The San Francisco call., 1910-12-21
System Adopted by Progressive
Middle Western States
Tested for Decade
Economy and Efficiency Watch
words of the Advocates of
Change in California
By GEORGE A. VAN SMITH

LlE D4Dl-E ana WIFI LICMlDCIS u ll0
legislature seems to Justify the appre-
tensions Of the place holders who are
directly or indirectly in control of the
states institutions under the existing
local board system.
The adoption Of the board of control
system for California involves nothing
in the realm of experiment. The most
progressive of the middle western
states have subjected the system to a
decades trial An attempt to repeal
the board of control laws of Iowa and
Minnesota would be received by the
people OF those states in exactly the
same spirit that would be aroused by
an attempt to repeal their direct pri-
mary election laws.
ONE BOARD FOR MANY
The board Of control means the aboli-
fion OF the score or more local boards
Of trustees charged with the manage
ment or mismanagement of as many
state institutions and the substitution
thefor Of one board composed of
practical businessmen held responsible
for the business administration of the
affairs Of those institutions.
Economy and efficiency are the
watchwords of the advocates of the
board Of control idea. 1t is contended,
and in board Of control states it has
been demonstrated. that the state can
get better supplies for less money If
the supplies for all its institutions or
q considerable number Of them are pur-
chased through one board than is the
case where the purchases are made
through several boards.
DIRECT PRIMARY QUESTION
The appeal Of the board of control
idea has not confined itself to the pro-
gressive or Lincoln-Roosevelt mem
bers Of the new legislature. Several
OF the regulars and conservatives have
declared themselves in favor of the
adoption Of a system that viii put
California on a par with other states.
If Meyer Lissner, chairman of the
republican state central committee,
has been fairly represented by the
southern California press, his program
for the amendment of the direct pri-
mary election law is going TO lead him
UP TO a strenuous row if il does not
result in getting him another severe
humping at the hands Of the iegisla
ture he has assumed to direct.
According to some of the southern
press that assumes to speak semi
bf7cially for the chairman Of the state
central committee. he purposes to meet
he democratic demand for a general
hection vote on United States senator
fimilar to the Oregon system which
Fould take the United States senator
thfp out Of the realm of partisanship.
REPORTS AROUSE SQUALLS
Perhaps Lissner has been misrepre-
rented II not, he may be prepared for
the squalls that have been stirred up
by the reports of his alleged Intentions
The republican platform calls for
statewide advisory vote on United
States senator. That plank is con-
strUed by a majority of the republican
legislators and legislators elect to
mean q statewide primary vote con-
hned strictly to party lines. The dem
ocrats construe their own platform
plank to mean the advocacy of the
Oregon system. which provides for
general election vote upon the NOM
inees chosen at the partisan direct
primaries.
Tt may be assumed safely enough
that the direct primary election law
will be amended in accordance with
the wishes of Governor Johnson. After
q partial canvass of the members of
the senate and with particular refer
ence to the prOgressiVes or Lincoln
Roosevelt leaguers I am disposed to
believe that Johnson would have an
extremely difficult task if he attempted
TO destroy the partisan features of the
primary law.
NOMINATION OF SENATORS
From the meager intimations of his
intentions given by Johnson, nobody is
justified in believing that he has any
intention Of destroying the partisan
character Of the law. It is not i'm
probable that Johnson will favor the
amendment of the direct primary law,
in so far as it touches the nomination
OF United States senators, by the adop-
ton Of the provisions of the bill as
originally introduced by the Direct pri-
mary league.
That bin made the nomination of
candidates for the United States SEN
ate partisan function It provided
Tor aggregate plurality nominations
and provided system of statements,
optional with the candidate for legis-
lstiVe Office, which would result in
putting the candidate for the legisla-
ture on record with his people before
he was elected At the same time If
provided insurance that the will of the
majority party would be obeyed by its |
representatives in the legislature and
insurance against the possibility of q |
republican majority being compelled |
TO vote for democratic candidate or
vice versa.
SIMPLIFICATION PROMISED
The promised "simplifcation" of the
direct primary law may be ACCOMPLISHED
with comparatively few AMENDMENTS
The petition prescribed as a prerequisite |
10 q place on the primary ballot of |
any party is lne cumbersome La Fol- /
lette system. 1t was designed to mt |
some difficulty in the way of aspirants |
70 partisan nomination to public Of 4
ice. 1t was presented and championed |
by La Toilette in Wisconsin on the |
ground that one who sought pubic Of |
nee should be compelled to demonstrate |
that he could muster some support |
II was adopted in California solely
upon the ground that it was employed |
in a great majority Of the direct pri-
mary states.
] am not advised that johnson adyo- |
Gates wiping out the petition and
adopting the affidavit plan employed in |
Minnesota and Washington. AS un-
derstano his idea it involves simple |
petition with fixed maximum and mini |
mum percentage provisions without |
reference to the distribution of those
percentages over any prescribed num-
ier of counties, districts or precincts |
ATTITUDE OF JOHNSON
There is a strong proba bility that |
Johnson may not care to make the non-
partisan judiciary bill take the form of /
an amendment to the direct primary |
law The nonpartisan judiciary prob /
lem could be solved by the inclusion of /
q single section in the direct primary
law and companion section in the /