I presume, however, that to go in the record such a statement should begin like this: "I am Anna Kelton Wiley, the widow of Dr. Harvey W. Wiley, father of the pure food law of 1906. I am 82 years of age and have lived in the District of Columbia since 1885, 74 years. I began to take interest in District of Columbia affairs about 1900 and ever since, in all those years have stood for national representation for this Federal City. The various organizations with which I am affiliated are also for national representation for this city, for the following reasons, given below. For many years I was one of the five vice chairmen of the Committee for National Representation for the District of Columbia headed by Mr. Theodore Noyes, of the Evening Star." If this meets with your approval, please cut and paste over the top of the letter to Representative Davis. I am sorry not to come to the hearing but tomorrow Miss Elizabeth Smart, a long time friend, is to be buried and I wish to honor her by attending the services. Thanking you for your friendly cooperation, I am ANNA KELTON WILEY. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, Hon. JAMES C. DAVIS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Chairman, House District of Columbia Subcommittee, DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: As part of the record of the hearings to consider various bills which would furnish a measure of self-rule to residents of the District of Columbia, I should like to be on record as in favor of such legislation. I introduced H.R. 4634 for this purpose. Despite wide support for "home rule” over a period of years among individual Members of Congress, nothing definitehas been done. Now would seem an opportune time for action. As further part of the record I should like to include the following resolution adopted by the board of commissioners of the city of Perth Amboy, N.J., which is located in the Fifth Congressional District. BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS "Whereas local self-government is the bedrock of government; "Whereas the rights and benefits of local self-government should be availableto all American citizens; "Whereas the residents of the District of Columbia are denied the rights and benefits of local self-government; "Whereas the Congress of the United States has the authority to assure local self-government by granting home rule to the District of Columbia; "Whereas the principle of home rule has been endorsed by a substantial majority of the residents of the District of Columbia; and "Whereas the Board of Commissioners of the District of Columbia have unanimously endorsed proposals for granting home rule to their city: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Board of Commissioners of the city of Perth Amboy, That the Congress be, and it is hereby, urged to approve home rule legislation to assure local self-government to the residents of the District of Columbia." Sincerely yours, PETER FRELINGHUYSEN, Jr. STATEMENT OF ETTA L. TAGGART, PRESIDENT, on BehalF OF THE WASHINGTONIANS: The Washingtonians, a civic group, has every year since its organization. favored national representation as a necessary element for any kind of suffrage for the District of Columbia, believing that no genuine suffrage can be granted to the said District which does not provide for national representation. We have therefore opposed the several suffrage bills now before Congress, known as home rule bills, and we do this with full knowledge that a constitutional amendment is necessary to achieve national representation. In considering the question of local suffrage for the District of Columbia we must bear in mind that Congress is the national and local legislature. Congress in this dual capacity has the power of exclusive legislation over the District of Columbia as provided by the Constitution of the United States. It must be remembered that Congress will still retain this power over the District, even if any local suffrage bill is passed, and we believe, until there is a constitutional amendment. It is necessary that we consider some of the fundamental aspects, and review briefly the former suffrage days of our city, in order that we can grasp an intelligent understanding of the subject, for the powers granted in the past to the city would seem to have an important bearing on its future in case of a change in government at the present time. Further it is important to observe that for about three-quarters of a century prior to the act of 1878, Congress provided some kind of suffrage for the residents of the District of Columbia and it is indeed unfortunate that the said local suffrage government proved very unsuccessful, but it did, regardless of whose fault it was in bringing about circumstances which lead to its downfall, and as a result the people became deeply in debt and overburdened with taxation. We believe that the most equitable stand for Congress to take and in justice to the residents of the District relative to this suffrage problem would be passage of legislation by Congress which would refer the matter to the residents for vote on the following (by stating their preference): 1. National suffrage. 2. Local suffrage. 3. Both national and local. 4. Commission form of government. 