The high cost of elections in Chicago and Cook County;

THE HIGH COST of ELECTIONS

IN

CHICAGO AND COOK COUNTY

.

REPORT PREPARED BY THE
CHICAGO BUREAU OF PUBLIC EFFICIENCY

315 PLYMOUTH COURT

ORGANIZED 1910

TRUSTEES

JULIUS RdSENWAL6, 'CKairman

ONWARD BATES JOSEPH CUMMINS

VICTOR ELTING WALTER L. FISHER

ALLEN B. POND GEORGE G. TUNELL

HARRIS S. KEELER, Director

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION 4

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS I

TEXT OF REPORT »

Ways of Reducing Election Costs 9

Too Many Registrations 9

Central Registration Recommended 10

The Resultant Money Saving 11

Too Many Elections 11

Dates for Judicial Elections Should Not Be Fixed by the

Constitution 12

Choosing Small Park District Commissioners 13

The Park Consolidation Act 15

Too Many Primaries 16

Non-Partisan Law Should Apply to Mayor 16

Too Many Elective Officials — The Short Ballot Needed 16

Illinois Should Have the Real Australian Ballot 18

Presidential Electors Should be Voted for and Counted as

a Group 18

Too Many Election Precincts 19

The One-Election-a-Year Proposal 20

CALENDAR OF ELECTION EVENTS IN CHICAGO FOR A

PERIOD OF YEARS 22

TABLE SHOWING ELECTION COSTS IN CHICAGO FOR A

SERIES OF YEARS . 24

INTRODUCTION

The accompanying report on ' ' The High Cost of Elec-
tions in Chicago and Cook County" is issued by the Chi-
cago Bureau of Public Efficiency with the three-fold
purpose of furnishing information to the public; of
urging upon the Illinois Legislature the need of changing
present laws so as to reduce election costs; and of sug-
gesting to the Constitutional Convention the modification
of provisions of the Constitution affecting elections.

Much of the work of collecting information for this
report and of preparing it for publication was performed
by Mr. George C. Sikes, former secretary of the Bureau,
who has been specially engaged to assist in dealing
with problems of reorganization of local government in

Chicago.

CHICAGO BUREAU OF PUBLIC EFFICIENCY,

HARRIS S. KEELER,

Director.
January, 1921.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

1. That in place of the present legal requirement of a
complete new registration of voters by precincts every
two years there be a new registration by precincts in
presidential years only and that the registration lists be
allowed to stand for four years; that there be only one
intermediate registration by precincts, to be held
prior to the November election of an even year other than
the presidential year; that all other intermediate regis-
trations by precincts be abolished; that provision be
made for a system of central registration whereby voters
can register at the City Hall at any time except during a
designated number of days prior to an election or a pri-
mary.

2. That provisions of the Constitution relating to the
election of judges be so modified as to authorize the Leg-
islature to bring about a reduction in the number of
elections by consolidating judicial elections with city
elections.

3. That the term of supreme court judges be changed
from nine years to some even number of years, so as to
make it possible to consolidate elections for such judges
with other elections not partisan in nature, and to avoid
the occasional election now necessary solely for choosing
one supreme court judge.

4. That the law relating to small park districts be so-
modified that the holding of separate elections for choos-
ing small park district commissioners will be avoided.

5. That the Legislature change the tax rate provisions
of the park consolidation act of 1915, thus paving the

CMca-go Bureau of Public Efficiency

way for its re-submission to a referendum vote. The
adoption of this act by the city and by the park districts
would eliminate elections for small park district commis-
sioners.

6. That the primary for the nomination of mayor, city
clerk and city treasurer be eliminated by applying to
these offices the provisions of the law for the non-partisan
election of aldermen.

7. That the Constitution and laws of the State be
changed so as to effect a reduction in the number of elec-
tive officials.

8. That the ballot law be amended to eliminate the
party column and party circle, substituting instead the
real Australian or Massachusetts form of ballot, on
which the names of candidates are arranged under the
designation of the office to be filled.

9. That presidential electors be voted for and counted
as a group, as is already done in some other states, thus
reducing the size of the ballot and the work of counting.

10. That the size of election precincts be increased,
and the number reduced — thus effecting large savings —
as rapidly as the progress of the movement for shorten-
ing the ballot and otherwise simplifying election proce-
dure will permit.

