ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

probably due chiefly to the voters becoming generally aware that the real purpose of this legislation was not to secure economy in government but to legislate out of office individuals who had come into conflict with the real authors of these measures. However, one of the bills added a new function to the consolidated department. The defeat of the city-county consolidation amendment must have been due to ignorance of the nature of the proposal.

In view of the conservative attitude of the people toward public expenditures, thus made apparent, the customary attachment of the emergency clause 1 to certain appropriations by the legislative assembly is very significant. But although in cases of most of the measures the saving of money was probably the determining motive in the vote, in many cases other motives were controlling, Moreover, it should be noted that in recent years, especially during this period of the initiative and referendum, great developments have been undertaken very generally by the localities as well as by the state, with the result that the financial burdens have in many cases become far too heavy without the addition of further taxation, and that the expenditures proposed were doubtless, in some cases, for other reasons unwise.

Most of the "tax reform" measures have been defeated, probably in most cases on account of the technical nature of the proposals.

All the measures concerned with the administration of the criminal law were adopted except the bill abolishing capital punishment and regulating the pardoning power and the bill providing for the sterilization of habitual criminals and other degenerates. The adoption of the amendment for the abolition of capital punishment, after the defeat of the similar measure at the preceding election, can doubtless be explained by the fact that women voted at the last election. Until the last election the vote on the measures dealing with the liquor traffic on the 1 Below, pp. 138, 140.

2 Above, pp. 37-41.

whole showed the people to be in favor of local option and opposed to state-wide prohibition. But the women's vote at that election was largely responsible for the decision in favor of statewide prohibition.

The bill regulating the licensing of dentists (by lowering the standards) was rejected in spite of a strenuous campaign in its favor as a "trust-busting" measure.

Measures designed to regulate corporations and other interests have almost all been approved. The exception of the "blue-sky" bill was doubtless due to the proposal for the creation of a new department which it included.

The three most radical measures submitted for the benefit of the labor class- the eight-hour bill for female workers, the universal eight-hour amendment, and the unemployment amendment were defeated, but the others passed. All the measures inimical to the labor interests were rejected. Most of the county-division and county-boundary billsinvolving questions of wholly local interest were defeated.

It thus appears that all the most radical measures were rejected by the voters the two proposals for the reorganization of the legislative assembly, the bill providing for people's inspectors and an official gazette, the amendment providing for the abolition of the senate, the "single-tax" measures, the sterilization bill, the women's eight-hour bill, the universal eight-hour amendment, and the unemployment amendment. Although the constitutional amendment permitting the use of proportional representation, and the presidential primary bill, in which the principle of proportional representation is applied, were accepted by the voters, they rejected the proposal to apply proportional representation to the composition of the house of representatives. Such a provision was also contained in the two rejected proposals for the reorganization of the legislative assembly.

On the whole it appears that the voters have shown a decidedly progressive attitude in direct legislation.

9. The Vote of the Uncertain Voter.

The voter who is uncertain as to the merits of measures submitted to his decision is confronted with two kinds of advice as to how he should act.

"When in doubt, note NO."1 "When the ballot is so encumbered... the only defense of the voter who does not wish to run the risk of turning things topsy-turvy is to vote 'no' on all measures that he does not fully understand."2 This principle is doubtless applied by some voters to both initiative and referendum measures alike, on the theory that by the approval of either they are assuming the responsibility for the enactment of law. But probably more voters make a distinction between initiative and referendum measures in this regard, and, while they reject initiative measures in the absence of positive evidence of their merits, place the responsibility for the measures referred principally upon the legislative assembly, and considering the approval by the assembly as prima facie evidence of their merits, vote, in the absence of evidence against their merits, for all measures passed by the assembly.3

"When in doubt, don't vote." "One sometimes hears it said that when in doubt you should vote 'NO.' This is one of the most pernicious fallacies developed under popular rule. If carried out it would block progress and make the rule of stupid standpattism effective. Because an individual has not sufficient intelligence, or is too lazy to consider a measure and make up his mind conscientiously, is no reason for standing in the path of more intelligent and more energetic people. A conscientious voter taking that attitude is hard to imagine. If a voter is worthy of citizenship he will either make up his mind one way or the other about a measure submitted and vote accordingly, or he will refrain from voting on it. He will refuse to

1 "When in doubt, vote 'NO.' Vote 'NO,' unless you have been convinced by a personal investigation that the measure is for the public interest, and should pass." Oregonian, Sept. 25, 1912, p. 10, col. 1.

