Omaha daily bee., 1910-11-20

Discussing the weaknesses Of the in
itiative and referendum disclosed in
states in which this system OF direct
legislation prevails, the Lincoln Jour
nal insists that they are only matters
OF detail that can be remedied.' No
sane supporter Of the system" it adds,
wants the submission Of any but
really important measures, and meas
ures with a chance Of winning. The
Nebraska legislature has a chance TO
frame a measure that will not admit
Of these faults
II we are to have the initiative and
referendum in Nebraska We are at
least making some progress when its
most ardent champions reach the point
of willingness to concede the existence
OF faults, and it will be up to them to
show how the pictured benefits may
be had without mourning worse afiic-
lions. Accepting the statement that
no sane supporter Of the initiative and
referendum wants the submission Of
anything but really important meas
ures and measures with a chance Of
winning" the problem still remains Of
providing the machinery that will sup
ply the demands Of direct legislation
enthusiasts and at the same time guard
against such fragrant abuses as have
been developed in Oregon and South
Dakota.
The avowed purpose of the initiative
and referendum is to enable the vot-
ers, themselves, to initiate and veto
/ Legislation just as easily as is at pres
ent done by their duly elected law
makers. II, then, the percentage Of
voters required to initiate a petition
is increased above the usual Is per
cent the complaint will be that the
remedy has been made too expensive
and too burdensome, and thus put out
of reach Of the people. If the num-
Der Of propositions to be submitted at
any one time is to be limited. then the
door is opened for trivial and inconse-
quential measures to crowd out those
that are Of Importance and timeliness.
II someone is to decide arbitrarily
what measures are important
enough to be submitted, then the leg
| islature might as we'll make this de-
cision itself. Or, II some officer or
official body is to sift out proposed
measures so as to submit only those
that have a chance of winning" then
it will be everybody's guess, because
often the most promising reforms fail
lamentably and the least feared dan
gers come on with a rush.
In a nutshell, direct legislation has
been proved really practical only over
small areas where the voters have an
immediate interest and are reasonably
homogeneous in intelligence and
needs. That explains its success in
Switzerland, where It is merely an en-.
larged town meeting. II has proved
a success again where limited to par.
ticular subjects and at the same time
hedged around with adequate safe.
guards, such as IN the su omission OF
constitutional amendments, the ap.
prevail or rejection ot@bond PROPOSE
tions, the division of a county or the
location of a county seat Even here
multiplicity Of propositions or com
plexity of subject matter have invaria
bly, prevented intelligent action on the
submitted measures,
We agree with the Journal that tn,
direct legislation bill can be made t.
avoid the faults it has enumerated
but we doubt whether a direct legis
lation bill so framed will satisfy thos,
who have been misled into regarding
the initiative and referendum as
, panacea for all the ills of the bod!
. polite.