11. That the Constitutional Convention abandon the
plan tentatively approved by it to write into the Constitu-
tion the one-election-a-year policy, inasmuch as that pol-
icy is legislative in nature and does not properly belong
in the basic law. The proposal in question is especially
objectionable because it repeals outright the law for the
non-partisan election of aldermen in Chicago and restores
the bad practice of making election days legal holidays,
thus setting aside two beneficial legislative measures
secured from the 1919 session of the General Assembly
after years of effort on the part of citizen bodies.

THE HIGH COST OF ELECTIONS

IN
CHICAGO AND COOK COUNTY

Election costs in Chicago and Cook County have gone
up enormously in recent years. The high cost of govern-
ment is an important element in the high cost of living.
Needless election expense constitutes a substantial part
of the high cost of government.

While the tendency in election costs thus far has been
rapidly upward, counter influences at last are at work.
Substantial economies will be effected by the fifty-ward
law and the law for the non-partisan election of alder-
men in Chicago, recently adopted by referendum vote.
Whether these economies merely will retard the rapid
rate of increase, or will reverse the upward movement
and lead to lower costs is dependent on future develop-
ments. On the basis of continued operation of the laws
as they now stand, election costs in this community
should begin to show an actual decline in 1922. The dan-
ger is that past experiences will be repeated and that
changes will be made which unnecessarily will start the
trend upward again.

Election expenses can be reduced still further without
impairment of the governmental machinery. In the main
the remedies lie with the Legislature and the Constitu-
tional Convention. Existing arbitrary statutory and con-
stitutional requirements are responsible for most of the
needless expense involved in conducting elections.

In a report issued by the Chicago Bureau of Public
Efficiency late in 1912, entitled " Growing Cost of Elec-

8 Chicago Bureau, of Public Efficiency

tions in Chicago and Cook County, " it was pointed out
that election costs in this community had more than
trebled in sixteen years. They had grown from less than
$300,000 in 1896 to almost $1,000,000 in 1912. In 1916 the
election expenses for Chicago and Cook County exceeded
$2,000,000, which means that they had more than doubled
in the four-year period from 1912 to 1916. The increase
of 1920 over 1916 was not so marked, but the figures for
1920 are in excess of those for 1916 by over $200,000.
In 1920, the law for the non-partisan election of aldermen
in Chicago, which was then in operation for the first time,
effected a saving of approximately $200,000. There was
a separate judicial election in June, 1916, costing about
$150,000, and no corresponding election in 1920. Except
for these circumstances the cost in 1920 would have been
about $550,000 higher than in 1916.

There are several causes for the rapid advance in elec-
tion costs. Growth of population, of course, is one. Ex-
tension of the suffrage to women is another. More voters
mean more precincts (involving substantial additional
cost) and larger expenses for printing, supplies, and
other purposes. Increase in the number of registrations
as an incident to the introduction of the direct primary
system has caused much of the advance in costs. Under
the old convention system a primary for the selection
of delegates was not preceded by a precinct registration.
The direct primary law did not specifically require such
registration, and evidently the Legislature did not con-
template it. But the courts ruled that a direct primary
was an election. Under that ruling, the general provision
of law requiring a registration by precincts prior to every
regular election, except judicial elections, became applic-
able to primary elections.

The High Cost of Elections 9

WAYS OF REDUCING ELECTION COSTS

The principal ways to lower election costs are :

1. Reduce the number of registrations.

2. Reduce the number of elections.

3. Reduce the number of primaries.

4. Shorten the ballot.

5. Increase the size of election precincts, thus reduc-
ing expenditures for salaries of judges and clerks, rental
of polling places, and cartage of booths and supplies.

TOO MANY REGISTRATIONS

A registration in Chicago is more expensive than the
election which it precedes. For an intermediate registra-
tion the three judges are on duty two days ; the two clerks,
three days. Each receives $5 a day. Thus the cost per
precinct for salaries of judges and clerks is $60. The
rental of a polling place for registration day and revi-
sion night is $8, making a total of $68 for each precinct
for salaries of judges and clerks and rental of polling
places. With 2210 precincts in the city, the aggregate
cost on this account is $150,280. There are some other
expenses, of course, for supplies and overhead. The fore-
going figures are for an intermediate registration. There
is at present an entirely new registration of voters in
October of each even numbered year. The judges and
clerks are then on duty an additional day, making a fur-
ther expense of $25 for salaries of judges and clerks and
of $5 for rental of polling place, thus raising the cost of
registration per precinct from $68 to $98.

For an election the salary of judges and clerks is $7 a
day each and the rental of polling places is $7, making a
total of $42 per precinct. Printing and other expenses
for an election are higher than for a registration, but not
enough more to equal the added cost for services for
judges and clerks for a registration.

