Under provisions of the act, as proposed to be further amended by H.R. 3496, such reorganization plans as may be submitted to the Congress by the President before June 1, 1965, would become law unless disapproved by a majority of either the House or the Senate by the passage of a resolution of disapproval within 60 calendar days after submission to the Congress.

Since enactment of the basic statute in 1949, the Committee on Government Operations, as well as its predecessor, the Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments, has taken the position that the Congress should not surrender nor abrogate its legislative jurisdiction over matters of such significance on a permanent basis. In its report to the Senate in the 86th Congress (S. Rept. 239) the committee stated that it was

the consensus of the committee that the present Congress
should not commit succeeding Congresses to the provisions
of the Reorganization Act, but that each Congress should
have the right to extend this authority to the President or to
withdraw it as the necessity dictates at the time.

REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY

At the request of the Director of the Bureau of the Budget, identical bills were filed in the present Congress by the respective chairmen of the Committees on Government Operations in the Senate (S. 813) and in the House (H.R. 3496). The letter from the Director follows: EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,

Hon. LYNDON B. JOHNSON,
President of the Senate,
Washington, D.C.

BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Washington, D.C., January 31, 1963.

DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: There is forwarded herewith a draft of legislation to further amend the Reorganization Act of 1949, as amended, so that such act will apply to reorganization plans transmitted to the Congress at any time before June 1, 1965.

This draft bill is submitted pursuant to the statement in the budget of the U.S. Government, 1964, that "legislation will also be requested to extend the President's authority to transmit reorganization plans to the Congress, which under existing law expires June 1, 1963" (pt. IV. p. 111).

The Reorganization Act provides a useful, expeditious, and successful procedure by which the President may present, and the Congress may review, proposals for the reorganization of agencies and activities of the executive branch of the Government.

Under the original Reorganization Act of 1949 and its successive extensions, 47 reorganization plans have become effective. This act has permitted the achievement of timely reorganizations, many of which have made possible significant improvements in the organization and administration of executive agencies and functions. It thus constitutes a proven tool for a continuing need.

The Bureau of the Budget urges early and favorable consideration of the proposed legislation.

Sincerely yours,

KERMIT GORDON, Director.

A further communication, in behalf of the passage of the subject bill, was submitted to the Chairman by the Bureau of the Budget on February 7, 1964, as follows:

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,

Hon. JOHN L. MCCLELLAN,

BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Washington, D.C., February 7, 1964.

Chairman, Committee on Government Operations,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The President has recommended in his budget message that legislation be enacted to extend the President's authority to transmit reorganization plans to the Congress under the provisions of the Reorganization Act of 1949. A bill to renew the President's reorganization authority passed the House of Representatives on June 4, 1963, and is now pending before your committee. I understand that the President personally has communicated with you his view that it would be very helpful for him to have reorganization authority comparable to that accorded by the Congress to his three immediate predecessors.

Please be assured of our intention to work closely with you and your committee concerning reorganization proposals and to take such other steps as may be necessary to improve communications between the executive branch and the Congress concerning reorganization plans. Through such cooperative efforts I am confident that it will be possible to eliminate or minimize the difficulties which you have identified.

Favorable action on the pending legislative proposal would be of material assistance to the President in obtaining needed and timely improvements in executive branch organization.

Sincerely,

ELMER B. STAATS, Acting Director.

HOUSE AMENDMENT

The House of Representatives considered and approved H.R. 3496 on June 4, 1963, by a vote of 227 to 174, extending the act to June 1, 1965. An amendment was adopted on the floor, however, which eliminated authority heretofore granted to the President to submit a reorganization plan which proposed the creation of any new executive department. This amendment is incorporated in the bill as reported to the Senate.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

In the first 5 years following the approval of the Reorganization Act of 1949, there was a total of 51 reorganization plans transmitted to the Congress under authority of the act, of which 40 were permitted to become law by the Congress, or were incorporated in other acts. In the last 10 years, however, although the act was extended 3 times for periods of 2 years as is again proposed by H.R. 3496, 17 plans were submitted, of which 7 were re ected. This reflects a total of 50 plans which have become law since the approval of the act in 1949. In some instances the plans were disapproved because

the House of Representatives or the Senate held that they were not in accord with the basic purposes of the act, going beyond reorganizations into areas of policy, which was in conflict with the intent of the Congress in approving the act in 1949.

The Congress, therefore, in view of the use to which it had been diverted, and the decreasing need for such authority being vested in the President, did not again extend the act when it expired in 1959. At the request of the President, however, the act was reactivated in 1961. A total of nine plans were submitted to the Congress under this extension, in 1961 and 1962. Seven of these, relating to functions, operations, and reorganization of the regulatory agencies were submitted in 1961. Four of the seven were rejected, one by the Senate and three by the House of Representatives.

In 1962, two plans were submitted under authority of the act. Plan No. 1 of 1962 proposed the creation of a Department of Urban Affairs and Housing, although the Committee on Government Operations had previously held hearings on a bill which would have created such a department, S. 1633, on June 21 and 22, and had reported the bill to the Senate on September 6, 1961. When the reorganization plan was submitted on January 30, 1962, S. 1633 was pending on the Senate Calendar. The committee nevertheless proceeded to hold hearings on a resolution of disapproval of the plan (S. Res. 288), on February 14, 15, and 16, 1962.

