\nwise. He espoused the philosophy of judicial restraint, a course of action I\nbelieve should be more closely followed by the courts.\nWithout over-indulgence in political partisanship, I can say that in this age,\nan imbalance exists in the relationship of government's three branches.\nThe political party dominating the Congress by a two-to-one majority has one\nof its own in the White House. The accelerated trend in the federal Judiciary is\nupsetting well-established practices and taking action which makes new law adds to\nthe lack of balance.\nThe role of the minority power in this situation should be greater than that\nof traditional *loyal opposition.'\nWith wisdom and foresight, the late President Theodore Roosevelt warned the\nparty out of power that \"mere negation and obstruction and attempts to revive the\ndead past spell ruin.\"\nHe was correct then and his words are just as correct and meaningful now.\nThe minority power has an obligation to its supporting electorate and the\nentire nation to provide a system of checks and balances as intended in the\nConstitution, the blueprint of our Republic.\n-5-\nIn the national interest, the strength of the minority power must have the\nnecessary volume and substance to not only serve as a counter-weight but to\ninitiate positive and constructive legislative propesals.\nThe minority party must be imaginative, dedicated, and alert. If it fails to be\ngiven needed strength and voice by the electorate, the true progress of our nation\nis impeded, mis-directed, or stopped short of desirable goals.\nDespite the present imbalance in government with an over-abundance of power in\nthe Executive branch, a steeply-tilted majority in the Congress, and the lack of\njudicial restraint in the courts, there are reasons to be optimistic.\nI have a strong abiding faith in the good judgment of the American people.\nThere is a growing realization that our political system is the finest in the history\nof mankind.\nI see strong indications of the American people seeking to fulfill a wish\nexpressed by Benjamin Franklin on the day work was completed in framing the\nConstitution.\nHe was asked: \"What have we -- a monardy or a republic?\"\nFranklin answered: \"A Republic-- if you can keep it.\"\nAmericans by and large are dedicated to keeping our republic in the face of\ncriticism at home and abroad.\nThere is a growing realization in Americathat a government big enough to give\nus everything we want is big enough to take from us everything we have.\n######\n\"Balance in Government: An Analysis of the Legislative Process\"\nPresented by the Honorable Gerald R. Ford\nMinority Leader\nThe House of Representatives\nCongress of the United States\nLos Angeles Junior Chamber of Commerce\nMarch 7, 1966\nIn today's context, an issue of salient significance is whether an excess con-\ncentration of Federal sovereignty is to destroy state and local government, thus sup-\npressing individual freedom and opportunity.\nThis examination of the legislative process centers on the three branches of\ngovernment, their balance or lack of it, with particular emphasis on the Congress.\nA responsible dialogue discussing the legislative process includes the three\ncornerstones of our American political society, two of them constitutionally ordained,\nthe other a tradition of our Democracy.\nThe first cornerstone is the relationship of the Executive, Legislative, and\nJudicial branches of government, best in balance when they guard against mediocrity---\nalways the danger of a society overly-planned.\nThese are relationships of paramount importance in government, which most\nproperly must create a social order permitting every individual to live in dignity,\nrespect law and receive justice, and exploit endlessly the best in himself.\nIn granting powers to the Executive Branch, drafters of the Constitution very\nwisely decided to carefully delineate the authority establishing a Presidential\nposition of balanced strength.\nStrength, too, was demanded in the Legislative Branch of Federal Government,\ngiving the Congress a vital role.\nA strong judicial system under the United States Supreme Court was written into\nthe document.\nIt is most significant that those who authored the Constitution, insisting on\nstrength in each of the three branches, gave no superiority to any one branch.\nThe second cornerstone of the Republic is the Constutional provision that each\nState shall retain a pluralistic degree of sovereignty in relation to the Federal es-\ntablishment.\nIn their fidelity to detail, the patriots who created the Constitution sepa-\nrate the powers and responsibilities of state and national governments.\nNot Constitutionally-ordained, the third cornerstone of our Nation is a\nstrong two-party political system.\n-2-\nEarly in America's history, out of the political experience of the early\nyears there developed two major political parties. This system has served the\nbest interest of the people. As a result, we have avoided the loss of freedom that\nexists in one-party government. We have avoided the chaos and confusion that\naccompanies multi-party government.\nPerhaps the late Sir Winston Churchill best described the functions of the\nAmerican Republic when he said: \"Democracy is the worst form of government except\nfor any other that has ever been tried.\"\nAccepting the premise that the Constitution is to be a lasting bulwark\nagainst the concentration of power in any one branch of government, let us examine\nour political society in possibly history's most crucial and turbulent era.\nThe Executive branch increases in power and strength. Its manpower corps\nnumbers more than five million, approximately half of the personnel in the military\nservices. With this huge mass of personnel comes a total annual payroll of close to\n$30 billion and the right to spend out of the Federal Treasury nearly $127 billion\neach year.\nThe social implications of this awesome power come in disjointed phrases,\nincomplete references, and an anachronistic comment.