The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, October 26, 1916, Page 12

S T NS L Cheatmg the Sovereign People Some Chapters of South Dakota History Showing Just How Far Legislatures and Courts Will Dare to Go 7 The South Dakota legislature in session the most unique, the most sweep- ing thing in the line of primary and election laws yet conceived in this country. That is, this state is the birthplace and place of development of this idea—the law is not yet on the statute books, but it bids fair to be. Reformers thought they had gone a long way in the United States when they put the initiative and referendum in the constitutions of 60 per cent of the states; the recall of public officials was hailed as a great step forward; direct primary laws, which have become effective in a majority of the states, were measures t{o which reformers pointed with pride; ¢ivil service and other laws hitting at the spoils system were welcomed as sub- stantial progress; nonpartisan elections as applied to judges in many states and to members of the legislature and school officials in other states were looked ypon as notable accomplishments. SOUTH DAKOTA has the newest, ““POLITICIANS WATCH CHANCE TO DEFEAT THE PEOPLE But all these things have not yet brought about the rule of the people. The initiative and referendum is hamp- ered and often destroyed by court decisions or restrictive rules enforced by legislatures, or actual trickery by poli- ticians makes it a farce. Again, apathy on the part of the people sometimes pre- vents its complete success. Honest and competent friends of the people in office - are often heckled and dismayed and their usefulness destroyed by constant recall ' petitions and agitation by selfish, special privilege or evil influences temporarily out of power. The direct primary still leaves the control of party nominations in the hands of machine party leaders’ and party organizations, with power and - money and publicity avenues open to them to put their men over against the poor man of the people, without organi- zation or campaign fund but with a real issue. These reform measures have all helped - But some of them have built up new abuses. Elections have degenerated into mere personal scrambles for office by ~will? in the new capitol at Plerre. The legislation repealed the Richards rpnmary act adopted by the people and the courts held it had a right to, thus making the initiative and referendum practically ineffective in the state. politicjans without issues. Political parties exist to perpetuate their leaders in office and furnish spoils to as many of the rank-and file as possible. Party platforms are made to catch votes, not with the intention of having the success- ful candidates follow them. State elec- tions are usually a fight between the “outs” and the “ins” for spoil and are conducted on national party lines, without regard to state issues. There are often no state issues on which the state parties clash. Cam- paigns deal in personalities of candidates. The stalwart and reactionary elements in all parties work together against the people when in office. They are nonpar- tisan then, but the progressive elements, the elements responsive to the people in the various parties, do not get together; though their issues are often the same. SOUTH DAKOTA’S PLAN TO BRING PEOPLE’S RULE But what has all this to do with South Dakota and the newest and most sweep- ing thing yet conceived in the way of primary and election laws? It has this to do with it: South Dakota proposes by one law, by one stroke of the pen, to make the government responsible end responsive to the people. It has con- ceived and developed an idea in govern- ment- which it claims makes unnecessary and useless the initiative and referendum, the recall, -civil service, non-partisan elections, direct primaries of the present kind and many other provisions for the organization of government which have been looked upon as the last word in reforms. This proposed law to usher in the rule of the people is called the Richards primary law. The people have fought 12 years to get it on the books. They got it enacted once by popular vote under the initiative, only to have it repealed by the legislature. Most of the history of the fight of Mr. Richards and a group of South Dakota progressives and -students of : political reforms, who have led the move for the bill, was recorded in a ‘previous article in ‘the Leader on direct legislation in South Dakota. The party candidates. and party leaders in power in the legislature and in state office three times pledged themselves to the people- to enact the Richards’ law into the statutes, and three times, over a period of six years, repudiated those pledges, some of which were written and are now in the possession of Mr. Richards. Finally, under the initiative, it came to a vote and passed overwhelmingly. The politicians got the legislature to sub- mit a substitute for it to the people at the next election. The people, who had tried the Richards’ law at one election, voted down the substitute, again by a big majority. Then the legislature met and repealed the Richards law passed by the people, and passed a substitute law similar to the one the people had turned down. The supreme court held the legis- lature had the right to repeal laws as fast as the people passed them. Now the Richards law has been initiated by .the people again, and it probably will be approved by a third vote of the people on November 7. During the brief time the law was in effect the politicians attacked it in court, securing a decision that invalidated some of its chief features regarding restnct— ions on the spolls system. PEOPLE OF STATE ASK A FAIR TRIAL FOR LAW The people have faith in the Richards law and they are determired to have it despite the politicians who have suc- ceeded in downing it during the 12 years’ fight. They believe Mr. Richards’ claims for it and the claims of the many eminent political economists who have studied it. Their hopes may be misplaced: The law may work out well and still not fulfill all that is claimed for it. It may not work well. These things can only be determined after a thorough trial. The purpose of this article is merely to explain the features of the bill and state Mr. Richards’ claims for it. The proposed Richards primary act is a code governing the organization of political partxes, .intended- to’ place /the * At the primary the people of each party = in each voting precinct chose what the ' act calls “minority county proposal com« . policies, issues and tandidates of parties under the direct control of the rank and file voters of the parties. It provides a Why did the people of South Dakota continue to elect leglslatures and courts that defied their : They couldw’t help it. They were not ORGANIZED. The farmers of North Dakota have ' found the way, after many years of mlsgovernment to make their Wlll effective. ORGANIZA-‘ - TION is the answer. ' direct primary and election procedure; is devised to make -issues instead of personalities the chief thing in primaries and elections; provides for party trial and recall of elected candidates, comse pulsory debates on issues between can- didates for nomination or election, and has provisions to eliminate the spoils system. In general, Mr. Richards claims for it that it will assure abso- lutely responsive and responsible govern= ment through parties. The act retains political parties. Mr. Richards says that no intelligent govern- ment is possible without parties and a clash of opinion that will thresh out the truth. He claims. that strictly nonpar- tisan elections, like Minnesota has pre- vided for members of the legislature, and like many states have provided for judges, school officials, etc., are wrong, because they make elections mere personal affairs between candidates, regardless of issues. Issues, he says, can only be developed and formulated through party organization. EACH CANDIDATE MUST RUN ON AN ISSUE At the same time the proposed act has provisions that Mr. Richards claims will give a free field to.-independent candi- dates who enter the lists for office on issues—an independent candidate, like a party candidate, under this law must have an issue. A clash of parties with real issues and opposing principles . is spectacular and creates interest, he says. It makes the people consider issues and not mere personalities. Under proper-: party organization, in control of the .people, he thinks this will obviate indiffer- ence in primaries and elections and the people will become alive to the issues -’ and vote intelligently. "Under the Richards act the people : register primaries. of his choice and it is recorded with his name. He is then entitled to enter the primary of his party ‘on primary day. as - partisans before the (Continued on page 14) Each voter states the party - Ny