Let us give the green light for the next 700 referendums!

700 is not a magic number. Today, we find it in political and historical writings. Since the founding of the federal state in 1848, voters in modern Switzerland have had the opportunity to vote on 700 federal resolutions – be it on the Federal Constitution as a whole, on new or amended constitutional articles, on new or amended laws, or many other matters more – such as the creation of the Canton of Jura or the purchase of fighter aircraft. What we must not forget: Switzerland’s political culture also includes tens of thousands of referendums at the cantonal and municipal levels.
  The two most important referendums for our country will follow in the near future. The framework agreement with the EU is intended to integrate Switzerland more closely into the EU institutional framework, and it would significantly restrict direct democracy. A vote on the “Neutrality Initiative,” which aims to renew and strengthen Switzerland’s traditional neutrality, is expected in 2026.

NZZ journalists Peter A. Fischer and Thomas Fuster recently interviewed economics professor Ernst Baltensberger, the “doyen of Swiss monetary policy,” as the two journalists called him. The discussion focussed on the current monetary policy of the Swiss National Bank (SNB) and the existing agreements with the EU. (Fischer, Peter A.; Fuster, Thomas. “The doyen of Swiss monetary policy questions the SNB: “I would have been a bit more cautious with the interest rate cut.’ ” In: “Neue Zürcher Zeitung” of 25 July 2025.) Ernst Baltensberger has written an impressive book entitled “The Swiss Franc – A Success Story.” He also conferred a doctorate on Thomas Jordan, the long-time president of the SNB.
  Baltensberger rejects the EU treaties because they restrict direct democracy: “...not because I am fundamentally opposed to contractual obligations with the EU. Of course, monetary independence does not preclude agreements in the area of trade. My reservations are of a political nature. Preferential access to the single market is undoubtedly worth something. But not as much as is often claimed. It is not as if we can no longer export to the EU without these treaties – even if that is sometimes how it is presented.”
  Question posed by the journalists: What are your reservations? Baltensberger: “For me, the political price of the EU treaties is too high. The treaties affect the Swiss direct democracy. The right to referendum would still exist, but it would be severely restricted in material terms because we would no longer be able to vote with the same freedom.”

Referendums in a historical context

Baltensberger’s statement on the planned EU treaties is not surprising. Rather, it poses the question of whether we are aware of the importance of direct democracy for our state and our prosperity. It is not just the individual vote or the total number of 700 referendums that is impressive. Their true significance often only becomes apparent in their historical context. I would like to demonstrate this in the following.
  I will select a few examples at the federal level from the long history of direct democracy – primarily referendums from the pre-World War II era, which are less well known today. (Although recent referendums could also demonstrate the significance of direct democracy throughout history – for example, the numerous referendums on agricultural policy, immigration, or federal taxes.)

The Founding of the Swiss National Bank
as a Reflection of Federalism

In 1897, the Federal Council and parliament wanted to establish a federal bank – a state institution like the Swiss Federal Railways, which had been founded shortly before. The people said no – and in 1905, without a referendum being held, the National Bank was founded as a special-law joint-stock company in which the cantons hold a majority and the federal government has no stake at all. Citizens can purchase shares for little money and participate in the general meeting. The SNB is a reflection of federalism and citizen-centricity. It is unique in its kind. The Swiss franc, as Baltensberger writes in his book, enjoys trust like no other currency. There were frequent referendums, even in the area of monetary policy –for example, on “Bretton Woods” and the gold reserves. (Wüthrich 2020, pp. 262–293)

Direct democracy
does not work with class struggle

Currently, the Young Socialists are calling for a 50 per cent federal inheritance tax on any amount exceeding 50 million Swiss francs in order to “fairly” finance climate policy. We will vote on this on November 30. Did you know that after the First World War, the Social Democrats launched a popular initiative demanding that the wealthy, in particular, pay for war debts? Specifically, citizens with assets exceeding 3 million Swiss francs would have had to pay a onetime tax of 60 per cent of their assets. At that time, Switzerland was not as rich as it is today. Only 6 per thousand of the population would have been affected by this tax. The result was record-breaking: 86 per cent of eligible voters went to the polls. 87 per cent of those who voted, and all cantons, rejected the popular initiative. Then, as now, voters knew that a large portion of these assets were invested in the SMEs that sustain our economy. The Social Democrats had a 30 per cent share of the vote at the time. Numerous popular initiatives have been submitted to date that would have taxed the “super-rich” even more heavily in one way or another. All of them were rejected. (Wüthrich 2020, p. 238)

Direct democracy paves
the way to social peace

In the autumn of 1918, in response to the hardships and the poor supply situation after the First World War, a general strike broke out also in Switzerland. The world was in turmoil in many countries. The Federal Council called in the army. 250,000 strikers faced approximately 90,000 soldiers in 117 locations across Switzerland. The situation was extremely dangerous. There were casualties. The Spanish flu raged in the background. The Federal Council succeeded in persuading the strike leadership to relent by promising to ensure that the most important points in their list of demands would be voted on, and indeed they were, resulting in a yes vote for proportional representation in parliament and for immediate re-election of the National Council according to the new principle in 1918, as well as to two yes votes for a 48-hour week in private and in public companies in 1920 and 1924. In addition, there were four votes on better food security. (Wüthrich 2020, p. 190)
  In 1925, the people voted in favour of the important constitutional article governing today’s Old Age and Survivors’ Insurance (OASI). Due to the difficult times, however, it would still take a long time before the implementing law came into force. In 1931, during the economic crisis, the people rejected an initial legislative proposal for the OASI. During World War II, the Swiss Association of Commercial Employees proposed that the future OASI should be financed with employee and employer contributions as well as federal funds, as was the case with the wage and income compensation scheme for soldiers. The Association submitted a popular initiative. Federal Councillor Stämpfli took up the idea and promised that the OASI would come into force on 1 January 1948. He kept his word. Parliament went along with this, and the Association withdrew its popular initiative. Other circles nevertheless launched a referendum against the new OASI law. But on 7 June 1947, the people approved the law we have today with 80 per cent of the vote. Many more votes on the design and financing of the OASI have followed since then. The Old Age and Survivors’ Insurance (OASI) has become the mainstay of the Swiss welfare state. Recently, a popular initiative called for a 13^th month of OASI pension payments, which we retirees will receive beginning next year. (Wüthrich 2020, pp. 102–106, 188–190)

Direct democracy defuses
social tensions and strengthens
cohesion in the free market economy

During the economic crisis of the 1930s, the Federal Council and Parliament decided to reduce the wages of federal employees by 7.5 per cent because not only tax revenues but also prices had generally fallen during the economic crisis. Tariff barriers severely hampered the economy. The USA, for example, imposed a 60 per cent tariff on Swiss watches. The mayor of Biel, the centre of the watch industry, called for a boycott of US products. In 1933, the Federal Council described the economic situation as follows: “the satisfactory economic and financial situation has been destroyed within four years.” Parliament and the Federal Council cut wages for federal employees and for the staff of federal companies such as the Swiss Federal Railways (SBB). The unions collected more than 300,000 signatures within a few weeks (30,000 were required at the time for a referendum). The federal law imposing wage cuts was decisively rejected in the vote.
  In 1935, the so-called “Crisis Initiative,” submitted by the Social Democrats and unions with over 300,000 signatures (at that time, 50,000 were required for a popular initiative), was put to a vote. It would have given the Federal Council extensive powers to combat the crisis through planning – with job creation measures, unemployment insurance, and measures to relieve farmers and businesses. These measures were to be financed through debt – as recommended by the British economist John Maynard Keynes. Economic freedom would have been significantly restricted, and the right to referendum would have been suspended for five years.
  Voter turnout was once again very high – 85 per cent. The crisis initiative was clearly rejected with 57 per cent nays. Most cantons also voted against. The vote calmed the heated mood and provided a strong impetus for reforming the liberal economic constitution of 1874, which was indeed then done.
  Even before the war, the Swiss parliament revised the economic constitution – that is, the economic articles in the Federal Constitution. Parliament adhered to the core of 1874: freedom of trade and economic pursuit (now economic freedom) were to continue as the guiding principle of the economic order and remain a fundamental individual right. To this end, the people’s representatives created a robust regulatory framework that took into account the painful experiences of the economic crisis and limited freedom. This allows the federal government to enact legal regulations on employee protection, employee-employer relations, vocational training, job placement, and unemployment insurance. The federal government can also take many more measures, e.g. against the harmful effects of cartels. In a few areas, the federal government can deviate from the principle of economic freedom: for example, in the area of agriculture or to preserve endangered economic sectors and professions. In 1939, the parliamentarians’ work was complete and ready for a vote. This vote was postponed until after the war.

Enthusiastic atmosphere of departure

Despite the war, the opposition was not long in coming. After the Wehrmacht’s defeat at Stalingrad in 1943, the threat of an attack on Switzerland was no longer considered high. Many of the 600,000 soldiers who had been drafted initially returned to work, and the population began to turn their minds to Switzerland’s future. A genuine sense of optimism increasingly emerged, even though the war was far from over. The Social Democrats presented their manifesto, “The New Switzerland,” and collected 150,000 signatures for a popular initiative that, unlike the parliamentary proposal, did not mention economic freedom: “Any attempt to maintain the fundamental principle of a ‘free economy’ and merely seek to mitigate its ‘dark sides’ is doomed to failure. No tinkering around with occasional interventions can help,” they said. Banks, insurance companies, and key industries were to be “communalised”, and smaller businesses were to merge into cooperatives (Rote Revue April 1943, cf.Current Concerns No. 25 of 12 November 2018). The Social Democrats were not alone. Three other popular initiatives were also submitted during or shortly after the war. In contrast, the Ring of Independents (a Swiss social liberal political party that existed between 1936 and 1999), led by Gottlieb Duttweiler, campaigned for even greater entrepreneurial freedom -combined with ethics and responsibility - with a popular initiative. “Social capital” was their battle cry. Citizens were to take the social design of economic freedom into their own hands. Duttweiler had recently converted his Migros stock company into a cooperative by giving each of his loyal customers a share certificate worth 30 Swiss francs. One per cent of sales was to be used for social and cultural purposes. This has remained the case up to today. With their initiative in the agricultural sector, the Young Farmers demanded a new land law that would link land to labour. The Free Economy Movement (which was guided by the ideas of Silvio Gesell) launched an initiative demanding a new monetary and economic order.
  These four popular initiatives were all rejected in the popular referendum after the war – and the parliament’s new economic articles were adopted on the same day as the OASI (Old Age and Survivors’ Insurance), all of these entering into force on 1 January 1948. They would become pillars of the Swiss liberal and social market economy in the decades to come, contributing significantly to prosperity. Some of the numerous rejected popular initiatives would later be incorporated into legislation (an approach we can still observe today). The interaction between the people and the authorities had worked excellently during a difficult time.

Conclusion: Direct
Democracy is a Success Story

Recent Swiss history is truly fascinating. In the few examples described above, the people, in cooperation with their political authorities, have significantly shaped the course of history and made politics come to life. Direct democracy may have slowed down politics – but this is usually not harmful. Rather, it strengthens the sense of community, group-identity and shared responsibility, and prevents violence. Direct democracy holds together the multifaceted Switzerland with its three parts and four language regions. Even in difficult times, when tensions were high and political views diverged widely, direct democracy created a sense of unity and stabilised Switzerland. In my view, the 700 votes – at the federal level alone – laid the foundation for modern Switzerland and the prosperity we enjoy today. There have never been any “firewalls” – at most, an occasional “Röstigraben” between German- and French-speaking Switzerland (the word “Röstigraben” due to different culinary preferences). Today, we are far too unaware of how much we owe to direct democracy!
  We must not forget that the small-scale, bottom-up federal structures of today’s Swiss Confederation could not have emerged if the cooperative idea had not been established and cultivated in various ways in the Old Swiss Confederacy – ever since 1291.
  Let us all give the green light to the next 700 referendums – especially in these times, when democracies in many countries are struggling and facing unrest. Politicians often search for ideas on how to better involve citizens. For Switzerland, it is more about becoming aware of what we owe to direct democracy and that we have every reason to preserve and nurture this treasure at all political levels.
  Professor Baltensberger is right when he points out that direct democracy is an essential part of Switzerland’s political culture. A stronger institutional connection to the EU, which operates quite differently, would be a spanner in the works. It does not fit in and can only be harmful.
  It is a strange thing that referendums carry so little weight in geopolitics. After all, the evidence for their peacemaking effect has long been on the table. •

For further reading:

Wüthrich, Werner. Wirtschaft und direkte Demokratie in der Schweiz – Geschichte der freiheitlich-demokratischen Wirtschaftsverfassung der Schweiz (Economy and Direct Democracy in Switzerland – the History of Switzerland’s Liberal-Democratic Economic Constitution). Zeitfragen Publishers, Zurich 2020; ISBN 978-3-909234-24-0

Linder, Wolf; Bolliger, Christian; Rielle, Christian. Handbuch der eidgenössischen Volksabstimmungen 1848–2007 (Handbook of Federal Referendums 1848–2007), Bern 2010

Studer, Thomas; Schaltegger, Christoph. Die Finanzgeschichte der Schweiz (The Financial History of Switzerland), Freiburg im Breisgau 2025