The Gavelyte, October 1911

The Gavelyte. VOL. VI. OCTOBER 1911. NO. 7 The Initiative And Referendum. BY PROF. LEROY ALLEN, Ph. B. The initiative and referendum, taken tog;ether as one reform, is a device to secure to the people more direct, definite, and certain control over legislation. The initiative means that a small proportion of the voters, usually eight per cent, can petition for the passage of a desired law. If the legislative body passes the law, well and good; but if not, then it goes to the people at an election, and if passed, becomes a law in spite of the legislature. The referen– dum means that a small proportion of the votes, usually five per cent, can petition for a popular vote on a law that has been passed by the legislature. The law is then suspended until an election can be held. If a majority of the voters approve, the law stands; if not, it is annulled. The initiative and referendum have already made considerable progress in the United States. The State of South Dakota enjoys the honor of having been the first to adopt the reform as a part of the constitution, as early as 1898. In the thirteen years since, nine other states, Missouri, Arkansas, Maine, Montana, Colorado, Nevada, Oregon, Oklahoma, and Utah ha.ve also adapted it. In addition, amendments to the con5tit.1tion, providing for the initiative and referendum, are now pending in eight states, California, Florida, Idaho, Ne– braska, North Dakota, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Furthermore, in four states, Minesota, Indiana, Kansas, and Illinois, amendments have passed one house and been rejected in the other. In twenty-five states, the initiative and referendum have been in use for many years for localities. The reasons for the adoption of the modern device for good government centre largely around distrust of the legislature. There has been a remarkable change in the course of our political history in the position of our state legis– latures and in the attitude of the people towards them. In 1876, these bodies had the bulk of political power and the complete confidence of the people. In all but two states, they even elected tha governor and other state officers; they ~mended the state constitutions without the sanction of the people; the gover– nor had no veto on their acts; the courts had no "judical veto," that is, could declare none of their act s unconstitutional. But for one hundred and twenty-