Evening star., 1926-12-13
Not Hostile Alternative.

Not Hostile Alternative.
The invitation of the House subcom
sAittee to Wastingtonians, organized
ana unorganized, to participate in g
discussion Of suffrage" for the Dis
trict neither contemplates nor neces
Hariiy involves a resultless free.for-al
fight Of hostile alternative proposals
4n Ishmaelitish fracas, in which every
mans fist seeks every other mans
Jaw.
There is no natural or even arti
Mcial hostility between these specific
proposals. They divide into two dis
tinct classes.
One class seeks for the Washingto
slian larger participation in his munic-
ipal government. 1t includes pro-
posals to choose by popular election
the Commissioners and the Board of
Education. This kind of legislation
could have been enacted by the major
Gty vote Of Congress at any time since
1878, provided the change in the de-
tails Of the local municipal govern
n,ert involved no delegation by Con-
gress OF Its general powers under the
exclusive legislation clause of the Con-
gtitution.
The other class seeks by constitu-
tionaJ amendment recognition of resi-.
dents of the District Of Columbia as
na<Sonal Americans, and voting repre-.
sentation In the National Government,
IN Congress and in the Electoral Col
iege. The Citizens Joint Committee.
Including most Of the strong citizens
organizations which fight for national
representation. can neither favor nor
oppose such municipal proposals as
the election Of the Commissioners or
OF the Board Of Education. since both
those who favor these municipal cleo
tion proposals and those who oppose
them are substantially united in sup
port Of the movement for District rep
resentation In their National Govern
nnent.
For example. the Central Labor
Union fights for national representa-
ton and also favors every municipal
election proposal. The Board of Trade
as the other end Of the line fights for
national representation and favors no
Msunicipal election proposals.
But neither organization is logically
weakened In itS support Of American
iz.hg the Washingtonian through
grant Of participation in his National
Government by the fact that it diff
fers from the other in opinion con-
cernlng proposed changes in the
municipal government.
The issue Of national representa-.
ton must be kept entirely distinct
frore that Of the form of local govern
inert. for otherwise success for the
proposed constitutional amendment
woald be endangered. Either those
who favor radical change of the munic-
fpsi government or those who oppose
I. can defeat The proposition which
requires for adoption a two.thirds vote
os Zach House Of Congress.
The proposed amendment, without
aEectiny IN the slightest the form OF
local government or the existing pow.
e. cf Congress to declare what shape
that municipal government shall take
prepares the way for the District to
Secure by majority vote Of Congress
v6ftng representation in Congress and
the Electoral College. 1t gives a new
povsr to Congress and raises the pos
sfbttity of a new power of value to be
en56ysd by the District.
National representation stands for
e distinctive American right, honor
sac p6ver to which the Washingto
rsia- IN entitled, and which he can en-
sey without injury either to himself OF
20 yas Va ion.
Every thoughtful Washingtonian
SEhethSr ne favors or opposes the pres
ent form Of municipal government
sheuia labor energeticaIly and en-.
thIsiastioally for the adoption of this
Wisc. wholesome and equitable amend
meat