Evening star., 1940-01-01
Urges Passage of
Presidential Primary Bill.

To the Editor Of The Star:
AS author of the presidential primary
bill for the District of Columbia I wish
to take issue with your Mr. Jesse C.
Suter for his rather sighting reference
in his weekly column of December II to
this bill.
AN attempt is being made to arouse
interest in the Capper bill for the elec-
tion of delegates to the national politi-
cal party conventions he says. Ger
tainly feeble effort to truly chronicle
the facts, for during the past week the
Stanton Park Citizens Association that
for l6 years has sent as a delegate to
the Federation of Citizens the man who
is now its president, Mr.. Harry N. Stull
urged the passage of this bill in reso-
lutions adopted. And this but adds
another voice to the innumerable as
soclations, civic leaders, political and
fraternal organizations that during the
past five years have sponsored this vital
ly needed legislation. Again he says:
There has been lack of interest in
this proposal because of the absence of
election machinery in the District"
Since its introduction in the Senate by
Senator Capper and in the House by
Representative Ambrose J. Kennedy,
Mr.. Suffers column alone has shown
peculiar lack of interest in this BILL
Most of the local dailies have persist
emily, in their columns, news stories,
cartoons and editorials urged its pas
sage. And the bill which incidentally
has been Endorsed by the Bar. Associa-
tion of the District-giving it some de-
gree of legal efhcacy-adequatel pro-
vides for the necessary machinery to in
sure to the bona fide residents of the
District of Columbia their free choice in
the election of delegates to the national
party conventions, with an accompany
ing penalty clause for violation of its
provisions.
Finally, in apparently dismissing as
unworthy of further discussion this pri-
mary proposal, he states: "Then there has
been feeling that, not being able to
vote for the candidates after their nomi-
nation, it would not be worth the ex-
pense." am confident there are not
many who share that same feeling with
MIR. Suter. For is not voice in the Sc
lection of delegates who would ostensibly
represent the voteless bona fide residents
of the District of Columbia at the ma
tional party conventions at least an in
direct expression of choice in the ulti-
mate election of our Presidents? Ger
tainly it would correct a condition in
local party politics that has long been
odious to every decent minded resident.
And the bill provides for poll tax which
would amply take care of the expense
of conducting these elections.
This proposed legislation is not to be
confused with local suffrage. It is alb
solutely distinct and apart.
We have delegates now and for years
we have had them-such as they are.
What we want is delegates of our own
free, untrammelled choice, who because
Of their regular election will carry with
them to the respective conventions the
authority and prestige that duly elected
delegates from the Nations Capital
should carry.
It would not only give an opportunity
to the residents of the District to prove
that they are politically minded men
and women, jealous of such poor civic
rights as have been vouchsafed to them,
but would serve to remind the rest of
the country that there are more than
half million people here-more than
populate many State-whose dele
gates to national conventions are their
only elective representatives.
That he who Is faithful In little will