Some Considerations Upon the State-Wide Initiative and Referendum
| DOI | 10.1177/000271621204300113 |
| Published date | 01 September 1912 |
| Date | 01 September 1912 |
| Author | W.F. Dodd |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
(203)
SOME
CONSIDERATIONS
UPON
THE
STATE-WIDE
INITIATIVE
AND
REFERENDUM
BY
W.
F.
DODD,
University
of
Illinois.
Professor
Beard
has
well
said
that
a
system
of
initiative
and
referendum
can
be
intelligently
discussed
only
with
reference
to
the
concrete
forms
in
which
it
appears.
Upon
this
question
as
elsewhere
much
of
the
discussion
is
fruitless
because
it
does
not
take
into
account
the
varying
aspects
of
the
institutions
under
consideration.
The
purpose
of
this
paper
is
very
largely
to
consider
the
main
objections
to
the
initiative
and
referendum,
and
the
extent
to
which
these
new
instruments
of
democracy
may
be
wisely
employed
under
our
system
of
government.
In
the
operation
of
the
initiative
and
referendum
there
are
three
fundamental
steps:
(1)
The
drafting
of
the
measure
to
be
submitted;
(2)
the
obtaining
of
initiative
or
referendum
petitions,
and
(3)
the
submission
of
measures
to
a
vote
of
the
people.
It
will
be
well
to
discuss
each
of
these
steps
separately.
The
question
of
draftsmanship
has
been
one
of
the
most
serious
ones
in
connection
with
the
initiative.
Perhaps
too
much
emphasis
has
been
placed
upon
the
value
of
discussion
in
legislative
bodies,
for
we
realize
that
the
great
bulk
of
our
state
legislation
does
not
receive
careful
consideration
by
the
bodies
which
enact
it.
It
is
true
also
that
important
measures
are
frequently
drafted
by
indi-
viduals
or
organizations
which
have
no
official
connection
with
legis-
lative
bodies.
But
legislative
discussion
is
of
much
value,
and
one
of
the
most
hopeful
movements
in
recent
years
has
been
that
toward
scientific
draftsmanship
of
legislation.
Any
plan
which
will
enable
a
small
group
of
persons
to
force
action
by
the
voters
upon
legislative
proposals,
no
matter
how
crudely
drafted,
is
defective
just
to
that
extent.
To
this
point
it
is
not
sufficient
to
answer
that
much
legis-
lation
now
enacted
by
legislative
bodies
is
bad,
and
that
the
more
important
initiative
measures
in
Oregon
and
elsewhere
have
been
drafted
with
some
degree
of
care.
There
must,
in
addition,
be
some
guarantee
that
initiative
measures
shall
receive
serious
consideration,
To continue reading
Request your trial