« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
(c) Relationship between optional and compulsory ref-
(d) Extent of popular vote..
Proportion of measures adopted.
VII. PROBLEMS AND CONCLUSIONS.
Submission to voters.
Emergency measures and the Referendum..
Relationship between the Initiative and the Referen-
Relation between the Initiative and the Referendum
Limitation of measures to be submitted to popular vote 116
APPENDIX No. 2. Text of Initiative and Referendum provisions 124 (1) Utah
(2) Oregon, constitutional amendments, statutes..... 124 (3) Ohio
APPENDIX No. 2-Concluded.
(9) Illinois, rejected proposal....
APPENDIX NO. 3. Text of Public Policy Questions in Illinois. on the Initiative and Referendum.
APPENDIX NO. 4. Illinois Public Policy Law...
APPENDIX No. 5. Text of California Recall Provisions.
This pamphlet deals with the initiative and referendum, with the recall of judicial decisions and the recall of public officers. The recall of public officers is an institution quite distinct in purpose from the initiative and the referendum, but the recall has normally been discussed in connection with the initiative and referendum, and it may properly be treated here, because it involves the same problems of petition and popular vote that are involved in the initiative and referendum. The recall of judicial decisions is really another application of the referendum, and is properly dealt with in connection with the initiative and the referendum.
The recall of public officers is of course another means of removing such officers, and bears a close relation to the problems of local government, and also to the problems of the executive department.
The initiative and referendum in most states are applied to local as well as to state issues, and in some states they are applied by statute to local matters while not applicable to state issues. However, this pamphelt deals with them primarily with respect to state issues, although a larger part of what is said about them with respect to state issues may be also properly applied to their use for local purposes.
The discussion of the initiative and referendum contained in this pamphlet is based upon a large mass of material which can not be given in the pamphlet itself. A complete table has been prepared of all measures submitted to a popular vote in the states under the initiative and referendum, and this manuscript table will be available for use by members of the convention who desire to analyze the votes for themselves. A manuscript summary has also been made of all statutes carrying into effect the initiative and referendum, and abstracts have been made of all cases involving the initiative and referendum provisions of the several constitutions.
The problems dealt with in this pamphlet bear a close relation to those discussed in a succeeding pamphlet on constitutional amendment and revision, and some further discussion of the popular initiative as applied to constitutional amendments will be found in that pamphlet.
Public policy questions upon the adoption of state-wide or local initiative and referendum have been submitted to the voters of Illinois in 1902, 1901 and 1910, and two questions upon the initiative and referendum are to be submitted at the election of November 4, 1919. The state-wide questions submitted in 1902 and
1910 are substantially identical. Upon the questions submitted at elections, the initiative and referendum have in each case received a majority of the votes cast upon the question, although this has in no case constituted a majority of the votes cast in the election. The votes upon these measures will be found upon page 1 of this pamphlet.
This pamphlet limits itself to an analysis of initiative and referendum provisions, and to statements regarding the general operation of these institutions, without entering into the controversial field with respect to their application in particular cases. For example, the use of the referendum to hold up appropriations for the University of Oregon has been referred to (p. 91) only to indicate its influence in causing other states to exempt such appropriations from the referendum; frauds in the preparation of petitions have been referred to (p. 96) only in so far as they have led to legal enactments seeking to prevent such frauds; misleading ballot titles have been referred to (p. 97) only in connection with efforts to prevent abuse in this respect; the use of the referendum merely for the purpose of delaying the coming into effect of an act has been commented upon (pp. 90, 113114) only so far as it bears upon efforts to remedy this abuse. The submission and adoption of conflicting measures (pp. 86-88, 112) has been dealt with only in its bearing upon the machinery of popular voting. Information is being collected upon the specific cases in which the use of the initiative and referendum has been more particularly subject to criticism, and much of the popular discussion of these institutions has centered about such cases; but discussion of these cases of abuse or alleged abuse involves facts which are in many cases capable of being interpreted either way, according to the point of view of the individual, and such discussion is out of place in a pamphlet seeking to make an impartial analysis of the institutions.