Omaha daily bee., 1911-03-30
Direct Primary =
as it Works Out
l.. J. Abbott In Harpers weekly.


The direct primary. like the initiative and
referendum the. recall. or any other steps
toward pure democracy, IL no civic cure-all
II works or fails TO work, exactly as the
convention works or fails to work, de-
pending entirely upon the men who work
H.
So far a. 1 know. It has been rejected
by no state which has once adopted g.
so the Judgment in the aggregate Is de-
cidediy In its favor yet the direct pri-
mary. as It has come under my observS-
ton for a series Of years. has certain
palpsble defects that can in q large meas
ure be remedied.
The first question to be settled is whether
you shall have an open" or CLOSED"
primary law The open primary has the
! names OF all the candidates arranged in
parallel columns upon a single ticket This
is the law that prevails in Wisconsin and
Nebraska. Under such a system the elector
is given a ballot with the candidates Of
every party upon Il. In the booth he Is
free to vote in any column, although in
Nebraska no one is permitted to cross
over from one column to another In wis
consin, 1 believe, there is no such limita-
ton.
~ - ANtAteh seen AAAeN Nho tfNh kAAAheAy
party distinctions are quickly eradicated
This probably makes for good government
There 10 no question that had II not been
for thousands Of wisconsin democrats for
sakins their own candidate and voting for
LaFollstte that bundle Of fearless energy
would long ago have been relegatsd to
| private life. But on the other hand the
open primary in Nebraska, this very fall,
4 - -
leans 20 vote for the "wide-open" dem
ocratic mayor of Omaha and thus NOM
mate him for governor over a conservative
and earnest democrat who had made a
good record as governor and was I'M
doubtedly the choice OF a considerable
majority of his party.
Again, under the open primary It il
possible for one party to present but sin
gle candidate for each office; then upon
| primary day most of its electors can vote
for the weak candidate OF the opposition,
and thus make him the choice Of their OPP
ponents. This is an expedient much dis
eussed where the open primary prevails,
yet must confess that have never known
the trick to succeed, except possibly in the
case Of the Omaha mayor mentioned above.
| II buOulu nc eApthineu inst tneEe were
| two republican candidates in Nebraska
last fall, so this it not exactly a case in
| point
| The CLOSED" primary requires all cleo
tors to give their party preference when
they enter the election booth. A ticket
is then handed them In accordance with
their previously declared party affiliation.
In this way the electors Of one party can
not dictate the nominees of another. But
on the other hand there are many citi-
Gems who do not affiliate with any po-
litical party, who are thus dIsfranchised
at the primary. These independent citi-
zens are often the best educated and most
thoughtful men In the community, yet
under the closed primary they are tabooed
from selecting men for office because they
refuse to wear a party label. Again, many
party men for reasons of their own, otter
prefer not to disclose their party prefer.
ence. They, too, are disfranchised by tn,
closed primary, while the Wisconsin plar
allows every one a choice. In this re.
spect, as we'll as in the facility afforded
men to shift from one party to another
the open primary is far more democrati,
than the closed primary that prevails
throuahout the aoutb