DISCUSSION OF MR. GILBERTSON’S PAPER BY RAYMOND B. FOSDICKl

New York City

N DISCUSSING the subject of co-ordination or amalgamation of civic forces, Mr. Gilbertson has addressed himself primarily to I the latter, evidently on the theory that of the two possibilities,

amalgamation is preferable. I confess I cannot quite follow Mr. Gilbert- son in this belief. There are so many human factors to be taken into consideration in the amalgamation of separate organizations that I am afraid we should find such a plan far more difficult than it looks on paper. Each of us is primarily interested ill a particular line of civic work. Some of us believe in single tax, and are bend- ing all our energies to that end. Others of us have no sympathy with single tax, and see in municipal research the avenue of most rapid civic advance. It would be extremely difficult to find common factors enough for such an amalgamation as Mr. Gilbertson suggests. And even if we did succeed in combining on certain movements or ideas as the basis of the militant program that Mr. Gilbertson talks about, I am fearful that we should antagonize large sections of the public in our endeavor to gain support for the plan. The public could not whole-heartedly endorse an organization which included certain movements in which it had no interest or with which it frankly disagreed. As a result, we would weaken the whole cause by trying to associate it with movements which for the time being, perhaps, are too undeveloped to obtain any appreciable amount of public support.

Moreover, I would suggest the thought that progress is not achieved in the fashion that Mr. Gilbertson implies. Reform is never accepted whole- sale. A little progress in this direction is followed by a little progress in another direction, or from another angle. These advances are irregular, sometimes irrational, often without relation to each other, but by and by we find that the whole line has gradually moved forward. The-result has been achieved not by a mighty “drive” but by a series of petty skirmishes. The methods by which human society changes its form may not be scientific but they have to be given pretty weighty consideration.

While, therefore, believing that such an amalgamation as Mr. Gilbert- son has indicated is impossible a t the present time, I a m heartily in favor, as anyone would be who has studied the subject, of a far greater degree of

1 Former commissioner of accounts of New York city; author of “European Police Systems.”

Civic ideals never advance in a uniform line.

252

19171 DISCUSSION O F MR. GILBERTSONS PAPER 253

co-ordination between civic agencies than now exists. If we could harness up the energy that is lost and misspent through duplication of work alone, I think we would have momentum enough to reach a good many civic goals that now seem far ahead of us. Overlapping of activity is one of the chief characteristics of our civic agencies. In New York city, for ex- ample, we have a training school for public service and an institute for public service, both answering-at least both assuming to answer-the same needs. If the money which supports both these agencies could be used to support a single agency, the work could be far more effectively conducted. But here again we have to take human characteristics into consideration. Differences in temperament are often the sole basis for different organizations, and our theories of co-ordination suffer from the frailties of human nature. We may not succeed in eliminating all the duplicating organizations in civic work, but at least we can highly resolve never to lend support to any new society unless it can prove by prepon- derating evidence its individual right to live. We can afford to be ruth- less in this matter, particularly when we remember that fully 25 per cent of our civic agencies-and I -am sure my figures are conservative-should be scrapped.

Many of our organi- zations-I mean the necessary ones-have no effective means of getting their ideas before the public. Either because they do not know how or because they are without proper facilities, they are unable to popularize the proposals which have met with the approval of a few specialists. There is no widespread educational program to embrace the latest ideas in civic reform. A few movements like the short ballot proposition and the city manager form of government are striking exceptions to this general rule. The central ideas incorporated in these two propositions have by a very effective process been given wide currency throughout the entire country. One hears about them everywhere, and the gentleman whose paper I am discussing has had no unimportant part to play in this remarkably effective piece of political education. But there are other civic ideas with which the public is little acquainted, or imperfectly ac- quainted, because of the lack of educational propaganda on a broad scale. The executive budget, for example, the relation of cost accounting to effective government control, the broad principle of a responsible execu- tive, could be made the basis of an educational campaign that would do more to wake up the country than anything else I can imagine. The trouble with many of our organizations is that they represent small groups of experts, whose thinking is largely confined to themselves. We are not putting across to the public on the scale that it should be put across, the result of our deliberation and investigation.

For example, the need of a national budget has been fully established by competent research. The facts have been completely developed by

One phase of co-ordination is not often discussed.

254 NATIONAL MUNICIPAL REVIEW [March

the Taft commission of 1912, by Willoughby’s forthcoming volume on English budget practice, and by the forthcoming book on Canadian finan- cial procedure. Very few people have read or will read these somewhat technical reports and books. They can be made the basis, however, of a propaganda that would arouse the whole country to the necessity of a responsible budget system in Washington. The same thing is true of state budgets. Maryland, for example, has recently adopted an execu- tive budget system which may well serve as a model for other states. All that is necessary to its wider adoption is to give substantial publicity to its operation and effectiveness. Similarly, the principles of efficient state management in the form of a responsible executive have been pretty fully developed, and a propaganda on this point would lay the foundations for the reorganization of state government which is inevitably bound to come. The principles of county government are also being worked out; and here, too, there is a need of systematic publicity.

This situation seems to me to present a unique field for co-ordination. Why should not all our many organizations club together to support a common selling agency or clearing house, whose business it would be to take the well established results of study and investigation, and by tem- perate, sure-footed, and dignified publicity put them before the entire country? Such a program for political education, supported by bodies like the bureau of municipal research, the institute for government re- search, the National Voters’ League, the National Chamber of Commerce, and the National Municipal League, would be far more effective than any of the retail methods at present employed. In this fashion our various organizations could find a common ground for fellowship, and out of this ultimately might come an approach to the amalgamation of which Mr. Gilbertson has been speaking.