5. Amend the act of 1878 to provide for an increase in number of Commissioners, elected by the people, to whom they would be responsive. WASHINGTON, D.C., July 22, 1959. Hon. JOHN R. FOLEY, House of Representatives of the United States, DEAR REPRESENTATIVE FOLEY: Will you be kind enough to see that my point of view on the question of home rule for the District of Columbia is brought to the attention of your District of Columbia Committee? On June 21, 1788, when the Constitution was ratified by New Hampshire and became the supreme law of the land, the citizens of Maryland who were residents of the territory which is now known as the District of Columbia were entitled to the full protection of Constitution article IV, section 2, which provides: "The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States." I interpret this clause to mean that "location" shall not be used as a basis for discrimination. The question arises then whether Congress has used "location" as a basis for discrimination in its policy of subjecting District of Columbia citizens to Federal and local taxation without representation. It seems to me that a basic principle of constitutional law has been violated. Your efforts in Congress to end the undemocratic voting situation which prevails in the District of Columbia will be appreciated. Sincerely, WILLIAM A. ALBAUGH. JOINT RESOLUTION OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ORGANIZATIONS The undersigned local organizations in the District of Columbia, representing many thousands of members, respectfully request each Member of the House of Representatives to sign the pending petition to discharge the House District Committee from further consideration of the pending home rule bill and thereby allow full membership of the House to vote on the bill. We further urge the House leadership to take such steps as are necessary and appropriate to allow the House an opportunity to vote on home rule during this session of Congress. In support of this request, we call the attention of the Members of the House on the following facts: 1. The Founding Fathers of this country intended the residents of the District to have their own local suffrage. 2. Congress respected this intent by enacting home rule legislation promptly after the District became the seat of our National Government. 3. The citizens of Washington enjoyed the privileges of local democracy for three-quarters of a century. 4. These privileges were "temporarily" suspended in the 1870's and have never been restored. 5. For the past 12 years home rule bills have been introduced in Congress, and on four occasions have been passed by the Senate. However, on only one occasion has a home rule bill reached the floor of the House of Representatives-and that was 11 years ago. On every occasion, the bill has died in the House District Committee without being submitted to the full House. 6. This year, despite numerous requests from citizens and from members of the House District Committee, the chairman of that committee has not even scheduled hearings on the home rule bills introduced at the beginning of the year. As citizens, we believe we are entitled to regain the democratic privileges respecting our own local legislature, which in turn will enact our own local laws. We further believe that the people of this city are entitled to elect a delegate to the House of Representatives to represent in that forum the 850,000 residents of Washington. The President of the United States, the Senate, both political parties, and many national groups of citizens have long supported our cause. A majority of the House of Representatives can make this cause successful by signing the discharge petition and voting for the home rule bill in the House. We urgently request the Members of the House to take these steps in the interest of democracy and the welfare of the people of this Nation's Capital. THE WASHINGTON BUREAU, NATIONAL STATEMENT OF MRS. MILTON ISAACSON, PRESIDENT OF THE LASALLE PTA, AN ORGANIZATION OF 1,200 MEMBERS The principles implicit in home rule for the District of Columbia require no elaboration from the representatives or membership of our organization. Indeed, they are principles for which, should the moment or demand arise, we would all lay down our lives. We earnestly urge the chairman and the membership of this committee to consider soberly, having enjoyed privileges of full citizenship, how they would countenance the curtailment, dilution, or impairment to any degree of those privileges. Those of us, who unfortunately have aspired to but never attained that ultimate grail of citizenship—the right to self-government— herewith express a resounding “Aye” to the proposition favoring home rule. Thank you for this opportunity to speak for my organization. STATEMENT OF CHARLES B. E. FREEMAN, PRESIDENT OF THE BARNARD PARENTTEACHER ASSOCIATION, AN ORGANIZATION OF 463 MEMBERS The Barnard Parent-Teacher Association has for several years and still does endorse the principle of home rule for the District of Columbia. This association is one of the many local parent-teacher associations of the District of Columbia Congress of Parents and Teachers which endorse home rule for the District of Columbia. Similarly, this association is one of the many local organizations endorsing home rule for the District of Columbia. We believe, in accordance with the decided cases, that there is no constitutional or other legal impediment to the grant of home rule to the District of Columbia. Moreover, we believe that the residents of the District of Columbia can properly and effectively administer local affairs under the privilege of home rule with due regard for the Federal interests in the Capital City. We further believe that insofar as it may be a matter of time and insofar as it may be a matter of prestige for the United States of America, home rule should be granted to the residents of the District of Columbia, the Capital City of the United States. We, therefore, urge your committee to cast a momentous vote and decide in favor of home rule for the District of Columbia. We appreciate this opportunity to present our views. STATEMENT OF LUCIUS G. ROBERTSON, PRESIDENT OF THE BRUCE PTA, AN ORGANIZATION OF 102 MEMBERS For as long as we are denied the privilege of voting we cannot exercise the moral or political right to extol the virtues of democracy or of self-government to any other nation or people. Thank you for this opportunity to speak for my organization. STATEMENT OF MRS. JAMIE ADAIR, PRESIDENT OF THE JANNEY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PTA, AN ORGANIZATION OF 600 MEMBERS The executive committee of the Janney PTA sent out a questionnaire last spring on the subject of home rule. Out of over 300 of these