10 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency

Under the Constitution of Illinois, a person otherwise
qualified is entitled to vote if he has lived in a precinct 30
days. Therefore, some form of opportunity to register
must be afforded to voters within 30 days before each
election, or a qualified elector must be allowed to vote by
affidavit. At present voting by affidavit is allowed at
judicial elections and at some special elections. But use
of this practice on a large scale would not tend to pro-
mote the purity of elections. The alternative to registra-
tion by precincts prior to each election is some form of
central registration. This plan, like all methods for
dealing with election problems, has critics, but the Bu-
reau believes it should be adopted as a substitute for
some — but not all — registrations by precincts.

Central Registration Recommended
The recommendations of the Bureau are :

1. That there be a complete new registration by pre-

cincts prior to the November election in each
presidential year, and that in place of the pres-
ent legal requirement of an entirely new regis-
tration every two years, the registration lists
be allowed to stand for four years.

2. That an intermediate registration by precincts be

held prior to the November election in each even
numbered year other than a presidential year,
and that all other intermediate registrations by
precincts be abolished.

3. That provision be made by law whereby persons

qualified to vote may register at any time at the
office of the Board of Election Commissioners
in the City Hall, except during a designated
number of days just prior to an election or a
primary.

The plan suggested in these recommendations, if
adopted, would operate to eliminate, during a four-year
period, registrations as follows :

The High Cost of Elections 11

In a presidential year, one registration before the
presidential preferential primaries in April ; also one
registration before the September primaries.

In an odd numbered year in which a mayor is not
elected, one registration prior to the aldermanic elec-
tion.

In an even numbered year that is not a presiden-
tial year, one registration before the September pri-
maries; also one of the two registration days in
October.

In an odd numbered year in which a mayor is
elected in Chicago, two registrations ; one before the
primary and one before the election.

The Resultant Money Saving

This program would mean the elimination of six com-
plete registrations (registration, canvass and revision)
and one additional registration day in each four-year
period. The amount of the money saving thus effected
during four years would be in excess of $1,000,000. The
additional cost of the central registration system should
be less than a fifth of that amount, which means that the
net saving for the period would be in excess of $800,000,
or an average annual saving of over $200,000.

TOO MANY ELECTIONS

With rare exceptions, there have been at least two elec-
tions a year in Chicago, and frequently three. Not since
1913 has there been a year in which only one election
occurred. Hereafter the number of elections will be
materially reduced by the fifty-ward law. Because of
that law, city elections will be held every two years only,
in odd numbered years. Elections for national, state and
county offices are held biennially, in even numbered years.
Therefore, were it not for judicial elections which occur
at separate times, and for yearly spring elections for com-
missioners in small park districts in some parts of the

12 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency

city, Chicago from now on would be on a one-election-a-
year basis.

The Constitution requires the election of supreme court
judges and circuit court judges on the first Monday in
June. The Legislature has fixed the dates for choosing
most of the superior court judges in Cook County at times
when no other officials are elected. All the circuit court
judges are elected at one time. Terms of superior court
judges do not expire together. One superior court judge
was elected in April, 1919, at the same time as a city elec-
tion, for a six-year term. One superior court judge will
be elected in June, 1921, when the 20 circuit judges are
chosen. Six superior court judges will be elected in June,
1922, and 12 at a separate judicial election in November,
1923.

Dates for Judicial Elections Should Not Be Fixed by the
Constitution

The term of supreme court judges is nine years, which
is an awkward one for election purposes. The Bureau
believes the term should be eight or ten or twelve years,
instead of nine, and recommends to the Constitutional
Convention the change of the term to some even number
of years.

In June, 1924, a judicial election mil be held in Cook
County for choosing one supreme court judge, no other
official bemg elected at that time. The cost for this sepa-
rate election for one judge will be about $150,000.

The terms of superior court judges should be so ad-
justed by the Constitution that they would expire to-
gether, thus making possible the election of all superior
court judges at one time. The judicial plan recommended
by the Constitutional Convention committee on judicial
department does not correct the present arrangement, but
leaves the terms of superior court judges expiring at dif-
ferent times.

The High Cost of Elections 13

The Bureau believes that the specific dates for judicial
elections, instead of being fixed absolutely in the Consti-
tution, should be left for designation by the Legislature.

