The Washington times., 1920-02-04
Why Should Not District People
Elect Their Commissioners!
By BILL PRICE

it an appropriate time for those Senators of the
Senate District Committee who favor suffrage in the Dis
trct to make real for election by people OF
their Commissioners and other local officials whose quafca
tons entitled to be passed upon by the pubhci
Entirely eliminating the issues raised In the conhrma
ton of Dr. VAN SCHAICK, there is no better time than
this for Congress recognize that If self government is
good for all the little nations OF the world and Tor those
people who want to be removed from the yoke OF other
nations little bit of political liberty might be good for
the 100000 people who live under the shadow OF the great
dome of the nation IS Capitol
Full suffrage for the District-elecon of Senator'S
Representatives and Presidential electors-w take many
years to bring about if Congress within the next few
years should agree to submit to the nation constitutional
amendment comforting these broad suffrage rights upon
Washington people The States unquestionably in sym
pathy with the plight of the District would ratify such an
amendment but the process would require years The
stumbling block to complete suffrage here is not in the
possibility that the States would refuse their sanction 1t
in Congress- especially in the Senate There exists in the
latter body ceiling that the big and popuous States of
the country unfairly counerbalanced by equal
sentaon from little States OF which do not have half
the population of the District but which elect two Senators
each whose votes weghy in the Senate those of
the Senators from New York. Pennsy ylvana Ohio What
few thousand people in Nevada want has the power
in the Senate the millions of voters of New York
This feeling is manifestly unfair to the District of
Columbia whose population exceeds that OF the largest OF
some of these little States
But this line Of opposition cannot possibly weigh with
the Senate in giving at the earliest moment the right OF
local suffrage to votecss people who faithfully answer
right to directly say who their local rulers should be-
No constitutional amendment is necessary for suffrage
for local officers Congress has the power to pass law at
once conferng these rights This suffrage would not
ct in the least with the rights Of Congress the Dis
trict would not take single bit Of control from that body
1t would simply enable Washington people to say who
they prefer to administer their local affairs These
Office would have to cooperate with Congress- respond to
its requests just do those who picked by the
White House.
1t is pretty safe to that much of the objection to
Dr. Van Schack has not been personal He is good
But people here have long felt that they virtually
ignored by the White House in the selection of Commits
sioner and there is way of stopping the irritation that
manifests itself under the circumstances
The cost of holding elections would be as nothing com
pared the satisfaction of free in partial possession
of rights they should have been denied Porto Ric
granted greater degree of local segovenment than
could possibly be conferred here by Congress without
amendment of the Constitution 1t is hardly to be doubted
that the people of Washington just intelligent and
able to pass judgment local affairs the people
of Porto Rico Congress to itself in this city far
greater powers than the of Porto Rico has there
II F r n A nj F. N