Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1940-08-15
Questions and Answers

mittee to take more time for further
study of the Summers amendment
before voting on the special rule
required for early consideration in
the House. People Of the District ask
only for the careful consideration
that postponement Of decision i'm
plies. The more questions asked
about the amendment the better.
The, more objections raised in the
spirit Of healthy skepticism the
greater the opportunity to clarity
the whole discussion. If there is
Impotence at the delay, members OF
Congress will realize how long has
been the struggle for the chance Of
favorable consideration that seems
now to be so close at hand.
Yesterdays session of the Rules
Committee was helpful and encou-
raging-helpful because of the ma
ture OF the questions asked Mr..
Summers; encouraging because of
the interest of members and the
absence of hostility in their inter-
rogations.
Question: Did not Congress once
before set up municipal legislature
that cost the people lot of money
and had to be abolished?
Federal laws, as Mr.. Summers re-
piled, have often been abolished. But
the territorial government of recon-
struction days has no more to do
with the Summers resolution than
the man in the moon. That terri
torial government was not a test Of
representative government but
mockery of representative govern
ment The money spent was chiefly
to develop a Capital, neglected by
Congress, that was the laughing
stock of the civilized world. and the
control of the government was ex-
ercised by Federal appointees, not
elected officials.
Question: Would not national rep
resentation tend to destroy or to
impair the direct interest of the peo-
pie Of the country in Washington?
Exactly the contrary. The Summers
amendment preserves and specifi-
cally protects the continuing, exclu-
sive control by the people Of the
country Through Congress) of the
National Capital. National repre-
sentation would give to the people
of Washington such participation in
their Government as Congress might
decide Is wise; would eliminate many
sources of constant friction and mis-
understanding regarding the control
Of Washington; would encourage
rather than destroy national interest
in the Capital City.
Question: Why has the national
representation issue been timed to
come in the midst Of a national
campaign?
The timing" was the result Of the
insertion in the Democratic platform
Of a plank favoring the extension Of
suffrage to the people of the District.
The lack Of suffrage is emphasized,
of course, in campaign year when
other Americans are voting. But
the question is always timely, in or
out of campaign years, in special
or regular session OF Congress and
is without partisan significance. It
has been pressed consistently and
actively by citizens Of Washington
for more than half century.
Question: Whence comes the urge
for national representation?
Whence came the urge of the
Barons of Runnymede, or Of the
American colonists, or of all the men
through all the ages who have sought
for the governed a voice in their
government? 1T is the human urge"
Mr.. Summers replied, an urge that is
a part Of every man or woman fit
for the obligations and RESPONSE
bilities Of citizenship in a free
country.
Question: Why not give statehood
to the District?
Because in the Nations Capital
the interests Of the Federal Govern
ment are paramount; the founders so
conceived it and so, in the judgment
of most men, it should remain. This
supremacy remains protected by the
terms Of the Summers amendment.
Question: Would 1t be simpler to
cede the District back to Maryland?
No, it would not, and every member
of Congress knows it. The simple
procedure is that which is proposed,
to empower Congress specifically by
constitutional amendment to give to
the people of the District the ma
tional and local representation in
Government which Congress con-
siders wise.
Question: Is this, the Summers
resolution, feeble" gesture with
no substance to it?
How can it be said that the efforts
Of the American citizens OF WASH
ington for a voice in their Govern
nent are feeble or lacking in
substance? How can 1t be said that
such aspirations are feeble or with
i