Points of Order

Virtually unnoticed by the press in the flood of first day Senate bills rests an outline of new rules for committee investigations. Throughout the last few years the actions of several notorious committees have shown that the fine print of a few procedural rules are needed to halt the two-inch headlines of unrestrained chairmen. The abuses of McCarthy, Velde, and Recce, among others, are so well known--holding one-man hearings unknown to other committee members, summoning witnesses under false pretenses, restricting the full advice and support of witness' counsel--that the new bill of Senator Thomas Hennings deserves the early blessing of Senate leaders.

The proposed rules put more committee power in the safest place--in the hands of the majority. Committee meetings could get underway only after majority authorization, and a requirement of four days' notice for meetings outside Washington should insure the presence of at least several members at every hearing. And since evidence would be introduced exclusively by courtroom procedure, members would be able to prohibit the assorted mail and stolen documents that clutter committee transcripts.

Even a majority, however, could support unfair investigations, and other rules are needed to give witnesses themselves courtroom safeguards. Under the proposed rules, persons mentioned unfavorably in hearings would have a chance to enter sworn testimony in their own defense. Witnesses could also have active counsels with the right of objecting to questions and supporting these objections with arguments. Finally, and perhaps most important, witnesses would have twenty-four hours advance notice of the subject of the questions to be asked.

The Hennings bill, incorporating safeguards for both the committee and the witness, is a necessary amendment to Senate procedure. The House, too, should adopt similar rules revisions that would curb offending committees without hindering investigations that are conducted fairly.