Evening star., 1950-03-06
16 Federation
Units Opposed
To Kefauver Bill
Survey Finds Foes
Outnumber Groups
Backing Measure

SltA1ClIo AoSOCldllOllS Has GWlCc
acted in favor of the Kefauver
home rule bill, many member
bodies oppose it. survey by The
Star has revealed.
Here's how individual associa-
tions line up so far:
For the legislation. 9.
Against it. 16
Not yet on record. 40.
Officers of the 40 which have
not acted gave several reasons
principal among them being:
The majority consider national
representation of primary i'm
portance, and do not want local
suffrage without it.
Several Back 1t "In Principle"
Several groups already are on
record in favor of home rule "in
principle" or in some other form,
and further action has not been
thought necessary.
The Kefauyer bill has not yet
been brought before the associa-
tion or has been discussed and
tabled for future action. Many
associations contemplate taking a
stand at meetings this month.
Spokesman for at least two
groups said the home rule issue
had never come up.
Additional opposition came
from one observation-disclosures
Washington-Which is not a
member of the federation. This
raises the tally to II citizens
groups in opposition to the Ke-
fauver plan.
Eight Seen For Measure.
Although membership senti-
ment remains in doubt in most of
these 40 associations, officers in
Is were able to estimate probable
action, on the basis of past records
or discussions. These estimates
gave:
For the measure, 8.
Against, Z.
Thus. the associations in op-
position would still outnumber
those indorsing the Kefauver leg
lslatiol, in the face of the almost
unanimous backing by the fed
Grafton itself.
The Kefauver bill, providing
for local self-government under
an elected city council, was passed
In the Senate during the last ses-
sion of Congress and now is before
the House District Committee. 2
1t was first backed by the
federation Gin principle" even be-
tore it was passed in the Senate.
Last January. the federation ex-
pedited its earlier action by voting
to have the measure released from
the District Committee for House
floor action.
Passed Overwhelmingly
Both resolutions were passed
overwhelmingly" on voice votes,
according to Herbert P. Leeman,
1ederatlon president.
At the time of the first favor
able action by the federation. only
a few member associations had
acted on the bill at their own
meetings. At the time of the
second Endorsement last January
however, most of the individual
groups in opposition had already
taken their stands.
Questioned about the apparent
discrepancy between stands of the
individual associations and that
OF the federation itself. Mr.. Lee
man said he believed the fedora
tion's action reflected the majority
opinion of Washington residents
He said the unfavorable stands
of some associations might have
been taken during meeting when
a minority were present in suf-
f1cient strength to pass the resolu.
tions.
They don't have a very full
attendance at some of these meet
ings," he observed. Mr.. Leemar
said he believed that in mos
cases of the 16 opposing organiza
tions, Il don't think the results
reflect the views of the majority
of the people in those localities.
Hetrick Gives Views.
He declared also some of these
groups may have acted without 6
full study of the provisions of the
Kefauver plan.
II don't think" he said. "fai1
publicity was given the bill in the
different associations where the
matter was considered"
This view was echoed in part
by Mark Hetrick, a delegate
from Congress Heights, one Of
the groups which opposes the
Kefauver legislation because they
want national representation be.
fore home rule. Mr.. Hetrick de-
clined to vote at the federation
meeting January 81 when ths
resolution was passed asking fol
House members to sign petition
to release the bill from committee
Explained Mr.. Hetrick:
II feel an obligation, as dele
gate, to express the views OF m!
own association at federation
meetings. However, I don't thinl
that many in my association
knew much about it (the Ke
fauver bilD when it was con
sidered."
Opposition Recalled.
He said that in the light O
later study of the bill, he "didn'
want to commit myself" on tn
federation resolution, and henc,
did not vote. MI. Hetrick recalled
g that several fellow delegates failet
to vote on similar grounds.
The federation president, as dix
several other delegates questioned
agreed that delegates either wer'
instructed or had a moral obi
CATION" to vote in the federation
as their home associations hat