Broadcasting (Jan - June 1940)

Cc^f to Cor^i" Superpower, Logan-Walter Bill Up The Gotham The Drake The£lach$ton9 ThcTooin liousG Eelleuieui^iltmore A. S. KIRKEBY, N^onoQinQ Director KIRKERY HOTELS Page 76 • May J, 1940 (Continued from page 16) Logan-Walter Bill would be called up on the floor of the Senate early in May. Passed overwhelmingly in the House, with a surprising 297-79 vote after a four-day debate, the bill has become one of the major New Deal stumbling blocks during the present session of Congress, and promises to become a campaign issue whether accepted or rejected. Designed to standardize the administrative procedure of some 130 Federal agencies, with few exceptions, and to provide uniform methods of appeal from regulations and administrative decisions of these agencies, the bill specifically provides for a rehearing or judicial appeal on any existing regulation issued under the act, providing it has not been in effect more than three years, and sets up a method of appealing from an administrative decision affecting any personal or property right. Although the Logan bill (S-915) early in this Congress was passed on the Senate unanimous consent calendar. Administration supporters almost immediately afterward succeeded in calling it back for reconsideration. Since then, and following the death of Sen. Logan (D-Ky.), original sponsor of the bill in the Senate, proponents of the measure in the upper house have not actively pressed for its consideration. Change of Attitude The movement to revamp administrative procedure gained fresh impetus some months ago when Rep. Walter (D-Pa.) emerged with a revised proposal essentially similar to that proposed by the late Sen. Logan. The new measure gained right-of-way in the House when the Rules Committee reported it favorably. Subsequently, and before it was actually considered in the House, it became knovra that Sen. King (D-Utah), who had handled the Logan bill in the Senate since the death of its author, would move to substitute the House bill for the original Logan proposal. The likelihood of Senate consideration this session became apparent shortly after the bill's enthusiastic approval in the House when Senators who previously had taken more or less casual interest in the lAMC-WORTHj LARGEST PUBLIC DOMAIN RECORDED LIBRARY in the WORLD LANG-WORTH FEATURE PROGRAMS 420 Madison Ave. New, York legislation urged its immediate consideration. Chief among these was Sen. Hatch (D-N.M.) , author of the "clean politics" bill passed at the last session. The Senate recently passed a group of Hatch-sponsored amendments to the original act, which since have been effectively bottled up in the House Judiciary Committee. It is believed that Hatch Bill supporters in the Senate will work on behalf of the Logan-Walter proposal there, while proponents of the other proposal in the House will exert their influence to pry loose the Hatch Act amendments. Spearhead of Senate opposition to the administrative procedure bill has been and remains Sen. Minton (D-Ind.), all-the-way New Deal supporter. Mirroring the feelings of Administration opposition in general, he termed it a "make-work bill for lavso^ers" which wotild hamstring and shackle the administrative side of government. Although President Roosevelt has not referred to the Logan-Walter bill by name, he has made it known that he would oppose legislation vdth this effect, and it is probable he would veto the measure if it was finally passed by the Senate. In view of this, it is considered unlikely that the bill actually will be enacted at this session, since if it were vetoed. Congress likely would adjourn before it could be taken up again to override the veto. Meantime the legislation has drawn the legislative spotlight during much of April. Press comment, generally supporting the measure, has usually taken the tack that although the proposal may have fiaws, it is a step in the right direction. Opponents hold that its main ptirpose is to wreck such pet New Deal agencies as the National Labor Relations Board and Securities & Exchange Commission. In neither House nor press discussions has the FCC drawn any substantial amount of individual consideration. Sees Many Flaws Objections of one group of the legal fraternity were presented in a memorandum written by Louis G. Caldwell, Washington radio attorney, which appeared in the appendix of the Congressional Record of April 18. In putting forward his objections academically, Mr. Caldwell explained to Broadcasting, he was speaking solely in his capacity as a lawyer and former chairman of the administrative law committee of the American Bar Assn. and not to represent the attitude of the Th« Noi lliwMf't iMt Broadcasting Buy WTCN AN NBC STATION MINNEAPOLIS ST. PAUL Owned ond Operated by MINNEAPOLIS TRIBUNE AND ST. PAUL DISPATCHPIONEER PRESS FREE fir PETERS, INC. — Natl. Rep.' WAGE-HOUR CLAIM REFUTED BY MILLER PUBLISHED comments that local radio advertisers using stations heard outside the State would be amenable to provisions of the Federal Wages & Hours Act were refuted April 26 by Joseph L. Miller, director of labor relations of NAB. The New York Herald-Tribune April 26 in editorially attacking the Wage-Hour Act as "absurd", stated that if a local business advertises "over a radio station heard outside its State jurisdiction it has been construed to be in interstate commerce within the meaning of this grotesque statute." Mr. Miller wired the newspaper suggesting a correction. He pointed out that last Nov. 27 Joseph Rauh, assistant general counsel of the Wage-Hour Division, had ruled that "the mere fact that the employer uses the facilities of radio broadcasting to advertise his products would not ordinarily make his entire business subject to the coverage of this Act." Declaring the broadcasting industry has had its troubles under the Wages & Hours Act despite the fact that the average weekly wage of $45.20 is one of the highest in the country, he told the newspaper that the prospective radio advertiser whose employes are at present exempt from the Act "need not fear that advertising by air will bring those employes under the Act." Clear Channel group or any other broadcasting group with which he is identified professionally. In his critical memorandum Mr. Caldwell contended that the legislation did not accomplish the purpose for which it was designed. He observed that althotigh it has been greatly improved over the original draft submitted to the ABA, "it still is full of flaws, ambiguities and even incongruities". He pointed out that the proposed legislation, applied to both quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative powers of administrative agencies, in many cases would yield a procedure less satisfactory than now prevails. One of the major arguments used by governmental opponents of the bill is tied in with the studies of administrative procedure being made by the Attorney General's Committee on Administrative Law. They contend that the findings of this special committee, which already has issued preliminary reports in the form of monographs and which is expected to make a final report after public hearings this summer, should be considered before such legislation is enacted [Broadcasting, Feb. 15]. Mr. Caldwell's observations have drawn considerable interest, since he was chairman of the ABA administrative law committee in 1933 when the study was begun which eventually evolved the present Logan-Walter bill. However, he has pointed out, his present position as a critic of the bill results not from any change of mind on his part but from the fact that "the LoganWalter bill represents a reversal of position by the association (and its special committee on administrative law) as against the position adopted at its annual meetings in 1934 and 1936". BROADCASTING • Broadcast Advertising