The Bemidji daily pioneer. [volume] (Bemidji, Minn.) 1904-1971, 1913-09-19
ANDERSON WRONG
SAYS TAYENNER.
CONTINUED from first page).

CONTINUED from first page).
and unwritten, deprive me of my OPP
portunity for service; and the sys-
tenn Of legislation, visible and inyisi-
BILE, which pertains here strips me of
my prerogatives as representative
Of the people. | am overwhelmed,
discouraged, disheartened by the USE
lessness, the terrible fruitlessness of
it all. My membership is at once a
farce and a fraud"
This spectacular action and speech
is designed to create discussion of
the caucus system of legislation. 1t is
to be hoped that it will. The Demo-
Gratis can hardly evade the issue.
There is no reason why they should
do so. ...A s..,..
The efficiency of a large body of
men depends largely upon their or
ganization. There must be organiza-
ton, some method of averaging in
dividual opinions and welding them
into compromise and composite pol
icy in which all can unite. Even the
Progressives, those fighting against
the Democrtic caucus, can scarcely
deny this fact. For the Progressives
themselves are acting in similar
manner. They have conferred, agreed
upon plan of action, and they are
now engaged in carrying out their
Legislative plan with singleness Of
purpose. ~. -
Any organization, however, is open
to the criticism that it contains pos
sibility of danger. The Democratic
caucus contains this element of dan
ger. We see perfect political organ
ization controlled by evil elements in
New York. But the Tom L. Johnson,
of Cleveland, had a political organiz-
alton or machine, as all powerful as
Tammany ever could be. But Johnson
used his organization for good, and
accomplished things for the people
which could not have been accompil-
ished without his machine. And so
the people of Cleveland, one of the
most enlightened Municipalities on
earth, elected Johnson and his Or
ganization for term after term.
The Progressives have an organic
alton in the House. The Socialist par
ty offers an example of the closest
organization known to politics. The
Democratic caucus is the organiza
ton, the machinery adopted by the
party for carrying out it's program.
Would Mr. Anderson have the,
Democratic caucus broken lp, allow;
ing each member to vote individual
opinion on the floor of the House.
The past history of legislation shows
what happens then. Take tariff legis-
lation, long dark record of betray-
al and duplicity. Perhaps parties
which came into power pledged to re-
duce tariff duties honestly intended
to keep their promises But the mem
bers, unbound by caucus rules, soon
commenced trading-the log rolling
process of evil memory and the result
was that each succeeding tariff law
was a greater betrayal of the people.
| believe Mr.. Anderson has aimed
q 0,,7/ ho1S h.
thing that rankles with him is the
secret caucus. It is the secrecy of it
that is wrong; and on each occasion
have voted for the open caucus. Mr..
Anderson tells the truth when he
says that the caucus is the real legis-
lative body. And for that reason it's
proceedings ought not only to be
open, but they ought to be published
as journal. The people have the
right to know not only how members
of the caucus vote but also the argu-
ments in caucus which decided their
vote
The people would be foolish, in my
opinion, to abandon this very practi-
cal instrument of good, even though
it be theoretically wrong. Theoreti-
cally our Congress would be compos-
ed entirely of high-minded men I'M
animously intent on carrying out
the wishes of the people, Practically
that is not always the case. Until
the millennium comes, if the people
have control Of an organization
which is termed a benevolent despot-
ism, they would be unwise to surren-
der it for perhaps something a great
deal worse I can see that if special
privilege ever comes to dominate the