Before the committee was able to obtain a corrected or complete transcript of the hearings, or had an opportunity to draft a report to the Senate on the disapproving resolution, a motion was made on February 20 to discharge the committee on the premise that it had been dilatory in taking action on the resolution which had been filed in the Senate only 21 days before. This motion was made without regard to the provision in the Reorganization Act, which permits the Congress to act on such plans within a period of 60 days. The motion to discharge the committee from consideration of plan No. 1 of 1962 was rejected by the Senate, and the House of Representatives adopted a resolution disapproving the plan on the following day.

On May 27, 1963, before the act again expired, Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1963 was submitted. It became effective on July 27, 1963, since neither the House nor the Senate adopted a resolution of disapproval.

The House committee, in its report submitted by a majority of its members to the House of Representatives on May 24, 1963, set forth the following additional background information relating to the actions taken on the original act and extensions previously granted by the Congress:

The authority granted under the Reorganization Act of 1949 to submit reorganization plans to the Congress has been given to the President in various forms since 1932. It is based on a demonstrated need that reorganization of the many departments, agencies, and bureaus of the executive branch must be made from time to time so that Government may carry out its purposes in an efficient and economical way. The act provides a tool whereby the President, with the approval of the Congress, may make such reorganizations as are warranted to achieve this desirable objective.

This committee, in reporting the 1949 act, stated:
"*** there is an ever-present need for making such
changes in the organization of executive agencies as will
make the executive branch of the Government more man-
ageable, promote better coordination in the development
and execution of Government programs by removing sources
of confusing and conflicting policies, minimize the confusion
encountered by a citizen in dealing with scattered and over-
lapping agencies and facilitate the conduct of his business
with the Government, and otherwise promote efficiency and
economy. For the last half a century one President after
another has called the attention of the Congress to the need
for reorganizing the executive branch. This need has in-
creased as the role of the Government has been enlarged and
as the number and size of Government programs and agencies
have been correspondingly increased. Unanimity of opinion
appears to have existed for many years that corrective
measures with respect to executive organization are needed."

Many reorganization plans have been put into effect since
that time but none of these could be expected to provide a final
and permanent arrangement for any agency. Functions
change, new methods are developed, bureaucratic structures
become obsolete, new laws are passed. Close attention must
always be paid to organization.

The Reorganization Act of 1949 was more comprehensive than previous legislation and was recommended strongly by the first Hoover Commission on Organization of the Executive Branch of the Government which was still in existence at the time the bill was considered by the Congress.

The act and its predecessors admittedly reverse the usual legislative process by allowing the President to submit plans for reorganization which go into effect unless disapproved by the Congress within 60 days. This once unique method of legislating has become more and more used by the Congress in recent years in fields other than reorganization.' But this method is peculiarly useful in Government reorganization as the Congress has continually agreed. In its 1949 report, our committee also stated:

66* * * experience has demonstrated that substantial progress in reorganizing the executive branch can come about only under general authorizing legislation enacted by the Congress. The Congress, of course, has made and will make selected changes in the organization of the executive branch; but, as many Members of the Congress have stated, it is not feasible to enact far-reaching changes in organization permeating widely through the executive branch by means of direct legislation affecting specific agencies.'

It has been suggested that the bill be amended to take away the authority of the President to propose plans that will create new executive departments. The committee disagreed. The Reorganization Acts of 1939 and 1945 con

1 See Congressional Record for Apr. 9, 1963, p. 5590, for a list of provisions of Federal law relating to programs or activities which became effective if not disapproved or rejected by the Congress within a prescribed time.

tained a prohibition against the creation of new executive departments but the Congress rejected such a prohibition in 1949 and removed it from the bill. It was under the authority contained in the 1949 act that President Eisenhower submitted Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1953 which created the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and which was approved by the Congress.

The prohibition against the creation of executive departments was removed in large measure because of the strong insistence of the Hoover Commission that the President be given as much latitute as possible in making reorganizations. In a letter dated January 13, 1949, to Chairman Dawson, former President Hoover said:

"The Commission recommends that such authority should be given to the President and that the power of the President to prepare and transmit plans of reorganization to the Congress should not be restricted by limitations or exemptions. Once the limiting and exempting process is begun it will end the possibility of achieving really substantial results. But, in saying this, the Commission should not be understood as giving sweeping endorsement to any and all reorganization plans. It does believe that the safeguard against unwise reorganization plans lies both in a sound exercise of the President's discretion and in the reserved power in the Congress by concurrent resolution to disapprove any proposed plan. Limitations or exemptions upon this power to reorganize should not be imposed other than that of congressional disapproval."

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with subsection 4 of the rule XXIX of the Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in brackets, new matter is printed in italic, and existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):

[PUBLIC LAW 109-81ST CONGRESS]

[CHAPTER 226-1ST SESSION]
[H.R. 2361]

AN ACT To provide for the reorganization of Government agencies, and for other purposes

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

TITLE I

SHORT TITLE

SECTION 1. This Act may be cite as the "Reorganization Act of 1949".