The principle of the selection of judges at separate
times, embodied in the Illinois constitution of 1870, may
or may not be wise, according to circumstances. Un-
doubtedly it is better to have judicial elections separate
from other elections, notwithstanding the added expense
involved, if judges are to be nominated and elected on
partisan tickets. It may even be undesirable to elect
judges on a non-partisan ballot at the time of a national
or state election in which party feeling runs strong. It
might be wise, however, to combine judicial and city elec-
tions, both conducted on non-partisan lines. The Legis-
lature ought to have the power to change the dates of
judicial elections so that they may occur at the same time
as city elections, if that course seems desirable. In this
connection, it may be said that municipal court judges
ought to be chosen at city elections, on a non-partisan bal-
lot, rather than on a partisan ballot at the elections for
national and state officers in November.

Choosing Small Park District Commissioners

The fifty-ward law and the law for the non-partisan
election of aldermen in Chicago will not operate to pro-
duce the full savings possible in election expenses unless
changes are made in the dates of electing small park dis-
trict commissioners. Under authority of a legislative
enactment of 1895 thirteen small park districts have been
created which lie wholly within the limits of Chicago and
there are two more such districts partly within the city.
Each of these districts is governed by an elective board
of five commissioners, serving for five-year terms. One
commissioner is elected each year on the first Tuesday in
April. So long as Chicago had a city election in April
every year, this plan did not involve added expense. Here-

14 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency

after, however, under the fifty-ward law, a city election
is to be eliminated every other year. Moreover, under the
law for the non-partisan election of aldermen, the main
election for aldermen occurs in February. Only supple-
mental elections are held on the first Tuesday in April.
Supplemental elections were needed in April, 1920, in
only nine wards. As the laws now stand, therefore, in
even numbered years no city elections will be held in
Chicago. Yet in each small park district an election will
be necessary for the selection of one commissioner. In
odd numbered years in which only aldermen are elected
in Chicago an election in April for park commissioner
will be required in small park districts comprising parts
of wards in which there may be no supplemental elections
for alderman. Moreover, the city of Chicago must pay the
expenses of these needless elections for park district com-
missioners. The amount of the expense on this account
probably will exceed $25,000 in each even year and per-
haps two-thirds of that sum in each odd year in which
only aldermen are elected. The territory in Chicago
included in these small park districts has about 200 elec-
tion precincts out of 2,210 for the entire city.

The money spent in holding elections for small park
district commissioners at times when there are no other
elections is wasted. The remedy for the situation
is fairly simple, so far as park districts entirely within
the city are concerned. It could be provided that small
park district commissioners, instead of serving for five
years, with annual elections for one commissioner, should
serve for six-year terms, with biennial elections in odd
numbered years. Two of the commissioners could be
elected at one time, two at another time, and one at an-
other. To meet the situation created by the law for the
non-partisan election of aldermen, under which only sup-
plemental elections for aldermen are held in April, it
could be provided that where a park district lies entirely

The High Cost of Elections 15

within the limits of a city, as is true of 13 of the 15 small
park districts in Chicago, the date of the elections for
small park district commissioners should be the same as
the date for the main election of aldermen in such city,
which in Chicago is now the last Tuesday in February.

The Park Consolidation Act

Elections for commissioners in small park districts en-
tirely within the city of Chicago would be eliminated if
the park consolidation act passed by the Legisla-
ture in 1915 should be adopted on a referendum
vote by the people of Chicago and by the voters
of these districts. This act was submitted to a
popular vote in November, 1916, and failed to
carry. It may be resubmitted by Council ordinance, or by
petition of voters. But before there is another vote upon
it the act should be amended as to the tax rate which it
provides. Since 1915 substantial increases in the taxing
powers of the city have been made and the rate then fixed
for the consolidated government would not meet the re-
quirements of the present situation. Complete consolida-
tion with the city government of all park governments
within the city must come sooner or later. One of the
numerous advantages of such complete consolidation will
be the elimination of elections for small park district com-
missioners.

TOO MANY PRIMARIES

Reducing the number of elections tends automatically
to reduce the number of primaries. But the number of
primaries ought to be smaller than the number of elec-
tions. There should not be partisan primaries before all
elections. The Illinois direct primary law is too sweep-
ing in scope. As originally passed, it made provision for
the nomination at partisan primaries of candidates for
municipal and judicial offices as well as for those properly

16 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency

partisan in nature. By court ruling, however, the direct
primary law was made inapplicable to nominations for
circuit, superior and supreme court judges. Such nom-
inations are now made by party committees. This ar-
rangement is highly unsatisfactory and indefensible, and
cannot be expected to continue. Judicial nominations
should be made by petition and the election of judges
should be conducted on non-partisan lines. The public
should be alert to see that when a change is made from
the present absurd plan of having candidates for judicial
offices nominated by party committees, provision shall
not be made for some form of partisan direct primary or
convention nominations that will add heavily to election
costs.

