Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1910-05-20

senator gibson says Snan9e Woulo SlNS
people Full Voice in Affairs Of Their
Government.
In previous articles attention has been
.,.Ned to the nomination of public officers
IN, direct vote and to some objections
&. the present caucus and convention
isystem 1t is the purpose of this article
g.. consider the advantages of nomina-
mons by direct vote, and in the same con-
ncction to answer objections which have
been urged against its adoption in this
state.
ID A primary election law would bet
fer the public service. People are now
naturally somewhat Indifferent to polit-
zeal conditions. Interest in public mat
tcrs would be greatly increased If the
pcople had faith that their votes would
count in the solution of political prob
lens and in the selection of officials.
20 1t would destroy machine politics.
The caucus and convention are instru-
ments used by political manlpulators to
the end of continuing a few supreme in
naming candidates. Until the adoption
of the primary method, the political
machines of the various states, almost
wholly controlled the nomination of can
ddates, and often forced nominations in
direct opposition to the will of the people.
DO we have a machine in Vermont? The
answer depends upon the definition of
machine" and the view of the voter as
TO the present political conditions
so 1t would greatly improve the char
aCter of nominations. man with no
convictions cannot win the great body of
voters. 1t is easier to control the few
than the many. Only such men would be
nominated for public office as represent
wholesome principles in which the people
as a whole are interested. 1t has served
in every jurisdiction where adopted, to
bring to the field of politics the best
citizens, thereby resulting in general pub
lie good, in that the best men have
sought office.
40 With the expenditures for cam
paign purposes limited, it would COM
pletely eliminate the securing of nom
nations for public office by the use of
money. 1t would result in the selection
of men qualified by reason IF ability,
not by reason of wealth. 1t should ever
be the highest ideal in dealing with the
public service to bring to it the best
available talent
C6 1t would free the officials from
the influence of the corporation and the
machine. An official owing his nomna-
ton to the people will feel under obli-
cation to serve no one but the people
who have selecte him. Men are too often
selected for office by means of control of
the caucus and convention because they
can be depended upon to do the right
thing at the right time, by the interests
responsible for their election.
90 The proposed system is plain, sim
pie and practical. 1t is in accord with
the spirit of our institutions. The object
Of a general election is to ascertain the
voice of a majority of the people as to
who shall serve for their public officers.
If it is right to ascertain the will of the
people as to who shall be elected, it is
equally right that we should ascertain
= Ia 20 TlNn hall fNGa
nominated. Nominations, in this state
mean an election, hence, it is more i'm
portant that the will of the people be
taken at the time the candidates, sure
of election, are selected, than at election
which is simply a ratification of what
has been done for the people by the pat
riotic politicians at the caucus and con-
vention. 1t is a simple system because
it simplifies the machinery of nomination
by aboishing the caucus and delegate
convention, and the holding of 700 eau
Cuses in the various towns of the state,
and of forty conventions in the state and
the various counties, and installing in the
place of this complex, cumbersome and
antiquated system, vote which Will
correctly register the choice of the voters
by one vote.
% 1t would result in a larger PARTED
patton of the voters than the party eau
Gus has succeeded in enlsting. Several
OF the papers or the STATE nave Expressed
doubts if it would increase interest in
the nomination of candidates for office.
If the experience of other states counts
for anything, then a primary law in this
state would result in a very great in
crease in the number who take part in
the nomination of candidates for office.
At the present time taking the state as
a whole, less than ten per cent of the
voters actually name our public officials
because less than ten per cent of the
Republican voters throughout the state
attend the caucuses. These caucuses
send delegates to select candidates who
are eventually elected. Can any system
be a success which permits the naming OF
the officials of a state by such small per
cent of the voters of one party?
Let us consider the experience OF
other states. In Missouri at the last
general election, 100000 votes were cast
At the primary election for the election
Of the candidate 10000 votes were cast
or IS per cent of the vote at the general
election. In Wisconsin the Republican
candidate for governor secured 1880
votes. A vote of 17O,S14 was cast at the
primary, or 81 per cent of the vote cast
at the general election. In Kansas, the
Republican vote for president in 1908 was
1926; the Republican vote for governor
in Kansas primaries was 1A,OS or 6S pei
cent of the Republican vote for president