Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (June 10, 1910)
The Commoner. JUNE 10, 1910 Election of Senators by the People A Powerful Speech Delivered in the United States ' Senate by Senator Robert L. Owen of Oklahoma . On 'May 30 Senator Robert L. Owen of Okla homa delivered an address In the United States senate oh the subject, "The Election of Senators by Direct Vote of the People and the Necessity for Restoring the Rule of the People." Following are extracts from Senator Owen's remarkable address: Mr. President: On the 21st day of May, 1908, in accordance with -wishes of the legislature of the state of Oklahoma, expressed by resolution of January 9, 1908, I introduced senate resolu tion No. 91, providing for the submission of a constitutional amendment for the election of senators by direct vote of the people. Article 5 of the constitution provides that con gress, whenever two-thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to the constitution or, on the application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amend ments which, in either case, shall be valid when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several states or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or other mode of rat ification may be proposed by congress. The reasons why ther people wish this pro posed reform are thoroughly well understood. First It will make the senate of the United States more responsive to the wishes of the peo ple of the United States. , Second It will prevent the corruption of legislatures. Third It will prevent the improper use of money in the campaigns before the electorate by men ambitious to obtain, a seat in the senate of the United States. Fourth It will prevent the disturbance and .turmoil of state legislatures and the interfer- ..en,ces.with,, state Jegisiation by the, violent con- r tests. of candidates . for a position in the United , States senate. Fifth It will compel candidates for the United States senate to be subjected to the se vere scrutiny of a campaign before the people and compel the selection of the best-fitted men. ' Sixth It will prevent deadlocks, due to po litical contests in which various states from time to time have been thus left unrepresented. Seventh It will popularize government and tend to increase the confidence of the people of the United States in the senate of the United States, which has been to some extent impaired in recent years. Mr. President, as the state of Idaho points out, and as the state of New Jersey points out, in their resolutions herewith submitted, the house of representatives of the congress of the .United States has on four separate occasions passed by a two-thirds vote a .resolution propos ing an amendment to the constitution providing for the election of United States senators by direct vote of the people. And the senate has, on each occasion, failed or refused to vote upon such resolution or to submit such constitutional amendment to the Beveral states for. their 'action, as contemplated by the constitution of the United States. On May 23, 1908, I called attention of the senate to the various resolutions passed by twenty-seven states of the union, and on behalf of the state of Oklahoma, I urged the senate to act. Over my protest the senate referred this joint resolution 91 to the committee on privileges and elections by a vote of 33 to 20. Thirty repub licans and three democrats. This vote meant the burial of the proposed constitutional amendment. Eight democrats as sisted me with a positive vote, and eleven west ern republicans. The senator from Michigan (Mr. Burrows), Chairman of the committee on privileges and elections, never gave any hearing on this reso lution and never reported it, but allowed the Sixtieth congress to expire without taking any action in regard to it, notwithstanding the legis lature of the state of Michigan had therefore by jjoint resolution expressly requested this action. I can not believe that the senate is conscious of the widespread public demand for the elec tion of senators by direct vote of the people. I therefore submit the following evidence of the action taken by the various states of the union, Showing the .following thirty-six states to have expressed themselves (in one form or another) favorably to the election of senators by direct vote of the people, over three-fourths of tho states of tho union: Alabama, Arkansas, Cali fornia, Colorado, Florida, Georgia', Idaho, Illi nois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisi ana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Now Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Ore gon, Pec isylvanla, South Dakota, South Caro lina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wash ington, Wisconsin, Wyoming. The fuller details relative to primary elec tions will be found in tho work "Primary Elec tions, a Study of tho History and Tendencies of Primary Election Legislation," by C. EdwaTd Merriam, associate professor of political science in the University of Chicago, 1908. Tho northeastern states" alone are moving slowly in the matter Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Delaware, Maryland and West Virginia. In West Virginia they have primaries in al most all of tho counties, instructing members of the legislature as to tho election of senators. In Delaware the election of the members of tho legislature carries with It an understanding as to the vote of tho member on the senatorshlp. In Massachusetts the legislature, through tho house of representatives, has just passed a reso lution favorable to this constitutional amend ment. Maine has recently adopted tho initiative and referendum tho people's rule. It is obvious that in Maine the question of who shall be senator is entering vigorously Into the question of tho election of members of the legislature, and commitments are demanded of candidates for the-legislature; and so in greater or less degree even in some other northeastern states, which are not definitely committed to the election of senators by direct vote of tho people, a similar method is followed, which, in effect, operates as an instruction, more or less pronounced, in favor of a candidate for tho senate. In the effort I made to have the amendment to the constitution submitted to the various states on May 23, 1908 (S. J. Res. 91), it was obvious that I had not the sympathy of those who control the senate and no voto from a northeastern state. The senator from Rhode Island, In answer