Non-Partisan Law Should Apply to Mayor

The principal unnecessary partisan primary in Chicago
is that for the nomination of candidates for mayor, city
clerk and city treasurer. It is unfortunate that the law
for non-partisan elections passed by the Legislature in
1919 was confined to aldermen. That law not only intro-
duces the desirable principle of non-partisanship in the
election of members of the Chicago City Council, but it
also effects important money savings in elections at which
only aldermen are chosen. The effort to secure its appli-
cation to the office of mayor should be pressed vigorously
until success shall be attained.

TOO MANY ELECTIVE OFFICIALS— THE SHORT
BALLOT NEEDED

It is notorious that the ballot in use in Chicago at bien-
nial November elections is preposterously long. State
and county officials comprise most of the list. At city
elections the ballot is short. It is unfortunate that the
majority of the members of the Constitutional Conven-

The High Cost of Elections 17

tion are against shortening the ballot in Illinois. They
voted in committee of the whole against any reduction of
the number of elective state and county officials. How-
ever, notwithstanding this attitude of direct hostility to
the short ballot idea, they did give tentative approval to
a provision under which the Legislature at some future
time might lessen the number of elective county officials.
When it meets again next September the Convention
should be importuned to re-open the question as to state
officers and to pave the way for lessening the number of
elective state officials.

While state and county officials for the most part
are elective by the Constitution, there are some that are
statutory and can be controlled by the Legislature. A
beginning might be made in the near future by dealing
with such positions as county surveyor, clerk of the pro-
bate court and clerk of the appellate court, which the
Legislature has the power to transfer from the elective to
the appointive list.

While the long ballot contributes to the needlessly high
cost of elections, the chief charge against it is that it
interferes with intelligent popular control of government.
This is particularly true where, as in Illinois, the long
ballot is a party column ballot, with the party circle at
the top by means of which ignorant voting for a straight
party ticket containing a great many names is made easy.
It is bad enough that there should be so many officials to
elect, making a difficult and confusing task for the voter
who tries to perform his duty intelligently. But when
the ballot is equipped with the party column and the
party circle, with their invitation to easy ignorant straight
party voting, the painstaking effort of the conscientious
citizen is offset by the ignorant voting of the straight
party ticket.

18 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency

Illinois Should Have the Real Australian Ballot

The so-called Australian ballot in use in Illinois is a
perversion of the real Australian ballot, of which it is
said to be a copy. Under the real Australian ballot sys-
tem there is neither party column nor party circle. The
names of candidates are arranged in some specific order
under the designation of the office to be filled. The voter
must place a mark before or after the name of each can-
didate of his choice. The elector who knows nothing
about any of the candidates for a given office naturally
will vote for no one for that office, thus leaving the deci-
sion to those who have some basis for the ballot cast on
that particular office. When ballot reform was in the air,
and the demand was general for the adoption of the Aus-
tralian ballot, American politicians in many states man-
aged to induce the legislatures to accept the perverted
form of the Australian ballot such as is in use in Illinois.
About a third of the states of the Union — among them,
Massachusetts, New York and Minnesota — have the Aus-
tralian ballot in substantially its original unperverted
form. Illinois, with its very long ballot, especially needs
the real Australian or Massachusetts form of ballot. A
campaign should be inaugurated to bring about this much
needed change as soon as possible.

Presidential Electors Should be Voted for and Counted
as a Group

In connection with the subject of form of ballot, the
work of counting the ballots on election night would be
materially reduced by regarding the presidential elec-
tors of each party as a block or compact group, instead of
dealing with them as individual candidates. No one
should care to split his ticket for presidential electors
and there is no good reason why the opportunity should
be afforded to do so. In some states, the names of the
presidential electors do not appear on the ballot at all.

The High Cost of Elections 19

A vote for candidates for president and vice president is
counted as a vote for the list of presidential electors who
will formally cast the electoral vote of the state for those
candidates. The Illinois law should be changed so that
presidential electors of a party shall be voted for and
counted as one group.

TOO MANY ELECTION PRECINCTS

If the average size of election precincts could be in-
creased the number could be reduced, thus materially low-
ering election expenses. The present law fixes the size of
the standard precinct at 400 voters, with a mandate for
rearrangement when the number reaches 600. There are
now 884,120 registered voters in Chicago and 2,210 elec-
tion precincts, or an average of just about 400 voters to a
precinct. While some precincts are below the average
others are exceptionally large and partial rearrangement
of precinct lines is under way by which the number of pre-
cincts will be somewhat increased.

