The Origin of Minnesota's Nonpartisan Legislature

A FEATURE of Minnesota government that stimulated much discussion during the 1951 legislative session is here traced back to its beginning in 1913 by an instructor in government at Wayne University, Detroit. The ORIGIN of Minnesota's Nonpartisan Legislature CHARLES R. ADRIAN ONLY TWO STATES - Minnesota and legislature, council-manager and commis Nebraska — select their legislators on a bal sion government in cities, the initiative, lot without party designations. Minnesota's referendum, and recall, and the nonparti unusual arrangement dates from 1913 and san election of certain public officials. Some is largely the result of a political accident reformers urged that judges and city and — of a series of events strongly resembling county officials should be chosen on a non a comedy of errors. Nebraska acquired its partisan ballot. A few extremists went so nonpartisan legislature more than two far as to propose the use of nonpartisan decades later, in 1934, when that state's elections in selecting all state officials. lawmaking branch was completely reor When the thirty-eighth Minnesota legis ganized. lature met in January, 1913, probably not In 1913, like most of the rest of the a single member suspected that before the United States, Minnesota was affected by session ended the state would have a law a reform movement in state and local gov making body chosen without party desig ernment — a movement that spread the nation. It was generally assumed that concept of "efficiency and economy" to na debate during the session would center tional as well as state government. It was about county option on the liquor question, inspired by the successful example of the industrial accident insurance, the desirabil business corporation and by general dis ity of the initiative, referendum, and recall, gust for the low moral standards that and the nonpartisan election of county offi marked much political party activity about cials. the turn of the century. Muckrakers had Minnesota reformers had precedents for been exposing politicians, and as a result the nonpartisan ballot in electing county party prestige was very low. oflBcials. Not only had California recently The movement toward political reform, furnished an example, but the year before which reached its peak in the second dec Minnesota itself had apphed the nonparti ade of the twentieth century, urged such san principle to county superintendents of innovations as the primary election, pro schools, officers of first-class cities, and portional representation, a shorter ballot, state judges. Laws passed in 1912 by a concentration of responsibility in state ad special legislative session called by Gov ministrative structure, the unicameral ernor A, O. Eberhart provided for the Winter 1952 155 Minnesota changes. Five other states had and 19 for Frank E. Minnette, a Democrat. previously removed the party label from On February 7, 1913, Senator Julius E. their judicial ballots, and the move to Haycraft of Madelia, a progressive Repub "purify" this branch of government was in lican who was chairman of the Senate elec full swing. In four years, twelve states had tions committee, introduced a bill to extend adopted the plan.^ the nonpartisan provisions of the 1912 pri The nonpartisan principle was then ex mary election act to include all judges and tended to other areas of government. Re all city and county officers. He was con formers argued that local officials should vinced that the plan was sound and pro be businesslike administrators, since there gressive, and the general feeling seemed to was no Republican way to gravel a road be that, although important and powerful and no Democratic way to lay a sewer. party regulars opposed it, the bill was al California made all its district, county, most certain to pass.^ township, judicial, school, and city officials When the Haycraft bill reached the floor nonpartisan. Other states considered ex of the Senate on February 13, it was at tending the plan to the state superinten tacked from several angles by Senate dent of public instruction, university re leaders. F. A. Duxbury of Caledonia imme gents, local school officials, and city and diately introduced an amendment to elim village officials. inate the provision regarding all county In 1913 Minnesota's political atmosphere officers except superintendents of schools. was marked by many discordant elements, Joining him in the opposition was Senator and was further complicated by the wet- A. J. Rockne of Goodhue County, a con dry issue which transcended party lines. servative and a long-time leader both in The Republicans, who were rapidly be the Senate and in the Republican party. Rockne argued that political parties were coming known as the dry party, were in necessary to the American system of gov complete command of all three branches ernment. The party system, he said, was of the state government. anchored in the local community. Its elim In the organization of the 1913 legisla ination would destroy the roots of an ture, the Senate was guided by Lieutenant important American institution. The Repub Governor J. A. A. Burnquist of St. Paul, a licans, entrenched in all branches of state dry Republican. After a close fight among government, and powerful also in county the Republican elements, Henry Rines of and city government, had nothing to gain Mora was chosen as the Republican can from a change in the party system. The didate for speaker of the House, He was Rockne group had little choice but to fight not a radical prohibitionist, but favored the bill on the Senate floor, since progres county option and pursued a middle-of- sives controlled the elections committee. the-road policy. His solid reputation for honesty made him a natural choice for presiding officer —a man acceptable both ' The nonpartisan judicial movement died al to the drys and to the progressive Republi most as suddenly as it began. Many states aban doned the plan after a few years. Since it was cans,- This was an important asset in a adopted by Nevada in 1923, no new states have period when the drys were regularly split tried it. between the county optionists, who favored "The term "progressive" as used in this article refers merely to the branch of the Repubhcan leaving the liquor question to the voters of party that supported the general principles of each county, and the prohibitionists, who Theodore Roosevelt, as well as other moderate would settle for no less than a completely reform proposals. The progressives were opposed by the conservatives, standpatters, or regulars — dry state, and therefore opposed county all fairly synonymous terms. option. When a vote was taken on the " For the text of the Haycraft bill see Minnesota speakership, it resulted in 101 for Rines Legislature, Thirty-eighth Session, 1913, Senate File 412. 156 MINNESOTA History The Duxbury amendment, however, was primary law passed in 1912. Consequently, voted down 34 to 20. the Clague amendment passed by a vote Backed by thirteen conservative party of 35 to 22 almost without discussion, al regulars, including Duxbury and George though only 21 senators actually favored H. Sullivan of Stillwater, Rockne then con the proposal. With only a few of the ceived the idea that the proposal could be Rockne group opposing it, the amended killed by adding members of the legislature bill was passed 53 to 8, and was then sent to the list of nonpartisan officers. After con to the House.° ferring with Speaker Rines and being as sured that the House would kill any such SENATE FILE 412 was given a first read provision in its elections committee, on ing in the House on March 1, 1913, and February 27 the Rockne group, represented was referred to the elections committee, by Frank Clague, proposed an amendment where it remained for nearly three calling for the nonpartisan election of legis weeks. During this period, the political lators.* significance of the bill received real con The proposal caught the Senate by sur sideration, and lobbyists went to work. prise. Battle lines that had been forming Seeing the Republican party, which nearly slowly were altered and reinforced, for the always controlled the legislature, securely bfll now affected every member of the leg in the hands of the drys, the liquor and islature. Senator Haycraft, as the author of brewery interests quietly began to work the original bill, let it be known that he for the bill in its Senate form. Lacking a had not contemplated including state of majority in either house, the wets resorted ficers and that he was opposed to the al to an ancient propaganda technique in tered plan. He, too, hurried to the speaker order to advance the cause of the bill. of the House, and received assurance that Through Democratic Senator John Moonan the bill would not pass if it included legis and Republican Representatives G. W. lators, or that it would be so changed that Brown and H. H. Dunn, former speaker a conference committee would become of the House, the wets let it be understood deadlocked over it. that they opposed any type of nonpartisan- In the Senate, progressives who had ship, since only the drys could benefit from looked with favor upon the Haycraft bill abolishing parties. Many drys rose to the were obliged to reconsider their position in bait. the light of the maneuvers of the conserva Rural legislators, feeling that the pro tives. Confusion seemed general. Regulars posal to put county elections on a non assumed that the Republicans favored the partisan basis was sure to win, feared that proposal. Some progressives evidently as the whole burden of local political organ sumed that if a little medicine was good ization and support would fall on them.

Load more