The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-03-22
LEGISLATIVE REFoRM.

LEGISLATIVE REFORM.
The Sentinel expresses regret for the
lack of serious and candid discussion of
the Journals recent propositions for
legislative reform and for the disposition
in some quarters to misrepresent them.
1t says:
The Journal did not propose longer legis-
lative sessions under the existing system.
1t proposed that legislators receive a fixed
salary instead of a per diem allowance, and
that each Legislature should hold two ses-
sions with an interval between them. At
the first of these sessions bills were TO be
considered and advanced to a third read
ing, but no bill was to be passed unless
supported by a th~ree-fourths majority. AT
the second session these prepared bills are
to be passed or rejected, the people, in the
meantime, having had an opportunity to
form some intelligent opinion concerning
them. The Sentinel submits that these prop
OsitionS are entitled to fair and candid con-
Sideration, and that it is not creditable to
the press of the State to toss them aside
with a misleading statement OF their pur-
pose.
This is a fairly correct statement in
outline of h Journals proposition. To
treat this or any other proposition for
constitutional or legislative reform in a
fippant spirit is di~screditable to those
who do so. 1t is a mark of ignorance
and narrowness to assume hat estab-
lished methods are perfect, and when
they have actually developed defects it
is the part of wisdom to try and find a
remedy for them. The Journal has a
great deal of reverence for the Constitu-
ton as it is and a great deal of respect
for he emo of its Trainers. They
were excellent. able and patriotic men,
and they did good work, but it does not
follow that in the light of experience and
changed conditions it may not be inn
proved upon. The trainers of the on
stitution themselves provided for its
amendment, and suggestions in that di-
r~ection, instead of being lightly brushed
aside, should be discussed with the
seriousness that BELTS the subject.
The Journals proposition was offered
as a possible remedy for the evils grow
ing out of short sessions of the General
Assembly, hasty, i'll advised and crude
legislation, and the enactment of laws
not approved by the people. That these
evils exist in a greater or less degree
will not be denied. 1t has been demon
strated time and again in recent years
that a single biennial legislative session
of sixty-one days is not long enough for
lie pIOQCI IdllodStAOh VI bAciA10So. -
is also well known that some bills fail
which ought to pass. while others pass
in a crude form owing to lack of time
or defective methods of legislation. 1t
Is not believed that a sufficient remedy
for these evils would be found in a mere
extension of the legislative session or
the entire removal of the constitutional
limitation, although, as the Journal has
pointed out, sixteen of the States place
no limitation on their legislative sessions.
while several of the others have longer
sessions than Indiana. The Journals
proposition is, first, to substitute mod
crate salaries for a per diem compensa-
ton, thus removing the money tempta-
that each General Assembly, elected BIZ
ennially as now, shall hold two short
sessions instead of one long one. with
an interval of five or six months be-
tween in which suspended legislation or
measures of doubtful propriety should
be discussed by the press n people.
M bill should be passed at the first ses-
sion except by the votes of three-fourths
of the members of both houses, and non
should be introduced or considered at
the second session except such as had
received a majority of the votes in both
houses at the first session. Thus the
second session would consider only such
measures as had descended to it from
h first and been before the people dur-
ing the recess. The two sessions to-
gether should be limited to one hundred
days, the present constitutional limit of
a regular and special session. and with
the per diem temptation removed this
limit would seldom be reached. One of
the best features of this plan would be
that only such measures as were strong
ly demanded by the people YOU be
likely to pass at the first session. while
the interval between the first and Sec
ond sessions would give the people an
opportunity to make known their will
regarding other measures.
This is not a question of bearing the
ills we have rather than fly to others
that we know not of. 1t is a question
of trying to devise a remedy for evils
which VIGOROUSLY do exist in this State.
n which are to a great extent guarded
against in others. If the Journals plan
can be shown to be a bad one it will
promptly abandon it, and if a better one
can be suggested it will promptly
adopt 1T.