The long ballot, involving arduous work in counting, is
largely responsible for preventing a reduction in the
number of precincts. If the ballot were short at all elec-
tions, the precincts might be made to consist of 600 or 700
voters each, except in very sparsely settled areas, where
it would be necessary to take territorial considerations
into account. But the ballot is not short. At the biennial
fall primaries and elections it is very long.

If the average number of voters to a precinct could be
increased, and the number of precincts reduced, the re-
sultant money saving would be large. In the year 1920,
the expense per precinct in Chicago for salaries of
judges and clerks of election, rental of polling places, and
services of policemen on duty in polling places was over
$500. Costs per precinct were exceptionally high in 1920.
For the year 1921, however, the cost will be nearly $300 a
precinct ; for 1922, over $300 ; and for 1924, the next pres-
idential year, it will be about $425.

20 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency

THE ONE-ELECTION-A-YEAR PROPOSAL

So great is the public feeling against the expense and
nuisance of the large number of elections that the Con-
stitutional Convention has undertaken to deal with the
evil in the basic law of the State. A proposal has been
approved by the committee of the whole intended to limit
elections to one a year. Under the terms of the proposal
all regular final elections to fill offices are to be held in
November of each year, and at no other time.

While sympathizing with the desire to reduce the num-
ber of elections, the Bureau is bound to say that it would
regard the insertion in the constitution of the State of
provisions of this nature as highly objectionable. The
main trouble with the present Illinois constitution is that
it contains too many arbitrary and inelastic restrictions
and too much detailed legislation. When the Constitu-
tional Convention assembled in Springfield in January,
1920, the talk among the members was that they intended
to make a constitution, not a code of laws. Yet this Con-
vention, in planning to write into the Constitution this
one-election-a-year proposal, is repeating past mistakes
of putting arbitrary restrictions into the basic law. Worse
than that,, this proposal, if put into effect, would repeal
progressive laws recently put on the statute books after
years of effort on the part of civic organizations. The
one-election-a-year proposal, if actually put into the Con-
stitution, would repeal forthwith the law for the non-
partisan election of aldermen in Chicago, approved by the
people on a referendum, and would make impossible the
enactment thereafter by the Legislature of a similar law
embodying the principle of first and supplemental elec-
tions. This proposal by its terms would make election
days legal holidays notwithstanding the Legislature
at its last session wisely amended the law so as to reduce
the number of such holidays. The whole community does

The High Cost of Elections 21

not observe election days as holidays. The principal
effect of making them legal holidays is to interfere with
business by necessitating the closing of the banks and
other institutions and to free public employes for politi-
cal work on those days. The present law requiring em-
ployers to allow their employes a reasonable time within
which to vote should be retained, but election days should
not be legal holidays. Few except the spoils politicians
want them to be.

Instead of trying to insert in the Constitution an ine-
lastic provision for one election a year, which incidentally
repeals beneficial laws now on the statute books, the Con-
stitutional Convention ought to remove restrictions which
prevent the Legislature from reducing election costs.
Under pressure of public opinion, the Legislature already
has begun to respond to the demand for economy in this
field. It doubtless will do more in this direction if its
hands are not tied by the Constitution. As pointed out
earlier in this report, as a result of recent legislation
Chicago will be on a one-election-a-year basis, beginning
with 1922, except for separate judicial elections and for
small park district elections in about one-eleventh of the
election precincts of the city. The Bureau believes the
Legislature will do away with the separate small park
district elections when the matter is called to its atten-
tion. Probably, also, it could be prevailed upon to elimi-
nate the separate judicial elections if authorized by the
Constitution to do so. The attempt to deal with such
matters as these by inflexible provisions in the Constitu-
tion always leads to embarrassments that cannot be fore-
seen at the outset. The power should rest in the Legisla-
ture to make adjustments as experience may show them
to be necessary.

22 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency

CALENDAR OF ELECTION EVENTS IN CHICAGO
FOR A PERIOD OF YEARS*

1916 Registration, Canvass, and Revision in February.
City Primaries in February.

Registration, Canvass, and Revision in March.

City Election in April. (First Tuesday.)

Presidential Primaries in April. (Second Tuesday.)

Judicial Election in June.

Registration, Canvass, and Revision in August.

General Primaries in September.

Two Registration Days, Canvass, and Revision in October.

General Election in November.

1917 Registration, Canvass, and Revision in February.
City Primaries in February.

Registration, Canvass, and Revision in March.
City Election in April.
Judicial Election in November.

