Page images
PDF
EPUB

CHAPTER XVIII

REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT

OUR problem is, to make government truly representative of the interests of the people as a whole, instead of, as it too largely is today, representative of the interests of the party bosses and the business organizations that can afford to give money and energy to influencing legislation. It is possible that by a more efficiently socialized education we might bring up a generation far more public-spirited than the present, and so raise the average level of conscience in politicians. Religious revivals, patriotic appeals something may touch the hearts of bosses here and there and bring them to quit the game. But when a politician becomes too disinterested he will find the highly organized forces of the machine against him. And when one boss gets converted another will be ready to step into his shoes. The system has become self-perpetuating; and nothing is likely to uproot it short of such changes in our political system as will make it cease to be a profitable means of livelihood.

Certainly the history of reform movements in this country is very discouraging. Nearly all of our big cities are ruled, practically, by a Democratic or a Republican machine, or a working-agreement of the two. A wave of popular disgust, the exposure of some particularly flagrant case of graft, the nomination by a temporary independent organization of some con

spicuously able and honest man, may lead to his election and a few years of relatively efficient and honest government. But the reform administration will inevitably be hampered from within and without by the "regulars" who do not want it to succeed. And at the next election, when the popular attention has lapsed, the machine will quietly come back into power.

Reformers are never tired of telling us that it is our fault, that we have the kind of government we vote for, that we must take more interest in politics, learn the qualifications and past record of candidates, and vote more intelligently.

“Why don't they keep the streets a little cleaner?'
You ask with keen annoyance, not undue.

'Why don't they keep the parks a little greener?'
(Did you ever stop to think that 'they' means you?")

But as a matter of fact, these appeals are nearly futile. The way by which you and I can hope to reform politics is too arduous and discouraging. We have other things to do. The bosses can give their whole time to politics, it is their business; the chances are they will circumvent us. No political system will work well which necessitates for its success too much work or presupposes too much intelligence on the part of the electorate. We must adjust political duties to human nature, and not expect too much of people.

One great and permanent gain has been made in recent years, the erection and extension of the Civil Service. This means that for thousands of subordinate offices a man may no longer be appointed simply because he is a friend or supporter of the leaders of the dominant party. He must show by passing a standard examination that he has the training and

abilities requisite to the duties of the position. Fitness, not party allegiance, is the criterion of selection. This deprives the party bosses in so far of their hold upon their supporters. It also raises the level of efficiency in the service, saves the country millions of dollars, and attracts able young men to government positions. They no longer need to fear dismissal when another party comes into power. Their pride in their work is thereby increased, and their loyalty is given to the service itself rather than to their party. There is less personal dishonesty and slacking; as President Alderman of the University of Virginia says, "You can trust men if you will train them."

The principle of the Civil Service should be extended to many positions not yet included. Instead of the easy-going assumption that anybody can fill any office, we must aim to have all public duties performed by experts, trained for their particular work, and proving their fitness by examination. Congressmen, instead of wasting a large part of their time, as they now do, in making petty appointments and apportioning the party spoils, can then give their full attention to matters of public policy. Except for the highest positions, the party convictions of an official have no bearing upon the efficiency of his work, and should be disregarded.

It would be impossible, however, to extend this principle to legislators and the highest executive offices, because in their case it is not merely efficiency and expert knowledge that is required, but convictions and principles which are to determine their policy. These principles must be such as to commend them to the people whom they are to represent. Moreover, in these responsible positions the factor

of personality enters in, which cannot be adequately tested by an examination. It might, indeed, be an excellent thing if candidates for Congress, as well as for State and municipal office, were required to take standard psychological and information tests, and the results published, as part of the data bearing upon the voters' decision. But examinations alone can never show to the people who can best serve them in those positions that require important decisions. Those representatives must be chosen not only for their ability but because they can be depended upon to represent faithfully the needs and wishes of their constituents.

If it were only a matter of expressing the ideas of the people, we might replace representative government to considerable extent by direct legislation, such as has bcome increasingly popular in several States of the Union. The movement toward direct legislation-the Initiative and Referendum-is a natural consequence of the thwarting of the popular will by the party machine. But it cannot succeed to any great extent in breaking the power of the machine; and it implies the renunciation of the ideal of expertness in government. Legislation should embody not only what the people think will be for their interests, but what trained students of public policy decide, after mutual discussion and investigation, to be for their interests.

Direct legislation does have the advantage of giving the voters a chance to express their will on a specific issue, disentangling it from the jumble of issues which complicate any election of representatives. And it may have an educative value not to be despised. But it is too much to expect the mass of voters to become competent to decide most questions

of public policy; they are too intricate, they require expert knowledge and study. Legislators are elected for the express purpose of deliberating and studying out the best solution of such problems. A popular verdict will usually be a snap judgment, based chiefly upon superficial newspaper arguments, the speeches of clever orators, or sectional interests and prejudices. The party organizations have the advantage in creating these prejudices and misunderstandings; the newspapers are controlled by definite Interests. Thus direct legislation can be used by party machines to thwart a too public-spirited legislature as well as by an aroused public to thwart a party-dominated legislature.

The people should be able to elect to the highest offices the men they trust and honor-as they very often can not today. They should decide, by the choice of their representatives, the big questions of public policy. If their representatives are thus men whom they trust and honor, men who represent their general attitudes toward public policy, they should, in general, leave to their more deliberately formed opinion the decisions as to ways and means. This certainly is the ideal of traditional Americanism. Direct interposition by the people should, perhaps, be available for exceptional cases. But it should be employed with caution. If we can but make our representatives truly representative it will seldom be necessary to resort to these heroic measures.

The Recall, likewise, is a double-edged and dangerous weapon. When there appears a wave of popular indignation at some office-holder, because of the disclosure of his dishonesty or treason to the interests of the people, the Recall may be used to salutary effect. But we are so used to bad government that

« PreviousContinue »