University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository Graduate Studies Legacy Theses 2001 Populism and federalism: the interplay of direct democracy and federal institutions in Australia, Canada, Switzerland and the United States Kamena, Theodore Henry Jr. Kamena, T. H. (2001). Populism and federalism: the interplay of direct democracy and federal institutions in Australia, Canada, Switzerland and the United States (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. doi:10.11575/PRISM/16329 http://hdl.handle.net/1880/41090 doctoral thesis University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission. Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY Populism and federalism: the interplay of direct democracy and federal institutions in Australia, Canada, Switzerland and the United States Theodore Henry Karnena, Jr. A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE CALGARY, ALBERTA APRIL, 2001 O Theodore Henry Karnena, Jr. 2001 National Libraty Bibliothhque nationale 1*1 of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographic Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON KIA ON4 Ottawa ON K1 A ON4 Canada Canada Your lve Votre nllBme Our fik Notre nlltimllcd The author has granted a non- L'autew a accorde une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive pennettant a la National Library of Canada to Bibliothkque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sell reproduire, prSter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette these sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/^, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format electronique. The author retains ownership of the L'autew conserve la propriete du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protiige cette these. thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la th6se ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent Stre imprimes reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. ABSTRACT This study examines the relationship between populism and federalism. In theory, these two conceptions of society are in conflict. Populism, in its most elemental form, sees the state as a tool for the "will of the people." This will is seen as indivisible, indicating populism views society in a monist way. Federalism, on the other hand, recognizes diversity within the state through the division of sovereignty between the federal-level government and component parts of the state. Despite this theoretical conflict, however, populism, as operationalized by direct democracy, and federalism do co-exist in some federal states. To examine this co-existence, this study uses data from ballot measures in four federal states - Australia, Canada, Switzerland, and the United States - using federal- level cases fi-om Australia, Canada and Switzerland as well as sub-national cases f?om selected Swiss cantons and American states in the period 1970-94. It also searches for intervening variables which may impact the relationship, focusing on the size of jurisdictions and the role of political parties. The study concludes that populist devices may co-exist with federalism by serving as a check on national power, both through providing a popular check on legislative decisions and by restricting centralization in a federal system. Populism and federalism may also work together to provide different definitions of the "people" on different issues, but this is limited by the emergence and growth of both cooperative federalism and universal standards of rights. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project has been a part of my life for nearly seven years. I am grateful for the help and assistance of many people, I name but a few of them here. During my 17-day visit to Switzerland in 1996, I was helped by many people. I am appreciative for the assistance of the staff of the Chancellorie dYEtatde Neuchatel, and the Staatskanslei in Kanton Luzern. In particular, I wish to thank Josef Koch of the Staatskanslei for his patience in the face of a language barrier, and Alexandre Treschel of the Centre for the Study of Direct Democracy for his explanation of the einzelinitiative in Zurich. I also wish to thank the University of Calgary for the travel grant which made the visit possible. I am grateful as well to Campbell Sharman and Joel D. Sherman for their electronic correspondences, to Fred Wall for his assistance in gathering data from the Angus Reid Group, to Came Sullivan for three invaluable months of aid as my research assistant, and Jan-Peter Schernrnel for his translation of much of the German language material. I am thankful to the members of my committee, whose suggestions have vastly improved this work. And without Roger Gibbins, my Ph.D, advisor, I never would have reached this point. I want to thank everyone in the political science department at Western Washington University. It shall forever be my home, no matter where life may take me. Thanks in particular to Gene Hogan for his incredible flexibility in finding ways for me to serve; to Todd Donovan, for being an incredible resource and sounding board on direct democracy; and most of all to Don Alper, who provided me avenues for pursuing my interest in Canadian politics f?om my first term as an undergraduate. Finally, thanks to my wife, Christie and sons, Trevor and Derek. Christie, you have survived seven years of this, two of them far from other loved ones. I love all three of you more every day. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 .INTRODUCTION ................................................................. 1 Questions to be raised .............................................................2 Selection of data .....................................................................3 CHAPTER 2 - POPULISM .....................................................................13 What is populism? ..................................................................13 Rousseau and the "general will" .................................18 The virtue of the "common people" ..............................20 The critique of representative democracy .......................24 Populist support of direct democracy ............................ 28 The use of direct democracy ......................................32 Differences in populist nature of referendums & initiatives ..37 Conclusion .......................................................................... -38 CHAPTER 3 - FEDERALISM ...................................................................42 What is federalism? ................................................................42 Why federalism? ...................................................................-48 A federalist conception of society ................................................ 54 Cooperative federalism ..................... ..................................... 59 Why federalism is worth studying .................................................62 CHAPTER 4 - POPULISM AND FEDERALISM ............................................66 Madison's critique of populism ...................................................67 The shared liberty of federalism and populism ..................................70 The co-existence of federalism and populism ..................................72 CHAPTER 5 - POPULISM VERSUS FEDERALISM .......................................90 Cooperative federalism ............................................................-90 Populism's problem with cooperative federalism ............91 Canada .............................................................95 United States .......................................................97 Australia ...........................................................99 Switzerland .......................................................101 Minority rights .....................................................................105 The issue of size ....................................................................110 Conclusion ........................................................................ 114 CHAPTER 6 - NATIONAL DISTINCTIVENESS AND CASE STUDIES .............117 Switzerland ........................................................................117 Federalism in Switzerland .....................................121 Direct democracy ...............................................124 Australia ...........................................................................132 Introduction of the constitutional referendum ..............133 Referendums and Commonwealth power .................... 134 Political parties and the referendum ........................ 137 Australia and Switzerland compared .........................................-139 Canada ...........................................................................-141 The 1942 conscription plebiscite ............................142 Charlottetown Accord ......................................... 145 Role of the parties ............................149 Decentralization ..............................151 Complexity ....................................152