1918 Registration, Canvass, and Revision in February.
City Primaries in February.

Registration, Canvass, and Revision in March.

City Election in April.

Registration, Canvass, and Revision in August.

General Primaries in September.

Two Registration Days, Canvass, and Revision in October.

General Election in November.

1919 Registration, Canvass, and Revision in February.
City Primaries in February.

Registration, Canvass, and Revision in March.

City Election in April.

Registration, Canvass, and Revision in August.

Primaries in September. (For nomination of delegates to Consti-
tutional Convention.)

Registration, Canvass, and Revision in October.

Election in November. (For choosing delegates to Constitutional
Convention.)

*This calendar is made up on the assumption of the continued opera-
tion of the election laws as they now stand. Of course, those laws should
be modified so as to eliminate some of the registrations, elections and
primaries scheduled. Detailed study of the calendar will show substantial
reductions already made in the number of registrations, elections and
primaries on account of the so-called fifty-ward law and the law for the
non-partisan election of aldermen. The first trial of the law for the non-
partisan election of aldermen was made in 1920. The first city election
to be eliminated on account of the fifty-ward law will be that of 1922.
Elections for choosing small park district commissioners, required by
existing law to be held on the first Tuesday in April each year, are not
mentioned specifically in the calendar except when they occur as separate
elections.

The High Cost of Elections 23

1920 Registration, Canvass, and Revision in February.
City Election in February for Aldermen.

Supplemental Elections for aldermen in April. (First Tuesday.)
Elections in some parts of city on same day for choosing
small park district commissioners.

Registration, Canvass, and Revision in March before presidential
primaries.

Presidential Primaries in April. (Second Tuesday.)

Registration, Canvass, and Revision in August.

General Primaries in September.

Two Registration Days, Canvass, and Revision in October.

General Election in November.

1921 Registration, Canvass, and Revision in February.

Alderman ic- Elections in February; also city primaries for nomina-
tion of candidates for city clerk and treasurer.

Registration, Canvass, and Revision in March.

City Election in April for choosing city clerk and city treasurer;
supplemental elections for aldermen on same day.

Judicial Election in June. (For choosing 20 circuit court judges
and one superior court judge.)

1922 Separate Elections (preceded by a registration) in some parts of

city for choosing small park district commissioners.
Judicial Election in June. (For choosing six superior court

judges.)

Registration, Canvass, and Revision in August.
General Primaries in September.

Two Registration Days, Canvass, and Revision in October.
General Election in November.

1923 Registration, Canvass, and Revision in February.

City Primaries in February. (For nomination of candidates for

mayor, city clerk and treasurer). Aldermanic elections on same

day.

Registration, Canvass, and Revision in March.
City Election in April. (For choosing mayor, city clerk and city

treasurer). Supplemental elections for aldermen on same day.
Judicial Election in November. (For choosing 12 superior court

judges.)

1924 Registration, Canvass, and Revision in March.

Separate elections in some parts of city for choosing small park

district commissioners in April. (First) Tuesday.)
Presidential Primaries in April. (Second Tuesday.)
Judicial Election in June. (For choosing one supreme court judge.)
Registration, Canvass, and Revision in August.
General Primaries in September.

Two Registration Days, Canvass, and Revision in October.
General Election in November.

1925 Registration, Canvass, and Revision in February.
Aldermanic Elections in February.

Supplemental Elections for aldermen in April. Elections (preceded
by a registration) in some parts of city on same day for
choosing small park district commissioners.

1926 Separate Elections (preceded by a registration) in some parts of

city for choosing small park district commissioners.
Registration, Canvass, and Revision in August.
General Primaries in September.

Two Registration Days, Canvass, and Revision in October.
General Election in November.

Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency

COST OF ELECTIONS

For Territory under Jurisdiction of the Board of Election Commissioners (City
of Chicago and Town of Cicero)

