페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

test for registration; and for keeping the
registry open for a stated period, keeping it
accurate and current, and for purging the
registration lists. Vacancy on Council to be
filled by Mayor with consent of Council.

Board; age qualification for voting fixed at
18 years; members of Council and School
Board shall be elected by method of propor-
tional representation; no literacy test for
voting.

Columbia government. Board to conduct regis-
trations and elections, including a general election
on Mar. 7, 1950, in November of odd-numbered
years beginning with 1951, and on bond issues in
even-numbered years. Elected members of Coun-
cil and School Board to serve 4-year staggered
terms. Vacancies on Council to be filled by Presi-
dent with consent of Senate. Vacancies on School
Board to be filled by its president with Board
approval. Elections to be nonpartisan, secret, at
Jarge, by ballot or voting machine, and by plural-
ity vote. Qualified electors shall have maintained
a domicile or place of abode in the District for 1
year, be United States citizens 21 years old, not
convicted felons or, if so, pardoned, and not men-
tally incompetent. Registrants must be qualified
electors, with domicile or place of abode in District
for 9 months, and must execute a registration affi-
davit. Persons not permitted to register may
appeal to Board of Elections and Municipal Court.
Qualified candidates shall be registrants nomi-
nated by petitions having 90 signatures, with filing
fee of $30 for Council, $25 for School Board, and
affidavit as to residence and domicile. Members
of Congress and of Elections Board may not be
candidates. No absentee voting. Upon petition,
District Court may review an election, void all or
part of it, and order a special election. Interfer-
ence with registration or voting is forbidden.
Violators of election laws may be fined up to $500

or imprisoned 6 months, or both.
17. Initiative, referendum, 17. No provision for, except for referendum on bond
and recall.

issues and on adoption of charter.

17. Same as S. 1527.

17. Contains such a title, providing for initia

tive and referendum on legislative pro-
posals, and for the recall of any elected Dis-
trict officer or of any appointed member of
Council or School Board.

COMPARISON OF SENATE AND HOUSE BILLS TO PROVIDE FOR HOME RULE AND REORGANIZATION IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA-Con.

Subject

H. R. 4981 (Klein)
S. 1527 (Kefauver)

H. R. 28 (Auchincloss)

H. R. 2505 (Marcantonio)

18. Civil service.

18. Contains no civil-service title.

18. Contains no civil-service title. It was

omitted to shorten the bill.

18. Subjects, with certain exceptions, all District of

Columbia government offices and positions to
Civil Service Act of 1883, as amended, and to Clas-
sification Act of 1923. Assigns classified status to
all present District of Columbia officers and em-
ployees who successfully qualify in a noncompeti-
tive examination. Intergovernmental transfers
may retain civil-service status. In selecting per-
sons for District of Columbia jobs from civil-service
registers, Manager shall give preference to persons
residing in metropolitan area. Only such residents
may take special examinations for District of
Columbia positions. Council shall fix pay of Dis-
trict of Columbia employees not covered by Classi-
fication Act and not otherwise fixed by law. Dis-
trict of Columbia government to bear cost of its
liability for retirement of District officers and em-

ployees and of services by Civil Service Commission.
19. District and Federal Governments authorized to

contract for intergovernmental services at cost, paid
for by recipient agencies. Personal interest in con-
tracts or sales forbidden. District to bear cost of
residents and prisoners committed to St. Eliza-
beths. Register of Wills to be known hereafter as
Clerk of Probate Court; to be appointed and re-
movable by chief judge of District Court; his fees
to be paid to Finance Director. Ex officio mem-
bers of NCPPC increased to 7; appointed members
from 4 to 6; NCPPC to develop master plan for
both District of Columbia and Federal Govern-
ments. NCHA is continued as a Federal agency
with certain added duties. Dual compensation
allowed, with certain exceptions. Soldiers Home,
NCPPC, and District of Columbia National Guard
to be Federal agencies,

19. Miscellancous provisions.

19. Same as H, R. 28.

19. Substantially the same as S. 1527, with fol

lowing exceptions: Cost of intergovernmental
services to be paid by government rendering
them and reimbursed by government receiv-
ing them; publicity of District records; re-
view of proposed District of Columbia legis-
lation by Budget Bureau not required; title
of Register of Wills not changed; chairman
of joint committee also to be an ex officio
member of NCPPC; defines composition of
NCHA.