2 Eugene Register, Sept. 1, 1912, p. 12, col. 2.

Oregonian, Oct. 15, 1913, p. 10, col. 2; Nov. 14, 1913, p. 10, col. 2.

try to hold back the whole community on account of his own ignorance or apathy. He will refuse to nullify with his 'no' cast from ignorance, the intelligent 'yes' of some one who has given thought to the matter. He will refuse to shirk his own civic duty, and at the same time block the exercise of good citizenship by another. The advocate of the principle of voting 'no' when in doubt, advocates the rule of ignorance in an age of enlightenment." 1

But, it is objected, "failure to vote simply reduces the opposition and virtually assists something which you might later wish you had resisted." Further, it is said, this is "lawmaking by proxy." It operates to "relieve the people as a whole of the duty of deciding on any measure submitted for their action, and leaves it to a selected group and informed few, an assembly commissioned to decide questions or issues for the whole electorate. The Oregon system is for all the people, not a part of the people. If a part of the people only discharged their obligations as lawmakers, the system is a failure." "If this delightful advice were accepted generally, it would mean that in order to get their pet plans enacted into law, the tinkerers and schemers would need only to word them in such a manner that understanding would be impossible, and then trust to their coterie of followers to cast the small number of votes that would be needed." 4

In practice, a large majority of the measures submitted to the voters have failed, and the proportion of measures rejected has increased with the length of the ballot. But although a considerable minority of the voters have invariably failed to vote on all measures submitted, the fact that the average percentage of votes cast for measures at the several elections has varied little with the number of measures would, by itself, indicate that as the number of measures increases and the voters' difficulties in

1 Oregon Journal, May 1, 1913, p. 8, col. 1.
Pacific Grange Bulletin, vol. 5, p. 26, col. 2 (1912).
Oregonian, Nov. 19, 1912, p. 12, col. 2.

• Eugene Register, Oct. 31, 1912, p. 4, col. 1.

the way of properly considering the measures are correspondingly increased the voters do not so much refrain from voting, but rather vote "No" in cases of doubt as to the merits of the individual measures.

10. The Vote as Protest.

Some voters, in cases where they consider that the system of direct legislation is being abused, on principle vote in favor of referred measures and against initiated measures, without regard to the merits of the particular measure.1 But how extensively this practice prevails is wholly uncertain.

Some extreme conservatives, wholly opposed to the system of direct legislation, openly avow that they invariably vote to support the legislative assembly in case of referendum measures, and as invariably reject measures submitted under the initiative. But this class is apparently becoming smaller, and probably most of its members make the best of what they consider a bad situation, and discriminate among the measures submitted as other voters do. This class has its opposite extreme in a class of voters supposed to exist, who reject all measures coming from the legislative assembly and approve all measures submitted by initiative petition.

11. The Intelligence of the Vote in General.

Any estimate of the general intelligence of the voters in their actual dealing with direct legislation is likely to be colored very largely by mere theoretical considerations. Thus, doubtless the pessimistic view is induced very much by a preconceived belief that the people are incompetent in this direction -"that

1 "Is not the voter justified in voting down the whole grist, and thus discouraging the industry? . . . Would it not be wise to kill all of those bills, good, bad, and crazy, and get rid of the abuse? If half of them are enacted, the rest will come up again." Salem Capital Journal, reprinted in Oregonian, Sept. 25, 1912, p. 10, col. 1. Cf. Oregonian, Oct. 30, 1913, p. 8, col. 2. "The way to rebuke reckless use of the initiative is to vote no, while the way to rebuke reckless use of the referendum is to vote yes." Eugene Register, Oct. 22, 1913, p. 4, col. I.

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »