The NPL Insurgency
In 1916, the League won an easy victory. League members were now governor, attorney general, secretary of state, agriculture commissioner – all but state treasurer (the only candidate to run as a Democrat). League-endorsed candidates won 81 of 113 House seats and 18 of the 25 open Senate seats. But it was the League-endorsed candidates for state Supreme Court that were key. Before the League introduced its industrial platform, it would require amending the State constitution.
The League's platform was an ambitious plan for regaining control of the state's economy. It called for the creation of a system of state-owned mills, elevators, and packing plants, a system of state-owned rural credit banks, state-funded hail insurance, state inspection to replace the Minneapolis miller's grain grading and dockage schemes, and tax exemption for farm improvements.
To secure its full industrial program, League leaders decided the surest way was to replace the entire state constitution with a new one that would allow the state to engage in any business or commercial activity. The now-famous House Bill 44 raised a storm of protest. Although the bill, which was approved by the League-dominated House, was defeated in the Senate the 1917 Legislature enacted many of the League's more moderate reforms.
The opposition began to organize. Before the fall 1918 election, The Twin Cities-funded interests began to organize the Independent Voter Association to defeat the League's Industrial Program. The IVA was made up of anti-League Republicans and Democrats who doubted the wisdom of the League's Socialist-flavored program of state-owned industries. The IVA would prove a formidable foe.
The election of 1918 saw a League landslide. League candidates now held all state offices except Superintendent of Schools, four out of five judgeships on the Supreme Court, and decisive majorities in both the House and Senate. The success of the League's Industrial platform seemed assured.