POPULAR INITIA TIVE 7 2 1
The credulous fool staking his money upon the result of games played with loaded dice or marked cards has a better chance of success than reformers under the present system with its " fixed primaries " and so-called representative bodies subject to deadlock, to caucus manipulation, to boss dictation, to log-rolling, to trickery, and to evasion of issues endangering party or the re-election of representatives. A governor with the veto, senate with power to shelve house bills, a lower house with ward heelers as members - here is a law-making machine capitally adapted to defeat or pervert the will of the people, and requiring a maximum of effort to secure a minimum of result. To none of these evils is direct majority rule subject.
It will be observed that several of the foregoing quotations refer to " the referendum." The reference, however, includes the initiative, and is coupled up with it wherever either is advocated. It is, in fact, the object of the most radical advocates of the vicious scheme to cloak it under the innocent title of "refer- endum." It is intended to deceive the people who do not take the trouble to examine the matter and discover the difference. The writer discovered from personal investigation that numbers who voted in 1902 (under the sentimental act) in favor of a constitu- tional amendment for the initiative and referendum did not com- prehend the scope of the scheme at all, but supposed it to be for a general compulsory referendum law.
WHAT IS CLAIMED FOR IT
Probably as good a synopsis as is possible of the manifold reasons urged for the adoption of the initiative (and the referen- dum) is given by Parsons in a chapter entitled " Twenty Reasons for the Referendum." It is peculiar to all writers in advocacy of the system to make positive statements as to what their panacea for political ills will do. They never express opinions; they make declarations. Professor Parsons says:
It will perfect the representative system by eliminating serious mis- representation.
Better men will be attracted to political life.
It will simplify elections, separating the judgment on men from the judgment on issues, and disentangle issues so that each may be judged on its own individual merits.
It will lessen the power of partisanship.
It will elevate the press voting will turn more on reason, and mud will be less in demand in the political market.
