Audubon Republican. [volume] (Audubon, Iowa) 1894-1925, 1906-05-10
THE CONDITION or IOWA.
Nothing to Be Excited About in Thi
Year of Grace 1906.

| The following editorial recently APP
peared in the Sioux City Journal,
which is edited and published by
George d. Perkins, who is candidate
for governor. Read it and give it a
SOBER SECOND THOUGHT.
What is there to be excited over In
Iowa in this year 1906 A. ID. There is
the obvious fact that Gov. Cummins
is charging about the state, working
himself into fine frenzy telling folks
things are all wrong and that he
alone can right them. There Is the
temporary spell of his oratory and
the grip of his personal magnetism to
help along his case. But how about
it when his argument is digested and
sober second thought gets in its
work? Sober second thought tells us
that Gov. Cummins is campaigning
for third nomination, and is using
what ammunition he may be able to
muster to help his campaign. Are we
to get excited and stay excited merely
because he tells us to do so, and gives
an example of frenzy, just as any
other good actor can do?
NOT RAILWAY DOMINATION.
What is there to be excited over in
Iowa? Is 1t railway domination?
Surely not railway domination in
Iowa. Gov. Larrabee settled that
years ago, with the assistance of Mr..
Perkins and against the opposition of
Mr.. Cummins. The Iowa railway
regulation law has furnished model
for many states. Don't the railways
pay enough taxesp If they don't it is
the fault of Gov. Cummins more than
any one man. But the governor isn't
saying anything about railway taxa
ton nowadays. Presumably it is all
right. There is the pass matter, to
be sure, but the legislature has settled
that. There was talk of the need of a
2-cent passenger fare. If conditions in
Iowa warrant the 2-cent passenger
fare and public sentiment demands it,
there is no reason to assume the legis-
lature will not do its duty.
Nor RAILWAY REGULATION.
Is 1t national railway regulation
that we should get all wrought up
about? Why, no. Congress seems
to be doing pretty well along that
line. A bill bearing the name of a
| distinguished Iowan has passed the
house, with the support of his ten
| colleagues, and is now receiving the
favorable consideration of the senate.
In the senate one Iowa senator is the
leader of the rate regulation cam
paign, and he enjoys the counsel and
hearty support OF the other Iowa SEN
ator, than whom there is no more use
full and influential legislator in Wash,
ington.
What is thereto bes excited over in
Iowa? Is it the general subject of
corporation regulation? Only recently
new statutes have been placed on the
national statute books, and the courts
were never so drastic as at the present
time in furnishing the government
facilities for corporation control.
The corporations have been getting
bigger, but the control OF national,
state and municipal governments has
been growing correspondingly tighter
The soundness of the principle of pub
lie regulation of public service cor
porations is nowhere denied.
NOT THE TARIFF.
What is there to be excited over in
Iowa? Is it the tariff? If it is, Gov.
Cummins is not saying so. The tar
III needs fixing, but nobody seems to
be in any hurry about it. President
Roosevelt is biding his time, and even
our excitable governor seems willing
to let the tariff oar rest.
NOT LACK OF PROSPERITY.
What Is there to be excited over in
Iowa? Is anything wrong with our
prosperity? Aren't the farmers get
ting good prices for their products?
Isn't labor employed at fair wages2
The cost of living is not low, but the
cost of living never is low during
prosperous times. The cost of living
was low in 1896. Does anyone want
to go back to conditions then prevail
ingP Wages have kept pace with the
rise in prices. The farmer and the
iaborer are getting their share of the
prosperity. Neither is complaining.
What Is there to be excited over in
Iowa? Is it the need for a primary
law? Grant that rational primary
law would be contribution to purer
politics. There are few to deny that
the principle OF free voice for every
voter in the conduct of party affairs
Is sound. The primary proposition
has been under consideration here
and there for good many years.
Past Iowa legislatures dallied with it,
but took no action because there
seemed no crying demand for election
reform in Iowa. People seemed to be
satisfied that we were getting along
pretty we'll under our present system
and that we might safely take it easy
while primary experiments in other