Evening star., 1930-06-28
What About the District?

WHdI hUUul IHc DISITlCLS
Before midnight on Monday the dead
lock between the House and Senate on
the District appropriation bill must be
broken or some method devised to pre-
vent the calamity to befall the unrep-
resented taxpayers of this community
should all funds for continuance of the
city's activities die with the death of
the fiscal year.
The extent of this calamity cannot
BE- reckoned now. The situation is
an extraordinary one, probably with
out precedent in the history of the
Capital.
Relying wholly upon the National
Legislature to legislate, and with the
legislative machinery snarled by the
hopelessly unreasonable. unethical and
uniustified attitude of the House. the
people of the District are left holding
the bag. What falls into it between
now and Monday at midnight no one
can forecast.
Debate yesterday afternoon in the
Senate emphasized the Districts pre-
dicament. Senator Jones correctly asked
why the Senate should pass the con-
tinuing resolution now before the House
when that resolution names $4,000. 900
as the amount of the Federal contribu-
ton. The S9000,000 sum is what is
holding up the regular District BILL II
the Senate must yield, it would be as
reasonable to yield on the regular Dis
trict bill as on the continuing resolu-
ton.
But, Senator Fess wanted to know. If
neither is acted on what will happen TO
the District?
THE Districts activities will STOP
said Senator Jones.
The proposal that the Senate keep
the House from adjournment until the
matter is settled reasonably would, if
carried out, develop an interesting situ-
alton in Congress. The House might re-
sort to three-day recesses throughout
the Summer. But every time it con-
vened one of the handful of members
remaining could raise the point of no
would be liable to arrest until they pre-
sented themselves in the chamber. On
the other hand, so-called gentleman's S
agreement might be entered into be-
tween the members of the House re-
naming in Washington and those leav-
ing the city whereby it would be un-
derstood that the point of no quorum
would not be raised
But, again, what about the District
of Columbia?
1t is about time for the House to
realize that 1t has gone far enough in
its efforts to cram an obstinate view
point down the throats of everybody
else. The responsibility, as one of its
members so clearly stated few days
ago, now rests squarely where it be-
longs. No reasonable man can fail
to place that responsibility after ex-
amining the facts. And the facts could
not be more clearly stated than they
were yesterday by Senator Bingham of
Connecticut when he said:
This is not question of principle;
amount which the Federal Government
should pay toward the expenses of the
District. The Senate committee. hav-
ing given the matter full and careful
study, came to the conclusion, not
agreed in by all, but came to unani-
nous conclusion in the committee that
Sl2,000,000 was the proper amount.
That was their judgment. The House,
by large vote, decided that they would
instruct their fareaS 70
to the Senate amendment providing a
Federal contribution of S12,000,0 900.
The Senate, by a large vote, stood by
its conferees in their opinion that So
100000 was not a sufficient amount.
Now, Mr.. President, in conference be-
tween the two Houses the Senate con-
ferees have repeatedly shown their
stand to be as follows: This is a uues-
ton OF judgment between two amounts
we have made careful study of it: we
think one amount is right you have
made careful study of it and you
think another amount is right: the
only way to confer and to reach a
decision between the two bodies that
differ'-as the conferees do differ-"in
regard to the amount is somewhere in
between the two"
Normally, as everybody knows. on bills
ot this kind confereeS meet about half
way. The amount in that case would
be Sl0,500000; but in order that the
Senate conferees might not be accused
of standing in the way of securing a
proper bill for the District of Columbia,
at the last meeting of the conferees
they unanimously suggested their will
ingnesS to meet the House two-thirds
If the way and to come down to $40 0,000,-
600. The House conferees, however in
dicated their unwillingness to come up
one cent above the 100000. :
The House conferees have not felt that
the request of the Senate for a reason
able compromise was worth listening to.
Does not the House admit that this
is true? Being the truth, can the House
any longer justify disregard for the
accepted principle of compromise at
the expense of the Capital City and its
Eolitically impotent residents?
Lenin in decease has one advantage