Jasper County Democrat, Volume 15, Number 75, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 21 December 1912 — Page 2 Advertisements Column 3 [ADVERTISEMENT]

man view of municipal duty. It is designed to cut politics out., make efficiency the standard of administration and to lodge the control of government in the hands of the people who create it.

Folly of Partisan Warfare Over City Government. Why should the voters of a city, all equally interested in the welfare of their community, divide into hostile camps, the one shouting. “We’ll elect Jim Crow mayor because he’s a democrat,” and the o|;her shrieking “We’ll elect Bill Snow mayor because he’s a republican.”? Why should not the two bodies unite to proclaim, “We want good government at home and all of us together will vote for it?” The cry, “For the Party,” has spelled waste in the cities of this country that exceeds the cost of the great Civil war. Add to that what the interests of cities have suffered from the evils inflicted by “city politics” and the total cannot be even guessed at. Why should there be partisan divisions and contests in city government? Why should city government and city problems be complicated with state and national political machines and state and national issues? No city can settle a foreign policy. No city can fix the standard of currency. No city can rule peace or war. No city can frame schedules of the tariff. No city can direct the law-making policy of its state. There is nothing any city can do to define the difference between one political party and another.

The city deals with the conditions under which its inhabitants must live and with which all its business and industry must be surrounded. Its functions are a labor of business, not the construction and enforcement of “policy.” Its work is to see that the city is kept clean and sanitary; that its thoroughfares are maintained; that light, water and transportation are provided; that peace and order are enforced; that life and property are made secure. There is no “policy” in the doing of these and all other things that fall within the obligations of local government and over which no question can be raised. The only consideration is that at reasonable cost to the people these things be done well. There can be no party “policy” in making a contractor with the city fulfill his contract. There can be no party “policy” in making the seller of supplies to the city “deliver the goods.” There can be no party “policy” In the city’s progress or the aids it lends to progress. There can be no party “policy” in preserving the property of the public, instead of permitting it to lapse into decay and ruin. There is no way that is “democratic” or way that is “republican” of managing the affairs of a city. There is a way that is bad and a way that is good—the way that is political and the way that is business. Cities cannot be managed by the histories and traditions of parties. They cannot be managed by what a majority of their voters may think as to revision of the tariff. They must be managed by the common sense and spirit of their people working through servants chosen for fitness and kept for efficiency. The Business System of Government for Indiana Cities cuts political parties out of the municipal situation. It founds administration of the public business upon the principle of expert efficiency. It allows the people to retain constant control of their home government.

Can the Candidates Afford It? The voters of a city divide into two war parties each bearing a factional name. They engage every four years in a battle called a campaign for possession of the offices of the city. It costs money to run a campaign. Sometimes the cost isi heavy and compels expenditures that equal the principal salary list for the entire term for which the successful candidates were chosen. Where does the money come from? Can a man who gets an aggregate of say SB,OOO for a service of four years as mayor afford to spend $5,000 to obtain the place? Can a ward councilman who receives $l6O a year to perform his duties afford to spend SSOO to SI,OOO to procure his own election? What is there in the office of counoilman to justify such an outlay of money to win the election? To whose interest is it that a councilman be inducted into office at such a cost? In Indiana the mayor is the only important elective official in the executive branch of city government. The brunt of the campaign assessment must fall upon him or those who want him. Can the man of average means stand it? If he doesn’t stand it, who does ? Are appointments contingently sold? Are favors conditionally promised? And if these things are true, is there a good guarantee that the administration will be conducted with the public interests uppermost? Why should the people divide? Why should men be chosen to office merely because they have “put up?” Why gain the support of any interests by promising them something the people have the first right to know about and examine? The Business System of Government for Indiana Cities abolishes parties in municipal affairs. The highsalaried officials, Including the mayor, are appointed. The recall stands against officials who are not what they should be.