\nExecutive accomplishments are detailed to the Nation by the device of\n\"releases\" at times distributed in flurries. Federal agencies are directed to pro-\nvide information to the White House, which takes unto itself the credit. Often the\ntiming of disseminating the information to America at large has political overtones\nand implications.\nCongress, the legislative branch, has great strengths and great weaknesses.\nThe human equation is paramount in Congressional action and inaction.\nIt has been said that \"Congress is a very human institution, part and parcel\nof our American culture.\" The late Speaker of the House Sam Rayburn used to describe\n\"those rolling waves of sentiment\" that dictate Congressional decisions.\nCritics attempt to denigrate the Congress, demanding reform, seeking to\nabolish certain prerogatives.\nThis dichotomy between the Congress and its critics has existed for decades.\nThe long estrangment will follow forward into history.\n-3-\nIt is difficult for anyone to stand between the critics and the Congress for\nhe faces assault from one side as an apologist for alleged incompetence and from the\nother for moralistic philosophastry.\nThus the disagreement prevents a meaningful dialogue between the Congress and\nits society of critics.\nThe lack of responsible debate and dissent is the Nation's loss, for Congress\nneeds help from outside its own political community in meeting the challenges of the\npresent and the future.\nCertainly, Congress needs the help of the academic, business, industrial,\ncommercial and cultural worlds.\nHowever, the assistance and advice must be based on an understanding of Con-\ngressional experience its depth and width and the psychology and logic of the\nCongressional processes.\nToo often critics seem more intent on seeking new ways to alter Congress than\nto truly learn how it functions. They could turn to the advice of Thomas Huxley,\nwho said a century ago: \"Sit down before facts as a little child, be prepared to give\nup every preconceived notion----or you shall learn nothing.\"\nIt has been said that Congress is not as bad as many of its critics allege,\nnor as good as many of its members believe. Only by a recognition of both its\nweaknesses and strengths can we achieve a rational understanding of the Congress.\nmore\n-4-\nA sensitive description and an accurate appraisal of the Congress should have\nas their base a personal and prolonged experience either as a member or as a\ndedicated observer.\nThose who criticize severely could well assume the responsibility of\ning\nseek/public office, winning an election, assuming a legislative role, and trying to\nbe returned to office on a record of performance.\nThe neglected aspects of Congressional life demand appraisal, dissecting, and\nchange, Among them are the operation of lobbyists in the legislative processes,\nsome out-moded parliamentary procedures, the realities of the seniority system, and\nday-to-day routines.\nFrom Congress itself is emerging such a study. A joint bi-partisan committee\ncurrently is conducting research in depth with the major goal of improving the\noperations of Congress.\nThere will never be perfect agreement within or outside of Congress on the\nscope of the problems and the methods of solving them. However, the present study\nis a bold move toward dissolving much of today's criticism and dissent.\nA contemporary examination of balance in the three branches of government\nindicates a trend in the judicial system to arbitrarily elbow its way into areas\nthat were not intended by the authors of the Constitution.\nIn my opinion the views of the late Justice Felix Frankfurter were sound and\nwise. He espoused the philosophy of judicial restraint, a course of action I\nbelieve should be more closely followed by the courts.\nWithout over-indulgence in political partisanship, I can say that in this age,\nan imbalance exists in the relationship of government's three branches.\nThe political party dominating the Congress by a two-to-one majority has one\nof its own in the White House. The accelerated trend in the federal Judiciary is\nupsetting well-established practices and taking action which makes new law adds to\nthe lack of balance.\nThe role of the minority power in this situation should be greater than that\nof traditional *loyal opposition.\"\nWith wisdom and foresight, the late President Theodore Roosevelt warned the\nparty out of power that \"mere negation and obstruction and attempts to revive the\ndead past spell ruin.\" \"\nHe was correct then and his words are just as correct and meaningful now.\nThe minority power has an obligation to its supporting electorate and the\nentire nation to provide a system of checks and balances as intended in the\nConstitution, the blueprint of our Republic.\n-5-\nIn the national interest, the strength of the minority power must have the\nnecessary volume and substance to not only serve as a counter-weight but to\ninitiate positive and constructive legislative propesals.\nThe minority party must be imaginative, dedicated, and alert. If it fails to be\ngiven needed strength and voice by the electorate, the true progress of our nation\nis impeded, mis-directed, or stopped short of desirable goals.\nDespite the present imbalance in government with an over-abundance of power in\nthe Executive branch, a steeply-tilted majority in the Congress, and the lack of\njudicial restraint in the courts, there are reasons to be optimistic.\nI have a strong abiding faith in the good judgment of the American people.\nThere is a growing realization that our political system is the finest in the history\nof mankind.\nI see strong indications of the American people seeking to fulfill a wish\nexpressed by Benjamin Franklin on the day work was completed in framing the\nConstitution.\nHe was asked: \"What have we -- a monardy or a republic?\"\nFranklin answered: \"A Republic-- if you can keep it.\"\nAmericans by and large are dedicated to keeping our republic in the face of\ncriticism at home and abroad.\nThere is a growing realization in Americathat a government big enough to give\nus everything we want is big enough to take from us everything we have.\n######"
}