Evening star., 1948-02-24
ArIineton's "Nonpurtisun" Row

Nearby ArllngtOn'S latest political con-
troversy revolveS around conflicting in
terpretations of the State constitution as
it applies to so-called nonpartisan cleo
tions. These differences of opinion are
technical in nature and it is difficult to
pass judgment on them. But there are
certain aspects of the dispute which are
not technical, and which will be of con-
Germ to all of the county's electorate
The central fact is this: Some elements
in the county, acting through the Joint
Legislative Committee and the Better
Government League, requested State Sen
ator Charles r. Fenwick to introduce a
bill in the Legislature which would provide
for what the sponsors call nonpartisan
elections for the School Board and the
County Board, the latter being the govern
ing body. This would be subject to
approval in a referendum in the county
Senator Fenwick has refused to introduce
the bill, contending that it does not pro-
vide for nonpartiSan elections in fact and
that if passed. it would violate at least
three sections of the constitution This
refusal has brought forth complaints from
the bills sponsors that Mr. Fenwicks con-
stitutional objections are not sound, that
they have not been advanced in good
faith and that his decision amounts to
contemptuous defiance of the wishes of
majority of the voters in the county.
There is not space here to review the
constitutional arguments. 1t Is a fact,
however, that similar legislation applicable
to a number of Virginia cities has been
in effect for years, and has not been
successfully challenged in the courts.
Against the presumption of constitution
ality which this raises, two points can be
cited. One is that spokesman for the
Richmond Charter Commission, which is
sponsoring legislation for the State Cap
ital somewhat similar to that urged in
Arlington has expressed the belief that
law providing for runof election (Mr.
FenWick contends and the proponents
deny that this is the effect of the Arling
ton bilD, would be unconstitutional. The
other is that in voting in the House of
Delegates on the Richmond Charter,
which specifically outlaws party primaries,
So of the 100 members acted subject to
the explicit reservation that their votes
for the Charter were not to be construed
as creating any presumption for or against
it's constitutionality. This unprecedented
action bears on the Arlington plan in the
sense that the latter is intended to elimi-
nate party-indorsed candidates.
The Arlington Sun, county newspaper
which is independent in politics and
which is an advocate of nonpartisan cleo
tions, has expressed the editorial belief
that Senator Fenwick is sincere in his
constitutional objections to the proposed
bill. Reinforcing this view is the difficulty
of perceiving any political advantage to
the Democratic organization in refusing
to introduce the bill that would not be
far outweighed by the political dis
advantages of antagonizing that large
majority of voters who favor the bill,
according to its sponsors.
Constitutional questions aside, however,
it is undeniably true that Arlington
County has need of nonpartisan elections
for the County Board and the School
Board This is so because many residents
of the county are Federal employees who
would be barred by the Hatch Act from
participation in local politics if they had
to seek office as partisan candidates. This
has been taken into account in the case
of the School Board and there is little
chance, law or no law, that the elections