The President stated:
I have given earnest study to the so-called Wagner Bill for improvement of public employment agencies, in an effort to find a method to make it of use in the present employment situation. I find upon study, however, that if I would prevent a serious blow to labor during this crisis, I should not approve the bill. I have repeatedly urged a proper extension of public employment agencies, but this bill, unfortunately, abolishes the whole of the present well-developed Federal Employment Service, and proposes after certain requirements are complied with, to set up an entirely new plan by subsidies to the states from the Federal Treasury. And even were there no other objections to the plan, it cannot be made effective for many months or even years. It is not only changing horses while crossing a stream but the other horse would not arrive for many months. This situation alone required legislation be deferred, as it will not help in emergency but will do great damage.
The fundamental questions involved also require more consideration. This bill proposes, as I have said, to destroy the Federal Employment Service in the Department of Labor, which has developed out of many years of experience, and to substitute for it 48 practically independent agencies, each under state control, the Federal Government paying for them as to 50% and based not upon economic need of the particular state but upon mathematical ratio to population. On the other hand, the existing Federal Employment Service is today finding places of employment for men and women at the rate of 1,300,000 per annum. It cooperates and coordinates with the service already established by some 30 states. It applies its energies to interstate movements and, being a mobile service, it concentrates upon the areas in need. Beyond this, however, the present Federal Service has special divisions devoted to the planting and harvest movement in agriculture and a special organization for veterans. There is no provision for the continuation of these two very important special services under the new plan, and the interstate quality of the Federal Service is destroyed. In any event, the bill required effective action by the legislatures and governors of the various states at a minimum time requiring so long a period for its establishment as to be of no purpose in this emergency. And there is, therefore, ample time to consider the whole of the questions involved. There is no financial loss to labor in allowing this bill to lapse. While the bill provides for $1,500,000 expenditure over the next 15 or 16 months, one-half of it would be absorbed in relieving one-half of the present expenditure of the states without any additional service on their part. On the other hand, the present Federal Service has available over the next 15 or 16 months nearly $1,000,000 for the conduct of its agencies, which are being rapidly expanded through the emergency appropriations.
I am asking the Secretary of Labor to cooperate with the various interested organizations to draft a plan for presentation to the next session of Congress which will avoid the difficulties presented by this bill.
A more ample statement indicating the difficulties of the bill is given in the reports to me by the Secretary of Labor and the Attorney General, which are attached.
March 6, 1931
The President,Dear Mr. President:
I have examined the provisions of S. 3060, the Act to provide for the establishment of a national employment system for cooperation with the states in the promotion of such system and for other purposes, which has not yet received your approval.
This examination made in conjunction with the Secretary of Labor has been for the purpose of ascertaining what the effect of this Act would be during the next year upon the efforts of the Department of Labor to relieve unemployment. The Labor Department now has an employment bureau which is rendering excellent service. Section One of this Act expressly provides:
“The Employment Service now existing in the Department of Labor is hereby abolished.”
If this bill becomes law, the present employment bureau would thus be immediately abolished and steps would then have to be taken under this Act to construct an entirely new employment service along new lines. It is obvious that months must elapse before substantial progress could be made in setting up the new service. The state authorities would have to be consulted, the action of state legislatures awaited, and when some progress had been made in setting up new agencies to aid the unemployed, the restrictive provisions of this Act such as that for apportionment of funds, would deprive the system of flexibility and hamper efficient action in the present emergency.
Without attempting here to analyze in detail all the complicated provisions of this Act, it is obvious that by its terms it would have the effect at this time when labor is in greatest need of assistance, of destroying the employment service now being maintained in the Department of Labor and making it impossible for months to come to replace it with a working organization.
Respectfully yours,
William D. Mitchell,
Attorney General