questionnaires mailed to the members only 20 responses were unfavorable to home rule. Therefore we would like to go on record as being strongly in favor of home rule for the District of Columbia. We would like to have the privileges accorded to other citizens of this country, mainly the right to vote and elect our own representatives. Thank you for this opportunity to speak for my organization. STATEMENT OF MRS. ULYSSES E. WILLIAMS, PRESIDENT OF AREA COUNCIL II-A OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CONGRESS OF PARENT-TEACHER ASSOCIATIONS, AN ORGANIZATION OF 4,888 MEMBERS Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is my pleasure to respectfully submit the following statement on behalf of Area Council II-A of the District of Columbia Congress of Parent-Teacher Associations. Area Council II-A, comprised of 13 schools, endorses without reservation the principle of home rule for the District of Columbia. The fundamental principles of this great democracy of ours, the United States of America, is the freedom of its people to choose those who shall govern them and the right of no taxation without representation. The District of Columbia, which is the Nation's Capital, is the only municipality in the United States which does not enjoy these rights. Our American heritage demands that the citizens of the District of Columbia be given the same rights of self-government in local affairs that other communities throughout the country possess. It demands, further, that these residents shall not be deprived of their inherent right to congressional representation and suffrage in local and national elections as the majority of the permanent residents of this city are now deprived. Area Council II-A, therefore, respectfully urges this committee to favorably support the principle of home rule for the District of Columbia. Thank you for this opportunity to speak for my organization. STATEMENT OF H. HERBERT BAIRD, PRESIDENT, RUDOLPH PARENT-TEACHER Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, on behalf of the Rudolph ParentTeacher Association, I wish to present the following statement: The Rudolph Parent-Teacher Association strongly endorses the principle of home rule for the District of Columbia. The various forms of home rule to be reviewed by this committee, though not meeting the full wishes of the total population, do provide some improvement over the existing methods of local government administration. The Rudolph Parent-Teacher Association therefore endorses legislation that will give the citizens of the District of Columbia representative self-government. I wish to thank you for the opportunity of providing this statement in behalf of the Rudolph Parent-Teacher Association. 44015-59- -34 STATEMENT OF MRS. WINIFRED B. BENTLEY, PRESIDENT OF THE MONROE SCHOOL PARENT-TEACHER ASSOCIATION Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, on behalf of the Parent-Teacher Association of the Monroe Elementary School, an organization of 300 members, I have the honor to present the following statement supporting home rule for the District of Columbia : The Parent-Teacher Association of the Monroe Elementary School heartily endorses the principle of home rule for the citizens of the District of Columbia. As parents and citizens it is our belief that we have a fundamental right as well as a duty to have a voice in the government of our city. We wish to insure these rights for our children and for all future generations. We believe that the primary duty of American citizens is to accept the responsibilities of governing themselves. We urgently request your favorable consideration and support of the principle of home rule for the citizenry of the District of Columbia. Thank you for this opportunity to speak for my organization. STATEMENT OF JEHU C. HUNTER, PRESIDENT OF THE PETWORTH PARENT-TEACHER ASSOCIATION I am Jehu Hunter, president of the Petworth Parent-Teacher Association, an organization of 284 members. The Parent-Teacher Association of the Petworth Elementary School endorses the principle of home rule for the District of Columbia. Legislation for home rule would restore to the inhabitants of the District of Columbia the powers of local self-government which are a basic privilege of all American citizens. Congress would, through such legislation, promote among the population of the District the sense of responsibility for the development and well-being of their community which will result from the enjoyment of the powers of self-government. Furthermore, such action would relieve the National Legislature of the burden of legislating upon purely local District matters while important national legislation remains pending. It is a fact that the development of a community and the solution of its local problems is more effective when undertaken by those persons who are most closely concerned. STATEMENT OF MRS. HAROLD KRONSTADT, PRESIDENT, ALEXANDER SHEPHERD PARENT-TEACHER ASSOCIATION The Alexander Shepherd Parent-Teacher Association, an organization of 350 members, at its meeting in March 1959 voted overwhelmingly in favor of home rule for the District of Columbia. We strongly urge that you give prompt and full consideration to measures providing home rule so that the early adoption of such a program may be possible. Thank you for this opportunity to speak for my organization. STATEMENT OF JEAN LEWIS, PRESIDENT OF THE WHITTIER PARENT-TEACHER ASSOCIATION We, the members of the Whittier Parent-Teacher Association, an organization of 500 members, hope this year of 1959 will see and enjoy home rule for the District of Columbia. Thank you for this opportunity to speak for my organization. STATEMENT OF MRS. CHARLES SMALLWOOD, PRESIDENT OF THE ADAMS Home rule will afford our citizens in the District of Columbia a chance to actively participate in our government; thus, we will nave our say on problems dealing with taxes, health, education, and welfare. Thank you for this opportunity to speak for my organization, an organization of 463 members. |