20. Succession in government.

20. Same as S. 1527.

21. Temporary provisions.

21. Same as S. 1527,

22. Charter referendum.

22. Contains no provision for a charter refer

endum.

20. Transfer of functions between agencies to be ac 20. Same as S. 1527.

companied by transfer of property, records, and
unexpended balances. Provides for settling dis-
putes arising out of transfers. Existing statutes,
etc., to continue in effect, mutatis mutandis.
Pending judicial and administrative actions to be
continued. Until July 1, 1950, no vacancy in a
District agency caused by abolition of Board of

Commissioners shall affect its power to function.
21. President authorized to issue regulations to 21. Same as S. 1527.

cover transition between enactment of bill and
first meeting of Council. Authorizes appropria-
tion of $500,000 to District of Columbia for fiscal
1950 to pay expenses of Charter Referendum
Board and Board of Elections. United States to
be reimbursed for such expenditures during fiscal

1951.
22. Creates a 5-member Charter Referendum Board, 22. Same as S. 1527, except that ability to read

appointed by President, to conduct a popular and write English and proof of domicile in
referendum on charter on Nov. 15, 1949. Specifies the District are required of registrants (sec.
powers and duties of Board. Provides for regis 1903-d).
tration of electors, form of ballot, and method of
voting. Charter to be accepted by majority vote
of registered qualified voters. Board to certify
result to President not later than Dec. 21, 1949.
Interference with registration or voting prohibited;
penalties for violations.
23. Prescribes formula for Federal contribution to 23. Beginning with fiscal 1952, authorizes an-

District expenses. Beginning with fiscal 1952, nual appropriation to District of $1,000,000,
authorizes appropriation of sun equal to 20 cents plus 14 percent of total locally derived Dis-
for each dollar of local District of Columbia revenue trict revenues during previous fiscal year, or
received during preceding fiscal year. $1,000,000 $15,000,000, whichever amount is smaller,
of payment to be credited to water fund; remainder $1,000,000 thereof to be credited to water
to general fund. Budget Director to certify fund; remainder to general fund. Budget
amounts authorized to Manager. Payments to be Director to certify amounts authorized to
made by Secretary of Treasury to Finance Direc Manager. Payments to be made by Secre-
tor on or before July 31. If District revenues tary of Treasury to Finance Director on or
exceed expenses in any year, surplus shall be used before July 31.
for public schools.

23. Federal contribution.

23. Beginning with fiscal 1952, authorizes

appropriation to District expenses of an
amount equal to the taxes which would be
levied on all property held by the United
States and foreign governments in the
District if such property were not tax.
exempt. Authorizes Manager to appraise
value of such property.

Mr. HARRIS. We are aware of the fact that our esteemed colleague from New Jersey, a member of this committee, has long been an advocate of home rule for the District of Columbia.

Mr. Auchincloss proposed, as chairman of the Subcommittee on Home Rule, in the Eightieth Congress, a rather lengthy and complicated measure, providing home rule. Then during the session of that Congress Mr. Auchincloss reintroduced a bill which was considered by his committee, reported, and for a brief time considered by the House of Representatives, but no final resolution was determined thereon. It became known as H. R. 28, to provide for home rule and reorganization in the District of Columbia, as it was reintroduced by him on January 3, the initial opening of this Eighty-first session of Congress.

We are glad to have our colleague and the author of this legislation before the committee this morning in order that he may explain the proposal for consideration during this session of Congress.

This meeting was called this morning for the purpose of giving opportunity for the authors of these various bills to explain their proposal, particularly the committee would like to hear the original sponsors of home-rule provisions, our colleague, Mr. Auchincloss, and Senator Kefauver, who was a member of the House during the last several Congresses and is now in the Senate of the United States, and who sponsored the bill which passed the Senate a few weeks ago.

