Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

2. NATIONAL REFERENDUM IN 1920 ON

RAIL AND MINE OWNERSHIP

By Herbert S. Bigelow
Cincinnati, Ohio

MR. BIGELOW: Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen; it has been my privilege to hear only six addresses this afternoon, but I am sure if the standard is kept up this will have been the greatest convention that I have ever attended. I think these addresses have been wonderful in their vital, informing value; and I shall be happy if I make a little contribution-make a suggestion that may be of some practical use to the members of this youthful organization.

Oregon Shows Us How

One of the first laws ever put upon the statute books of America by use of the popular initiative was a statute by which the people of the state of Oregon accomplished. practically, the election of United States Senators by their vote before the Federal Constitution was amended to permit it. Under the Federal Constitution the legislature of the state of Oregon had to do the electing, but by state law the people of the state decided that they would do the nominating, and so they provided a law by which candidates for the United States Senate should submit their names at a primary election. This law also provided that the candidates for the state legislature that was to elect United States Senators must, before their names were printed upon the ballot, file with the election authorities one of two statements, the law itself prescribing the form of the statement. One statement was in effect that if elected to the legislature the candidate agreed to vote for that man for United States Senator who was the choice of the people at the primary election without regard to his politics. The other statement was that if elected the candidate refused to be so bound. The issue in the election was the election of statement No. 1 men or statemen No. 2 men. The people elected a legislature of statement No. 1 men. Now it so happened that at the election the people chose a democrat for the United States Senate. The man who received the largest number of votes at the primary was the present United States Senator, George E. Chamberlain from Oregon, a democrat, although the legislature elected at the same time was overwhelmingly Republican. So we have this interesting incident, quite unique in our political history, a Republican legislature electing a Democrat to a seat in the United States Senate, by virtue of that law, one of the first ever put upon the statute books by popular initiative.

184

How to Provide for a National Referendum Without Waiting for a Federal Amendment

Now the suggestion I am making is that we utilize the principle of this law in order to establish a method of voting on national questions without waiting for an amendment of the Federal Constitution to establish a national referendum. The law would provide, and it should be, of course, a state law, that the people of any governmental district might on a petition, say of 10 per cent, cause any question of national legislation to be placed upon the ballot at any regular election. It should also provide that on a larger petition, possibly 20 per cent, the people of any congressional district might cause any question of national legislation to be placed upon the ballot at any special election. The law should also provide that no candidate for Congress should have his name printed upon any ballot until he filed with the board of election a statement stating categorically whether or not he agreed to be bound by any such vote or instruction that might be given in his district either at the time of his election or after his election, such statement to be printed conspicuosly immediately above the candidate's name on the ballot. I think it is a foregone conclusion that if the people of America were given a chance they would gladly vote to establish that method of instructing congressmen on national issues.

Machinery Now at Hand in 16 States

-a

Now fortunately we have at hand a body of machinery, the value of which has not been appreciated-machinery that we may use to accomplish this thing, at least in a large number of the states of the union. It is possible for this organization, in cooperating with other organizations, to take concerted action to place a uniform law, and an identical measure, upon the official ballot next November, 1920, in 16 states of this Union. The labor organizations themselves could do it in these 16 states. The Federation of Labor in these 16 states could easily do it. First, the law should be drafted and agreed to by this organizationlaw providing this system on future national issues. Then it would be necessary to secure the signatures in these 16 statessufficient signatures to place the question on the ballot, as is possible in these 16 states that have the direct initiative. That would take from 50,000 to 100,000 signatures. You see how easy it would be for the Federation of Labor executive board in a state having a direct initiative to send the proposed law with blank petitions to each one of its 1,000 or 2,000 local labor unions in the state with instructions that these petitions be filled up with 100 or 200 names from each local labor union, so that in the course of 30 days or 60 days the Federation of Labor in these 16 states could collect the necessary signatures to place this proposal upon

the ballot in November, 1920, so that in 16 states of the Union the people might by direct vote establish by law, and legalize this method of instructing congressmen on national questions. Now if we can secure the co-operation of these organizations to pool their interest, to combine their effort and to place this measure upon the ballot in these direct initiative states this next November —if we can do this I am sure the people of these state will do the rest.

The People Could Control and Instruct Congress

We have had much experience with referendum voting in some 20 states of the Union now, and this experience has extended over a period of 20 years, and this experience warrants this conclusion --that the people of America always vote to increase their political power. They may not vote as some of us would like upon economic questions, but on political questions they vote unfailingly for democracy every time. They vote for the measures that are calculated to increase their power over their government. So that if we can get the machinery in motion to place this proposed law upon the ballot in these 16 states, it will be equivalent to its enactment into law, and thus the day after the November election this may be a legal method of voting in these 16 states.

