Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1910-05-06
PRIMARY ELECTIONS LAWS.

The Hinman-Green direct primary bill,
which the New York legislatur is ex-
pected to enact into law, is vouched for
by Gov. Hughes. 1t contains an import
ant provision, which simplifes the make
up Of party organizations and gives them
legal, publicly exercised function Of
proposing candidates for nomina-
tions at the primaries. The disruption
Of party organization or the advent Of po-
litical anarchy is not likely to occur under
this wise provision The party proposals,
however, must be made six to seven weeks
in advance Of the primaries. with ample
opportunity for voters within the party
to propose opposition candidates where
those named by the party organization
are unsatisfactory. The beneficial re-
suits Of this provision will be many. In
the first place, forcing the organzat ton
to reveal its hand before the primaries
will Of itself raise the level Of candi-
dacies-because unfit proposals may be
dissented from within the party, and not
alone at the final election, as a present,
and then only by desertion OF the voters
party In the second place, reasonably fit
proposals will not be generally opposed
maries will be concentrated upon the Of
fees in regard to which there is a vital
question Of fitness or policy at stake
Lastly, the party committeeman who pro-
pose candidates for nomination will event
ualy come before the same primary for
reelection to their party positions: and
the action they have taken in proposing
candidates for nomination will give the
party membership a definite gauge of the
members Of the party organization. In
other features the HirJnan- Green bill fol-
lows the best laws of other states.
The Review Of Reviews for June, from
which this information is obtained con-
tains in its May number an Illuminating
article on primary elections laws gem
orally under the title Of The Doom Of
the Old Machine Convention" from the
pen Of Robert 5. Binkerd, secretary OF the
city club Of New York
The gain OF the direct nominations sys-
TEN in the past few years has been very
remarkable according to The Review
of Reviews. Twenty states and one ter
ritory with a total population Of over 80, =
600, 600. have mandatory laws requiring
the use Of this plan for selecting candi-
dates Of the principal parties for practl-
cally all offices: California. Idaho, nli-
I nois. Iowa, Kansas. Louisiana, Michigan,
Mississippi. Missouri. Nebraska, Nevada,
New Hampshire, North Dakota, Okla e
homa. oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee,
Texas, Washington, Wisconsin. Arizona.
Three others have mandatory laws COW
ering practically all except state Offices
Minnesota, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Three
other states have mandatory laws COW
ering certain localities or offices: Indi-
ana. Massachusetts, New Jersey. Eight
states have optional laws covering prac-
ticaly all offices: Alabama, Arkansas.
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland,
South Carolina and Virginia. Party
rules have established direct nominations
for at least the majority party in nearly
al OF the Southern states not previously
mentioned. About one-half of the states.
including those in which the system has
been established by party rules, use di-
rect nominations for practically all cleo
tive offices. The total population Of all
the states which use the direct primary
system in some form is about 6O,OOO,OOO,
or 81 per cent of the entire population of
the United States by the 1900 census.
/ Mr Binkerd is Of the opinion that the
/ direct primary law within national lines
| Is only a transition point or stepping
| stone to the remedy of a fundamental de-
/ feet in our electoral machinery That
| defect is the absence OF proper machinery
| for the analysis Of public opinion prior
to election. This defect goes to the bot
I tnu, Of o1ir noIitical evils and is little
understood even by reformers.