At this time we are glad to recognize our colleague, Mr. Auchincloss, to proceed to explain the bill which he proposes, H. R. 28.

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES C. AUCHINCLOSS, A REPRESENT

ATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

Mr. AUCHINCLOSS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity,

I would like to suggest that I am not a Communist [laughter] although I am in favor of this bill.

Mr. HARRIS. I might say for the committee at this point we have known you for a long time and have been personally associated with you on this and other committees. You do not need to make such a statement for the benefit of any member of this committee, or in the Congress. As far as I know no one has indicated in any way that you were a Communist. We know you are a good American and an able Member of the Congress.

Mr. AUCHINCLOSS. Mr. Chairman, that statement was made in all good humor.

In my statement this morning, Mr. Chairman, I will first review the history of this legislation; second, outline the main features of the bill; and third, present arguments for a favorable report.

I. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

On May 29, 1947, the House of Representatives authorized and directed the Committee on the District of Columbia to conduct a full and complete investigation and study of reorganization and home rule for the District of Columbia, and to report the results to the House with its recommendations. The expenditure of $30,000 was authorized for this purpose and $26,538.15 was actually spent.

Acting through its Subcommittee on Home Rule and Reorganization, the committee carried out the mandate of the House during the Eightieth Congress. With the aid of its professional staff, Dr. George B. Galloway and Mr. Clarence M. Pierce, intensive studies were made of the government and administration of the District of Columbia. These two men devoted their full time for more than a year to work on this legislation and I cannot praise them too highly for their excellent work. Six lawyers on the staff of House legislative counsel worked full time for more than 7 months on this subject and two other lawyers worked on it part-time for 4 months. The subcommittee, of which I had the honor to be chairman, heard testimony for 28 days when experts on local government, representatives of local civic organizations and Members of the House of Representatives appeared and discussed the reorganization of the District government and the question of home rule. The President designated the Director of the Bureau of the Budget as his representative and the testimony of these witnesses may be found in the printed hearings of the committee. Seventy-seven scheduled witnesses appeared before the committee, some of them as many as two or three times; 19 Members of Congress also appeared and 16 written statements were received and embodied in the hearings. At the conclusion of the hearings the subcommittee sought the opinions of experts on municipal government and 20 replies were received which contained detailed suggestions and plans, and in November 1949 the subcommittee issued a preliminary report. Shortly after the publication of this report the subcommittee held many meetings in executive session to consider the points suggested, and the forms of government in other American cities were examined.

In January 1948 the final report of the subcommittee was drawn up and on the basis of this final report a bill, H. R. 4902, was drafted and introduced into the Congress. An identical companion bill, S. 1968, was introduced in the Senate by Senator Joseph H. Ball, and joint hearings of the House and Senate subcommittees were held covering a period of 8 days, 3 of which were all-day sessions. Eighty-two witnesses were heard, of whom 57 testified in favor of the legislation, 11 testified in opposition, while 14 witnesses restricted their comments to specific sections of the bill. Up to the time the hearings were printed the subcommittee had received 35 resolutions of action taken by organized community groups in Washington and of these 29 were generally favorable to the legislation, 4 were in opposition, and 2 were undetermined as to their attitude.

The subcommittee, after considering every suggestion made at the joint hearings, drafted a clean bill, H. R. 6227, which I introduced in the House. The full District Committee considered this bill page by page for about 3 weeks before reporting it out and the Rules Committee inquired into it thoroughly before granting a rule. It was considered by the House in the Committee of the Whole for 2 days and remained unfinished business at the end of the session.

After the adjournment of the Eightieth Congress the subcommittee staff, under my direction, revised the bill H. R. 6227 that had been considered by the House in an effort to simplify it and the result is the bill H. R. 28 introduced by me in the Eighty-first Congress, which is now being considered by the committee.

It can be seen by this historical recital that the question of home rule and the reorganization of the District government has been very

« 이전계속 »