Then the same organizations that have co-operated to place this measure on the ballot may, if they choose, make important use of it, by causing such a question as the Plumb plan for the control of railroads, or the nationalization of mines, or whatever may be up of a pressing nature, to be placed on the ballot at the special election in time to consider these questions and control the congress that is to be elected in November 1920. If we had that power, if the system were in operation, it would then be possible for us to unite whatever strength we have for a given issue such as the Plumb plan.

But with the present method of doing things what is the situation? Does anybody hope that the Republican party will espouse the Plumb plan? Does anybody hope that the Democratic party will do so? Here and there there may be a Democrat or a Republican candidate for Congress entirely committed to the Plumb plan, but the Democratic or Republican party as such could not possibly be so committed. And if it were—if the Democratic party, for example, should endorse the Plumb plan as a part of its platform, then no Republican could vote for the Plumb plan at the next congressional election unless he could be persuaded to leave the Republican party, at least so far as congressional elections go, and vote as a Democrat, and vice versa? But I suspect that few of us have hope for much help from either the Republican or Democratic party. Well, then, shall we say that our only hope of getting political power back of the Plumb

plan is in building up a third political party? Well, it seems to me that a third political party is inevitable. (Applause.) Yet I should not want to put all my eggs in that basket.

People Could Unite Regardless of Party

If this system of direct voting on national questions is established in these 16 states, at least as it may be by the use of public initiative, then it will be possible to place the Plumb plan on the ballot and get a vote upon that when nothing but that issue is involved; so that everybody in the district who favor the propoosition may vote for it, and if they have a majority the member of Congress will then be instructed. What is the likelihood of his disobeying those instructions? Well, I believe with that method of voting we could soon create public opinion that would be so strong that Congressmen would learn to respect the instructions of the people. There is no law to prevent a member of the electoral college from voting for a candidate for president of the opposite party, but it was not done but once in the history of America, and I think we can put back of this system of voting the same power that enforces that rule in the electoral collage, that is the power of public opinion. We must rely to some extent upon the people's appreciation and faith in democracy, and the moral power of an aroused public opinion.

It would be better if we had an amendment of the Federal Constitution, so that we had a real constitutional initiative referendum upon national questions. But that is a long process, and I am suggesting a way by which without waiting for an act of Congress, without waiting for the consent of any state legislature, it is possible for us by using in our own behalf and establish in 16 states of the Union a method of voting by which we can instruct the very next Congress to vote for the Plumb plan on railroads or national ownership of mines or anything else the American people may want, (applause) and if we were to get a favorable vote in these 16 states on the Plumb plan, I think that vote would decide the issue for the rest of the states and if this system of voting proved to be popular and successful it would, of course, rapidly extend to the other states, and thus we might have, without waiting for a federal amendment, what would be practically a popular initiative on national questions, just as Oregon, without waiting for a federal amendment, has practically got the direct election of United States Senators.

Would Restore The Spirit of Self Government

We are of a great race. The American historians wrote eloquently of the liberty our forefathers were practicing in the forests of Europe when the Roman legions came upon them. This Anglo-Saxon race of ours has given to the world the Magna Charta and the Declaration of Independence, and when we began

on this side of the sea we established as our first governmental institution an institution that was native to the genius of the Anglo-Saxon race, the New England Town Meeting-governing themselves. But this New England Town system of governing ceased to be feasible in the course of years, with the great social changes that came, so we had to adopt in its place the representative form of government, and while it would be impossible to establish this form of government over so large an area, with the vast population we have, without a division of the representative form of government; still when we adopted the representative form of government we lost something very precious that our forefathers had in the New England Town Meeting. We lost that sense of closeness to our government. We lost the joy of feeling that the government was ours-that it responded to our will. The New England Town Meeting form of government married the people to their government. The representative form of government to some extent divorced the people from their government, and we must bring them back to their government somehow, and while we cannot have the New England form of government, while we cannot re-establish the popular assembly, yet one of the nicest problems of government is to revive the loss of the New England Town Meeting government without sacrificing the convenience and efficiency of the Republican form of government; and this we think has been accomplished as far as is possible to do so by the system of referendum voting that has been established in some 22 states of this union. And now my suggestion is that we shall, so far as possible, without asking for a Federal Constitutional amendment, establish this system in national legislation. (Applause.)

3. CIVIL SERVICE AS A PRE-REQUISITE TO
SUCCESSFUL PUBLIC OWNERSHIP

By Daniel P. Riordan

Secretary Chicago Civil Service League

We assert this as a first principle that the government should be controlled by the people. From this principle it follows that the use of public employes as a species of standing army for defeating the will of the people at the polls should be prohibited. The common practice of making an employe's continuance or standing in the service dependent upon the number of votes he can deliver to candidates, favored by the political leader who secured his appointment is subversive of popular control. So too, the practice of multiplying elective offices for the purpose of con

« ForrigeFortsett »