Unpopular government in the United States

The federal government is already organized upon a plan of centralized power. The ballot which it presents to the voter is always short. The voter casts his ballot for a president and vice-president every four years and for one congressman from his district (and perhaps one or two from the state at large) every two years. United States Senators hold office for six years. Until the adoption of the recent 17th Amendment two were elected by each state legislature. Now two are elected at large in each state. The judges are appointed by the president with the approval of the Senate. The Senate has a general veto power on Executive appointments. Such in form at least is the organization of the national government.

Today, however, extra-legal government has laid its hand to some extent at least upon the government at Washington. In congressional districts where extra-legal government flourishes, it has become the strongest and most persistent single force in the election of congressmen. Naturally it has its loyal supporters in the House of Representatives of Congress. As the power of extra-legal government grows and becomes more widespread its influence in that house will grow. It is, of course, entirely immaterial whether a supporter of the extra-legal government is labeled Democrat or Republican. He is a Democrat when he comes from a district where the vote-directing machine operates successfully under that name. He is a Republican when the vote-directing machine operates successfully under that name. The power of extra-legal government which has appeared in the Senate of the United States is the direct consequence of the power of extra-legal government in the state legislatures. Of course, extra-legal government does not often control a majority of the members of both houses of a state legislature. A considerable minority, however, who hold together under a strong leadership can wield a large influence. One of the reasons for the persistence of the fight upon Mr. Lorimer and its popular support throughout the country was the fact that his election represented to the popular mind in a striking manner the invasion of the United States Senate by extra-legal government. No matter how free from corruption Mr. Lorimer may have been, the power so openly wielded by those allied with extra-legal government to place him in the United States Senate presented itself to the people of the country as a menace to the nation. Yet a similar invasion has been going on steadily in quieter ways. Every gain of extra-legal government in the control of state legislatures has been a step farther toward a predominant influence in the United States Senate. It has been for the most part through senators who have supported, or at least felt that they must placate the power of extra-legal government in their states, that that government has obtained its hold upon the federal judiciary. The president’s appointments must be approved by the Senate. Senatorial custom, sometimes called courtesy, places the control of the Senate’s approval in the hands of the senators from the state for which the judicial appointment is made. The two senators from the state sometimes divide the federal judicial districts in the state between them. Thus has the president’s appointment to the lower federal bench been placed at the mercy of two, or perhaps a single senator. The president on his part may have a popular legislative program which he is pledged and is attempting to secure action on from Congress. The support of senators is necessary. The tendency, therefore, on the part of the president to allow senators the upper hand in his appointments to the bench has been very marked. Extra-legal government has in the last few years become a visible force in the selection of the president of the United States through its power to control delegates sent to the National Convention. At both the Democratic and Republican National Conventions in 1912 the numerical strength of the delegates representing extra-legal government in particular states or districts of states was very marked. In the Republican Convention these delegates and their allies not only controlled the situation, but actually took issue with the delegates who represented the electorate and beat them. This was not a matter which could end when one faction cast more legal votes at the convention than the other. The contest was one between the forces of extra-legal government and delegates for the moment actually representing the popular choice. The contest between two such forces can be settled only when one or the other has been swept from the field. The triumph legally of the forces of extra-legal government in the Republican Convention could have no other logical outcome than the formation of a new party.

The recent change effected by the seventeenth amendment providing for the popular election of senators was made avowedly for the purpose of ousting the control of extra-legal government in the Senate. We may be sure, however, that the change will not in the least tend to drive extra-legal government from the field at large. It follows, therefore, that the politocrats will use all their power to control nominations and elections to the United States Senate. The office of senator, however, is conspicuous and extremely important. This fact alone will force the politocrats to put forward or support candidates of some independence and popular strength. This will naturally result in the United States Senate becoming far more representative of the electorate than is the House. We may, therefore, expect the Senate to become less conservative than the House. If this continues in a marked degree, it means the entire decadence of the House as a legislative body. Its power will be exercised by the leaders of the house majority in the interests of a conservative check upon the Senate. Whether this condition would survive the elimination of extra-legal government in our local municipal and state governments seems beyond the possibility of prediction.

Other proposals for changes in the plan of the federal government have been made with the avowed object of eliminating extra-legal government by politocrats. The influence of extra-legal government in national conventions is to be permanently overthrown by presidential primaries. If any change were to be made in respect to the judiciary it would be in the direction of making them elective, and perhaps subject to the recall. No doubt nominations through primary elections would be advocated for all elective officers. Newspapers recently gave space to the demand that the postmasters should be elected by the voters of the post-office district. Whatever temporary advantage over the extra-legal government there may be in any of these expedients, they represent the application of the very principle of government which in the long run produces, and must always produce, the disease from which we are suffering and desire to be cured. This is our process of curing the ills of democracy with more democracy. It is the case of more poison for one already overcome. Have the past thirty years not yet taught us that to increase the burden upon the voter is to reduce the most intelligent member of the electorate to the darkest political ignorance and thus to enable the professional adviser and director to the politically ignorant voter to cast his ballot for him? Every additional appeal to the electorate is a step toward that scheme of government which is most favorable to the growth and development of extra-legal government by politocrats. The federal government is suffering because in the village, the township, the city, the county, and the state, such political burdens have been placed upon the voter that he cannot perform his political functions intelligently. He is forced to delegate them to those who make it their profession to carry his political burdens for him. To them he turns over the privilege of casting his ballot for him. It would be amusing if it were not tragic that the increase of the cause should be selected as the cure.

The elimination of extra-legal government from our villages, townships, cities, counties, and states has become a national problem. The proper functioning of the national government is impossible while these sources contribute to the existence of extra-legal government. The reduction of governmental agencies to two—a local municipal government and a state government—the application of the principle of the commission form of government to both, so that the electorate casts its ballot for one officer only in each, and the consequent disruption of extra-legal government, are essential to the restoration of the federal government to political health. The plan of the federal government taken by itself and as an instrument of government in its appropriate sphere is still admirable. If it were the only governmental agency in the field, extra-legal government would never have had a chance to achieve power in the United States. If any improvements in the plan of the federal government are ever found necessary they should be in the direction, first, of uniting the executive power and the legislative power, and second, the elimination of the Senate veto upon executive appointments. The former may be accomplished by placing the control of the executive power in the hands of the president and his cabinet or in a so-called council of state composed of the president and his cabinet officers and also requiring that each cabinet officer must be a member of one of the houses of Congress. This would at once place the control of the executive power of the nation in the hands of the leaders of the majority in both branches of the legislature, or at least in the leaders of that branch which more effectively represented the electorate. The president would cease to carry his present load of responsibility for executive action and legislative progress. His office would be important, for he would be that human agency necessary to place the representatives of the victors at the polls in control of the executive power. His influence as a member of the council of state would be considerable. With a veto power over legislation he would still retain an enormous one-man power.