Year

Proportion of Election Costs Charged To

Total Cost
within Juris-
diction of
Bd. of Elec.
Commissioners

City

County

Cicero

1895

$ 199,888.41

$ 48,328.16

$ 2,824.29

$ 251,040.86

1896

218,906.64

66,308.25

3,066.47

288,281.36

1897

231,108.93

32,853.08

3,726.24

267,688.25

1898

317,876.11

149,718.08

5,115.54

472,709.73

1899

259,102.12

11,131.79

2,534.40

272,768.31

1900

338,744.52

154,915.97

3,324.29

496,984.78

1901

264,030.73

11,499.84

2,830.36

278,360.93

1902

325,697.92

169,341.75

867.91

495,907.58

1903

279,466.83

44,889.70

744.36

325,100.89

1904

342,872.38

172,061.38

908.35

515,842.11

1905

338,123.78

141,760.01

1,413.49

481,297.28

1906

373,747.92

244,121.68

1,574.96

619,444.56

1907

439,943.57

12,754.82

1,204.21

453,902.60

1908

400,328.65

203,091.40

1,812.72

605,232.77

1909

387,241.45

86,568.88

2,107.74

475,918.07

1910

405,708.62

211,731.84

1,010.00

618,450.46

1911

428,061.18

244,965.12

1.029.00

674,055.30

1912

678,391.98

224,515.91

i;232.00

904,139.89

1913

382,964.74

19,999.80

1,056.00

404,020.54

1914

743,834.79

365,103.24

2,038.00

1,110,976.03

1915

715,363.82

85,411.13

5,051.00

805,825.95

1916

1,193,718.66

791,499.11

7,197.00

1,992,414.77

1917

989,365.22

105,703.42

7,416.00

1,102,484.64

1918

890,124.44

573,575.97

8,643.00

1,472,343.41

1919

1,339,985.47

477,979.06

10,347.00

l,828,31l!53

1920

1,123,681.00

973,763.11

10,726.00

2,108,170.11

The above figures are taken from the books of the Board of Election
Commissioners. They do not cover the cost of city, village, township
and other local elections in the portion of Cook County outside of Chi-
cago and Cicero, nor the expenses paid by Cook County for general state
and county elections in the portion of the county outside of Chicago and
Cicero.

For the year 1912 the expense to Cook County for state and county
elections in the county outside of Chicago and Cicero was approximately
$30,000; for 1916, $60,000; and for 1920, $125,000. Adding these figures
to the figures for the corresponding years in the last column of the
table, it will be seen that the total costs to Cook County, Chicago and
Cicero in presidential years were: 1912, not quite $1,000,000; 1916,
slightly over $2,000,000; for 1920, over $2,200,000.

137

PRIOR PUBLICATIONS

(Continued from Inutile front

24. The Monti Iti«ue« to l!e V .-u April 7, 1814. March 30, 1814.

25. A Second Plea for Publicity in the OiHee of County Treasurer. Jnly 9, 1014.

26. The Kiuoteeu Local Government* iu Cbicatco. (Second Edition.) March. 101.%.

27. Unification of Local Government* In Chicago. Jnimnry, 1017.

28. The City Manager Plnn for Chicago. October, 1017.

20. The Couii<> Hond i ,t November 0, 1017. October 30, 1017.

30. Primary Days anil Ki<>o<[cm !):>< x KM Iloll.lajn. An Instance of <,<>vern»iental

AliKiirillty and \Vnste. .November 5, 1U17. (Out of Print.)

31. ChlcnKoV. l-'iunuciiil Dlleiniua. Hepli ,'tter from City DtUeinlH Aaklnc

Civic OrRanlMitlona to Co-operate lu I r^ins a Spc-clul Se^lon of the IH.-BU-
lature to Provide Fiuanclnl Uelief for the City. December, 11)17.

32. The AVnter \Vorkn System of the City of Chli-nKO. December, 1017.

33. Univt>r»al 3Ieterine of ( hlcaicoN Water Supply. The Need for It — What It

AeoompliHh. July, IDIN.

34, ICiceMs Condemnation. M hy the <itj of Chicago Should ll,,vo tlie Power, la

Malting Public Improvements, to Tnke Property in Exccsa of Actual Kemilre-
•its. September, 181S. (Out of Print.)

35. ChicaKO'M Special Xecd for a CouMtltntionnl Convention. October 21, J

36. Proposed Tax Inereimea for the City of Cblr.-iKo, the Hoard oi (ton and

.k County, June, 101». (Oat of Print.)

37. Shall the City of Chicago Kniploy Permaneatly 1,000 Additional PolIcemenT

September 5, 11)10.

r44»ne» to Be Voted Upon A] > . i in-il «l.

RETURN

CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT

198 Main Stacks

LOAN PERIOD 1
HOME USE

2

3

4

5

6

ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS.

Renewls and Recharges may be made 4 days prior to the due date.

Books may be Renewed by calling 642-3405.

DUE AS STAMPED BELOW

JUN '/> / IQQft

FORM NO. DD6

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY
BERKELEY. CA 94720-6000

Jhica.fr o bu

r»of public

efficiency

i r.fi -H

«AR 25 1939

14 1939

7/4

-

THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY