Evening star., 1934-04-30

This is the third article OF
!. series discussing reorganization OF
the municipal government.
ARTICLE NO. 3.
While Congress is in the present
mood to alter the set-up of the Dis
trict government, as shown by sew
eral pending bills and the fact that
a general reorganization survey is
being made. it might be well to con-
slider establishment of machinery by
which the voteleSS local residents
could at least express their views in
the form of referendum on i'm
| portant issues, such as changes in
ness or similar broad problems.
II the Commissioners were elected
instead of being appointed, the ballots
cast in such an election would con-
I stitute an expression of local senti-
ment on major questions, which
would be presented in the platforms
and declarations of policy of those
who sought election
| There are no indications whatever
from Capitol Hill that Congress is
likely to go from the appointive to the
elective method of selecting the di-
recting heads of the District govern
ment, although suggested changes in
the form of the appointed board are
being discussed. If the appointive
method is adhered to in any future
reorganization, however, a limited
degree of local Self-eXpression could
be granted by setting up a .ystem, in
! which could be included the right of
1 local residents to recall a Commits
sioner whenever it appeared that he
was pursuing policies at variance with
the majority sentiment of the COM
munity or was contemptuous of local
sentiment and the people of the
city, and was thus personally offensive.
Can Recall Incumbents.
! In communities that elect their
municipal officers the next election
i always offers the opportunity to re-
call incumbents if they are found
to be out of step with prevailing
| opinion. Under the appointive sys-
TEN here, however, the community
as a whole usually has no idea in
| advance who is to be appointed. In
| the case of the Commissioners, local
organizations have a week or two
in which to make known to the SEN
ate any objections they may have
| to particular nominee.
But, as in the case of local legis-
lation. this opportunity is nothing
more than the right of petition, and
does not carry the force or per-
suasion that would rest behind
ballot of the entire community on
the question of recall after the ap-
pointee had been in Office and demon
strated unftness in the opinion of
the local community.
Initiative, Referendum and Recall.
The initiative. referendum and re-
call are OF the most value in the
smallest political subdivisions, where
thelr effect corresponds to the action
OF a town meeting. as in connection
with city government They are of
/ less value in the States and are
hardly claimed as yet to be applicable
at all nationally.
The Initiative, referendum and re-
call may also have valuable applica-
ton as supplements of representative
government in special cases where
pubic opinion should be taken into
account in legislation and admins
tratlon, and where the securing of
that expression of public sentiment
through ordinary forms Of representa-
tive government is denied by the Con-
stltutlon-for example. in the District
of Columbia, where Congress in act
FOR ha
tion should heed and give effect in
; local concerns to local sentiment and
yet is deprived Of power to learn this
| public sentiment in any conclusive
way by absence from the District of
all representative elections and all
elections of any kind. These de-
vices might in contingencies serve a
very useful purpose in securing ex-
! pressions of local public sentiment, to
which Congress. as exclusive legisla-
ture, might respond.
Referendums of the Past.
Congress has on occasion in the
| past adopted the referendum for the
District to the extent of permitting its
people to vote upon some question
vitality affecting their interests, as in
Buchanan'S administration, in 1853.
when the people of the Capital voted
on proposed code of laws. Con-
gress has not always needed these ex-
| pressions of local public sentiment
after they have been rendered, espe-
clally in cases where it had not au-
thorized the election and where the
corporate authorities had attempted
! to exercise the initiative. For in
stance, in JohnSon'S administration
! the President vetoed an act of Con-
| gress affecting the District which in
its terms disregarded and reversed the
almost unanimous voice of the COM
munity expressed in an unauthor-
lzeo referendum vote, and Congress
| passed the law over the Presidents
veto. The act in question eStab-
llShed Negro suffrage in the District
and in the local referendum vote
which preceded the Houses action it
was favored by only 35 votes in Wash
lngton and one in Georgetown. Presi-
! dent 10 'nsons message vetoing this
| act Q866) Is clear and interesting
I discussion of the relation of Con-
gress to the Capital and of the obliga-
ton of the Districts constitutional
legislature on American principles to
! heed and give effect to reasonable
local sentiment an wishes.
Local Referendum and Recall.
AS long as the Nation is the Dis
, trio. S n.u.tImiilionaire citizen, by far
the largest property owner and quasi
: taxpayer in the Capital, it will not
surrender control of the tax-raising
and tax-spending function in the Dis
trict, and the exclusive legislative
power of Congress will be MAIN
tained, and probably also the appoint
ing power vested in the President. It
has been affirmed by several Presi-
dents and is generally conceded that
all American rights should be given
to the Americans in the District of
Columbia which are consistent with
this full national control of the Ma
tion's City. There would be no in
| reference with such control even il