Evening star., 1948-11-17
Dispute Seen Certain
On Kind Of Mandate
Given by Election
No Acceptable Means
Seen to Measure Trends
Or CIoims Of the Selfish

Seen to Measure Trends
Or Claims Of the Selfish
By David Laurence
What mandate" was given by the
last electionP
This question will be interpreted
differently by various groups. There
IL no acceptable means Of measuring
trends or the claims Of selfish in
terssts. But II the United States
had . parliamentary system like
Canada and the other nations Of the
British Commonwealth, there would
not be any need to worry about any
body distorting or misconstruing the
mandate" For in a parliamentary
system the existing administration
can at any time be checked by the
peoples expressed will. This is true
democracy.
Under our constitutional system,
the Chief Executive cannot be
checked except once in four years.
The will of q sizable minority-it
amounted to 21,544,061 voters in the
last election, according to the latest
count-can be completely disre-
garded by an American President
without any check being imposed
upon him. Likewise, 100000 or
more out Of the q, ,669 1887 who voted
for the victorious candidate Tor the
presidency at the time of the elec-
ton may find cause hereafter for
disappearing some proposals and
NAV. therefore, actually help form
a new majority. But in the United
States the will of that majority can
not be expressed Immediately. 1t
must wait for four years to change
Chief Executives.
Fear Abuse Of Power.
It is true that a congressional
election will be held in two years
and that the protest Of the people
can be registered then. But 1t need
not affect the presidency at all.
Indeed, it Is not good government
for the executive and legislative
branches of the Government to be
OF opposite political complexion.
Under a parliamentary system, the
Prime Minister and his cabinet are
responsible to the National Legis-
lature and can be ousted by
majority vote. II he feels he is right
and the legislature is wrong, the
issue can be carried to the people
to decide. The reason that this sys-
tenn does not result in frequent
elections is that serious thought Is
given constantly to the true wishes
of the majority Of the voters. Re-
adjustments in the cabinet are
made In the face Of the evident
desires Of the people.
There would be far more unity
in America and much more OF
spirit of reconciliation today If the
minority felt that the majority party
would not abuse its power IN the
name Of groups seeking special priv
ilege. Thus already there are DEM
ocratic leaders blandly saying that
union labor won the election and
that a mandate" was given to re-
peal the Taft-Hartley Act. Natu-
rally the union leaders do not want
any balanced labor law-they are
already saying they want a return
of the one-sided Wagner Act.
But the people in the farm dis
tricts did not intend by their votes
to bring about a labor-controlled
Government. The farm areas Will
look with disfavor on any situation
that produces higher and higher
prices for the articles bought by
the farmer, especially since decline
in the prices Of farm products seems
likely.
Says Labor Should Watch Step.
The labor leaders made the mis-
take OF preventing modification OF
the Wagner law for twelve years. II
they should get their way now and
secure the repeal of the Taft-Hart-
lev Act without any balanced law
being put in its place, the next con-
pressional elections may see a COM
plete overturn of Congress, and then
a much more extreme law than the
Taft-Hartley Act may be enacted.
The farm areas will do the trick.
II series of strikes and work
stoppages begins to paralyze the
economic system, the people in the
farm areas and the cities, too, will
express themselves in no uncertain
terms at the next congressional
election. Under a parliamentary
system, however, they could make
their wishes known at any time and
prevent extreme policies from being
adopted. Under the rigid system
in effect in America today, serious
damage can be done the economic
system by extremist groups, and
there Is no check possible through
legislation If the party in power feels
itself beholden to special-privilege
factions or pressure groups.
It would, of course, take a con-
stitutional amendment to bring
about a parliamentary system in
the United States and such pro-
posal would mean that Congress it
self as well as the Executive would
be subject to instantaneous check
by the people. The cause of parlia-
mentary democracy is gaining favor
as the economic problems of the
country grow more complex Since
. centralized government has be-
come necessary to supersede the
economic rule Of 48 State entities,
some more effective means Of check
ing a centralized government than
is at present available would also
seem to be necessary. Certainly
there would be a united country
today If the majority of the people
could make their wishes felt at any
time that the Chief Executive or the
Congress failed to heed the true