Evening star., 1960-06-05
Remove All Doubts

The constitutional amendment
granting national suffrage to Washing
tonianS will be such significant mile
stone in the life of the Nations Capital
that special pains should be taken to
insure it is not deficient in any respect
For that reason, we hope consideration
will be given two points when the excel
lent resolution from the House Judiciary
Committee reaches the House floor for
debate.
The committee version authorizes
District residents to vote for PreSi-
dent and Vice PreSident-a right which
WaShingtonianS have sought since the
Federal District was created-and we
earnestly hope that this provision will
be overwhelmingly approved by the
House, as it has been by the Senate.
During half a century of debate,
there never has been the slightest doubt
that this right could be granted only by
a change in the Constitution Over the
years, however, it has not been as clear
whether a constitutional amendment
also is needed for the District even
tually to attain a second important Suf-
frage right-Some form of voting repre-
Sentation in Congress.
The consensus of lawyers today is
that such constitutional authorization
is needed. We hope, therefore, that the
House VerSion-in some such form as
the Senate has approved-will remove
any constitutional doubt about Con-
greSS' right in later years to grant the
District some form of voting delegate
representation in the House
This may not be the time to grant
District representation. In fact, a great
deal of study of the precise nature and
degree of District representation in
Congress may be required before any
such decisions are made. Neither is a
constitutional amendment the proper
place to spell out in precise terms the
duties and powers of District delegates
in the House. Our point is simply that
Congress should not leave up in the air
now the question of whether it will
have the power to grant these rights at
such time, and in such manner, as it
may see fit.
The second provision at which we
hope the House will take another look
is the language of the House resolution
which would limit the number of Dis
trict electors Of President and Vice
President to the least number which
represent any State, regardless of how
large the District may become
If District representation in the
electoral college would affect the num-
ber or apportionment of electors from
any State, there might be justification
for such a limitation as this. The re-
port of the House committee states in
specific terms, however, that the num-
Der of District electors would be in ad-
dttion to those reserved to the States.
They would neither lessen the total
number of electors from the States, nor
lessen the apportionment to which any
State is entitled.
In urging these considerations, we
are aware that the House Judiciary
Committee spent long days debating
them in closed session. Perhaps no
other committee has given the subject
such careful and serious attention The
resolution it reported as a result is
an advance of historic proportions, and
the committee deserves the highest
commendation for it. A constitutional
amendment is so rare, however, that
no opportunity should be overlooked to
make this one as tter-perfect as
possible.