Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1948-05-23
Home Rules Day in Court

Judging from what was said during the
Rules Committee hearings, opponents OF
home rule may be expected to center their
attack on two points during the House de-
bate now promised for the Auchincloss
bill
One will be dual voting. This will be
singled out for criticism because 1t Is new
and never tried before on such scale.
Because it Is new and untried 1t may be
expected to create doubt. What should be
remembered, however, is that If dual vot-
ing is unprecedented, so is the condition,
in America, which it attempts to cure.
Voting in two Jurisdictions may be unique.
But taxation without representation is
also unique in our times and under our
avowed principles of government.
Dual voting would not be necessary II
Washington had its rightful representa-
ton in Congress and in national elections
But it probably is necessary part OF any
purely local suffrage machinery. The rea-
son is obvious. If years residence here
should be a qualification to vote in local
elections, the estimated electorate would
be about 100000. Without dual voting-the
privilege of voting In State and voting IN
municipal elections here-this local elec-
torate would be reduced by an estimated
third. Some 100000 intelligent men and
women, working for the Government,
maintaining State domiciles but living
here, would be cut from the voting lists.
without their participation in local voting,
home rule would establish an unnatural
and undesirable condition, Of no real
benefit to anybody.
This estimated third Of the population
Washingtonians with legal domicile in the
States-has a heavy stake in the local
community and its government. There is
nothing in the State constitutions. &C
cording to the reported results Of legisla-
tive research, to prevent this proposed dual
voting An overwhelming majority OF Gov
ernors, queried on the subject, was in
favor of it. And while there are some
complications in the fact that District
property-ownin Maryland and Virginia
residents would not be eligible to take part
in local voting on matters affecting their
District property, the advantages OF dual
voting outweigh such occasional disad-
vantages. Virginians and Marylanders still
have the more potent vote of their repre-
sentatives in Congress.
The bill may be subject to second
attack because of the rules it sets up for
House and Senate consideration of local
legislation. This became apparent in Rules
Committee discussion. The City Council
would initiate local legislation and 1t would
be referred to Joint Committee of Con-
gress. But the Joint Committee would have
to accept it or reject it; the same rule
would apply on the House or Senate floor
It would not be subject to amendment, al
though member Of Congress could pro-
pose to the Joint Committee substitute
bill, or himself initiate new legislation
which would run its regular course under
existing House and Senate rules. Those
familiar with the perfecting processes
applied to all legislation by committee
amendment, or amendment from the
floor, are skeptical of rule by which
legislation is offered on take it or leave
it" basis. The perfection through amend
ment is especially desirable in local legis-
lation. And some members of Congress
feel that their legislative prerogatives
would be too strictly limited.
But to do away with the take it or leave
it" formula would be to depart from the
bills first objective-which is to relieve
Congress of as much work as possible on
local legislation. Several means Of accom-
plishing this were considered. One was to
have Congress approve local legislation by
the negative action of failing to disap-
prove The "take it or leave it" process
which also involves automatic discharge
of the Joint Committee from consideration
of local bill ii it has not acted within
two weeks-was about the only method
which would curtail the time spent on local
legislation by Congress and at the same
time meet the requirement for Congress
sional approval of legislation enacted by
the City Council.
Here we find an interesting demonstra-
ton of the dilemma in attempting to
fashion a workable machinery for local
suffrage. Without substantial local auton-
omy (Which this bill seeks to confer home
rule is an empty phrase. With substantial
local autonomy the dubious question arises
of how much of its legislative powers
Congress can delegate to local govern
ment under the constitution. When the
chief objective of the bill is to relieve Con-
gress of the details of local legislation
without relieving it of constitutionally-
assigned responsibility over the District,
there must be resort to unusual methods
or we find ourselves right back where we
started, with Congress crossing every and
dotting every /.
This bill has won its right to day in
court House leadership and the Rules
elAI f1~
bringing it to the floor. The debate is 60
ing to be constructive, no matter how the
bill fares in the final vote. What we need
in Washington is an understanding, by
members of Congress of the nature of