« ForrigeFortsett »
petent to name their United States Senators or they are not. Johnson held them to be competent.
He accordingly recommended that legislation be enacted to provide that candidates for the United States Senate be nominated at the primaries as State officials are nominated;58 that the names of the nominees for United States Senator as made by the several parties be placed on the election ballot so that The People at the finals may vote for them the same as for the candidates for any State office; that a form of contract be provided by which candidates for the Legislature may be bound in the event of their election, to abide by The People's choice in naming the Senator, as is done in Oregon.
There was no questioning the logic of Johnson's position. Admit with him that The People are competent to govern themselves, and one must go in full sympathy with his policies from the beginning to the end of his message.
From the moment of the delivery of that message, there was a new alignment in the Legislature of the State of California. In unmistakable terms, Governor Johnson had made the Initiative, the Referendum, the Recall, Restoration of the Australian Ballot, Direct Vote for United States Senator, Effective Railroad Regulation -all the reforms, in a word, to which both parties stood pledged, and for which The People were clamoring— "administration policies." And "administration policies"
58 The same position was at first taken by several of the Progressives at the session of 1909, but abandoned for the compromise, "within-the-party plan,' which the machine finally fought as viciously as it could have opposed the Oregon plan itself.
in no partisan sense. Johnson left no room for partisanship.
"It is in no partisan spirit that I have addressed you," he said in concluding; "it is in no partisan spirit that I appeal to you to aid. Democrats and Republicans alike are citizens, and equal patriotism is in each. Your aid, your comfort, your highest resolve and endeavor, I bespeak, not as Republicans or Democrats, but as representatives of all the people of all classes and political affiliations, as patriots indeed, for the advancement and progress and righteousness and uplift of California. And may God in His mercy grant us the strength and the courage to do the right."
The "bracer" which the Legislature needed had been furnished. The Senator or Assemblyman who had more belief in direct legislation than in his own conviction that direct legislation is based on sound principle, and who was ready to accept any compromise which the machine was willing to offer, found himself confronted with the alternative of following with the administration or running with the "machine." That member who insisted that United States Senators should be elected by direct vote, but hesitated about adopting its equivalent, the Oregon plan, saw there were but two sides; he must either stand with those who advocated popular election of United States Senators, or with those who opposed.
Johnson's message wiped out partisan lines. In the Legislature of 1911, there were to be no Republican policies nor Democratic policies, only "administration
policies."59 Those Democrats and those Republicans who continued faithful to the spirit as well as the letter of the platform of their respective party, must of necessity support the "administration measures."
And those who failed to support such measures would find themselves outside the pale of both parties. It was evident that some changes of attitude had to be made, or certain of the old guard would find themselves without a party.60
And there were many such changes. Men of the
59 At once legislators and lobbyists with "pet measures" claimed for them the advantage of being "administration measures. So general did this abuse become, that before the session was a month old, Governor Johnson found himself compelled to issue the following statement:
"Apparently there has been some misapprehension regarding what have been termed 'administration measures' before the Legislature. There is no desire on my part to do anything else than to act with members of the Legislature in accomplishing those things concerning which all of us stand pledged, and when I say 'all of us,' I mean Democrats as well as Republicans. Apparently many bills wholly outside of this category have been termed by the newspapers, sometimes erroneously, and sometimes maliciously, 'administration measures.'
"The particular measures for which I am at present striving in common with the members of the Legislature who wish to redeem their promises to The People, are the Railroad bill, the Amendment to the Direct Primary Law, Ballot Reform, the Initiative, Referendum and Recall and the bills recently introduced at my request, to recover the public service appropriated at the close of the term of my predecessor, and the Act about to be introduced designed to prevent such appropriation in the future.
"I make this statement for the purpose of correcting the impression that certain bills outside of our platform pledges are measures of the administration. In respect to bills in general, that are introduced, my attitude has been to decline, in advance, in any way, to approve any proposed measure, but to leave the question of approval or disapproval of a measure until the matter shall have been passed upon by the Legislature, and in due course brought to the Governor."