to the various resolutions passed by the various states, asked the following question of me: Mr. Aldrich: Does the senator from Oklahoma understand that a senator is bound to vote ac cording to the instructions of his legislature? While I answered in the negative, neverthe less I' do think that when tho opinion of the people of a state is thoroughly well made upa senator ought not only to be bound by it, but that he ought to feel glad to carry into effect the will of the people whom he represents, and ought not to set up for himself a knowledge or an understanding greater than that of the people of the entire state who have sent him as their representative. I believe that the will of tho people is far more nearly right, in the main, than the will of any Individual statesman who is apt to J)e honored by them with a seat in the senate; that the whole people are more apt to be safe and sane, more apt to be sound and hon est than a single Individual. At all events I feel not only willing, but I really desire to make effective the will of the people of my state. I believe In popular government, and I believe that tho people are more conservative, more "safe and sane," and more nearly apt to do right in the long run than ambitious statesmen temporarily trusted with power. I now submit, Mr. President, the evidence of the public opinion of the people of the United States as expressed through- their legislatures, or by the. voluntary act of party regulations in Instructing candidates for tho legislature on the question of the election of United States sen ators, or by primary laws as far as they apply. It will be thus seen that democratic states and republican states alike, west of tho Hudson river, have acted favorably in this matter almost without exception. Only eight or nine states have failed to act, and I do not doubt that if the voice of the people of these states of New England, of New York, Maryland and Delaware could find convenient expression, freo from ma chlno politics, every ono of them would favor tho election of senators by direct voto, and would favor tho right of the people to instruct their representatives in congress and in the sen ate, a right which they enjoyed from tho begin ning of tho Amorican ropublic down to tho dayB when this right was Braothercd and destroyed by tho convention systom of party management. Not only tho states havo acted almost unani mously in favor of this right of tho people but all tho great parties of tho country havo de clared in favor of it, except tho republican party, and this party would havo declared for it except for tho overwhelming influence and domination of machine politics in tho management of that party and tho prevalence of so-called boss in fluence. And this Is demonstrated by tho fact that tho largo majority of the republican states, by tho resolutions or acts of their legislatures, havo declared in favor of it. Tho democratic party, representing about half of tho votors of tho United States (G,409,104 voters), in its national platform adopted at Den ver, Golo., July 10, 1908, says: "Wo favor tho election of United States sen ators by direct voto of tho people, and regard this reform as the gateway to other national reforms." Tho platform of tho independence party, adopted at Chicago, 111., July 28, 1908, declared for direct nominations generally, and furthor made the following declaration: "Wo advocate tho popular election of United States senators and of judges, both state and federal, and any constitutional amendment necessary to these ends." The platform of tho prohibition paTty, adopted at Columbus, Ohio, July 10, 1908, mado the following its chief plank after tho prohibl-i tion question, to-wit: "Tho election of United States senators by direct voto of tho people." The platform of tho New York democratic league, adopted at Saratoga, N. Y Soptomber 10, 1909, declares for tho "Election of United States senators by the direct vote of tho people." Tho American Federation of Labor, consist ing of 118 national and International unions, representing, approximately, 27,000 local unions, four departments, thirty-eight branches, 594 city central unions, and 573 local unions, with an approximately paid membership of 2,000,000 men, representing between eight and ton mil lions of Americans, with 245 papers, havo de clared repeatedly In favoiof the election of sen ators by direct vote of tho people. The national grange, comprising the associa tion of farmers in the northeast and in central states, including nearly every farmer in Malno and in the New England states, and in Penn sylvania and Ohio and Michigan, the Society of Equity and the Farmers' Educational and Co operative Union of the west and south, and alto gether representing the organized farmers of the entire United States, have declared in favor of tho election of senators by direct vote of tho people. In this group of people our census of 1900 disclosed 10,438,219 adult workers. The state of Iowa In a joint resolution of April 12, 1909, makes the following statement: "Whereas the failure of congress to submit such amendment to the states has made It clear that the only practicable method of securing sub mission of such an amendment to tho states is through a constitutional convention to bo called by congress upon tho application of the legisla tures of two-thirds of all the states." And the legislature of Iowa therefore resolved in favor of a constitutional convention because of the neglect and refusal of tho senate to per form its obvious duty in tho premises. This expression of tho disappointment of Iowa in the senate of tho United States Is emphasized in a more vigorous manner by tho platform of the socialist party adopted at Chicago, 111., May 13, 1908, which submitted as ono of their po litical demands: "The abolition of the senate." (Votes, 420, 793.) Mr. President, the senate of the United States is ono of the substantial bulwarks of tho gov ernment against sudden popular passion or hasty generalization of tho people. Its strength in this direction is well known to all and needs no commendation by me. Its weakness is in dis regarding tho matured will of tho people of - the United States in matters of national impor tance, obstructing national reform, and being regarded by the people as too greatly influenced by organized special interests against tho poll cles needed and desired by tho people. I think it is no exaggeration to say that nine tenths of the peoplo of the United States art t-t 5.1