60 Take for example those co-workers in the Senate of 1909, Senator Hare of San Francisco, down in the record as a "Democrat," and Senator Wright of San Diego, down in the record as a "Republican."
At the 1909 session, these two gentlemen voted together almost constantly on questions of public policy.
Among the most important policies recommended by Johnson and pledged by both parties, for example, were a practical Statewide vote for United States Senator, and effective Railroad Regulation, to include physical valuation of railroad properties and definite authority granted the State Board of Railroad Commissioners to fix absolute rates.
Both Senator Hare and Senator Wright opposed these policies
character of those whom machine managers send to the Legislature were prepared to desert the machine for the "winner," just as they will desert the Progressives should the Reactionaries secure control again.
But even without this shifty crew, the Progressives had a good working majority in both Senate and Assembly. This majority included the Progressive Democrats as well as the Progressive Republicans. Governor Johnson had made it clear that neither party had a monopoly of the progressive movement; the reforms which he advocated in his message had been pledged in the platforms of both parties. The reputable element of both parties united to uphold the Governor in his recommendation that their platform pledges be observed.®2
at the session of 1909. If they continued their opposition at the 1911 session, with which party were they to be classed?
The same applied with equal force to Senator Welch, or to Senator Bills, or to Senator Finn, in fact, to all the members of the Senate who had, during the 1909 session, been identified with the Wolfe-Leavitt group.
61 "The President of the Senate" (Lieutenant-Governor Wallace), announced Senator Caminetti, Democratic leader, "will have my earnest support from now on. It is the President's purpose to secure action on the recommendations of Governor Johnson, and my purpose to assist him."
62 This confidence in Governor Johnson assumed one phase which could not be justified. Senators and Assemblymen when called upon to pass upon a vicious, but strongly supported measure, fell into the habit of voting for it, trusting to Governor Johnson to exercise his veto power. The Sacramento Bee in its issue of March 4, 1911, said of this abuse:
"A tendency is developing in both Senate and Assembly, when a well-backed but undesirable measure is under consideration, to pass it with the comfortable assurance that 'a safe man sits in the Governor's chair, and he has a veto.'
"The Assembly and Senate may find this an easy way to pass on responsibility, but the shifting upon one man the wrath of constituents which 120 legislators fear to encounter cannot be regarded as an act of supreme courage.
"Furthermore, the Senate and Assembly of California are a duly constituted branch of State Government. For them to shift a duty because, if honestly performed, it would offend this or that powerful political body, is worse than cowardice; it amounts to betrayal of trust.
"The Governor represents the executive, not the legislative, department. For the Governor to assume legislative powers would very properly be resented. The People have a right to resent the thrusting of legislative responsibilities upon him."
ELECTION OF UNITED STATES SENATOR.
The Progressives, Having Failed at the Legislative Session of 1909 to Prevent the Organization, or "Machine," Members Striking From the Direct Primary Measure Practical Provisions for the Nomination of United States Senators, at the 1911 Session, Regardless of Party Affiliations, Joined in Electing to the United States Senate, Judge John D. Works, Who Had, at the Primaries, Received the Highest Popular Vote for that Office.
The line between the so-called machine and anti-machine factions in Senate and Assembly was closely drawn at the session of 1909, but in no instance was the division more clearly defined than in the contest over that section of the Wright-Stanton Direct Primary bill which dealt with the nomination of United States Senators by popular vote.
The anti-machine faction, while willing to compromise with the "machine" and not insist upon the Oregon plan,** nevertheless insisted that The People of California
63 The 1909 Direct Primary bill was introduced in the Upper House by Senator Leroy A. Wright of San Diego, and in the Lower by Mr. Phil A. Stanton of Los Angeles.
64 The procedure of nominating and electing Federal Senators under the Oregon plan is as follows:
Candidates for United States Senator are nominated by the several parties precisely as are candidates for State offices.
The names of the candidates receiving party nominations are