Pubdate: Sat, 13 Dec 2014
Source: Washington Post (DC)
Copyright: 2014 The Washington Post Company
Contact: http://mapinc.org/url/mUgeOPdZ
Website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/491
Author: Colbert I. King

THE THREAT TO D.C. HOME RULE CAN'T BE IGNORED

We thought all the angles had been covered, since the Senate had 
passed D.C. home rule legislation seven times before. So on July 10, 
1973, Committee on the District of Columbia Chairman Thomas Eagleton 
(D-Mo.) and ranking member Charles McC. Mathias Jr. (R-Md.), plus 
Robert Harris and me - the committee's majority and minority staff 
directors, respectively - entered the Senate chamber confident that 
the votes were there to pass the bill again.

The outstanding question of the day was whether the House, which for 
reasons of race and politics was a burial ground for the city's hopes 
of home rule, could pass a similar bill under the leadership of new 
House District Committee Chairman Charles C. Diggs Jr. (D-Mich.), an 
African American and veteran congressman. So we thought. Our bill 
encountered smooth sailing on the floor as Eagleton and Mathias 
easily disposed of two amendments that we knew would be offered by 
GOP Sen. William Scott of Virginia. (Scott once called a news 
conference to deny he was "The King of Dumb," as he would be dubbed 
in a 1974 New Times cover story by Nina Totenberg.) But we weren't 
prepared for what came next. Republican Sen. Norris Cotton of New 
Hampshire took the floor, announced his support for the home rule 
bill and then offered an amendment that would authorize the president 
to appoint the District's police chief with the advice and consent of 
the Senate.

The ghosts of 1783 seemed to be haunting the Senate. Concern centered 
on the possibility that an elected D.C. government might refuse to 
send police to protect Congress from a threat, as the Pennsylvania 
executive council had when the Continental Congress sitting in 
Philadelphia was besieged by 400 unpaid and unruly soldiers.

The Cotton amendment sent Eagleton, Mathias and staff scrambling to 
round up votes against it. Ultimately it was defeated, but nearly a 
third of the Senate favored allowing the president and Congress to 
essentially control the D.C. police department - a surprising and 
sobering discovery.

Which is a rather long-winded way of working around to the latest 
congressional incursion into D.C. self-government - and to what a new 
city administration needs to do going forward.

You don't have to be a supporter of legalized marijuana to recognize 
that the rider in Congress's pending budget deal that would block a 
marijuana legalization measure approved overwhelmingly by D.C. voters 
is an incursion upon selfgovernment.

The essence of home rule is the right of D.C. residents to decide - 
not for the nation, only for themselves - on a particular course of 
action. As a resident, I may or may not agree with the decision. But 
I respect and defend the will of the voters. Today's Congress 
obviously does not. Congress's overriding objective right now is to 
approve a spending bill that avoids a government shutdown. If getting 
to yes on a spending bill means cutting something here and blocking 
something there, so be it. Most members probably never gave a thought 
to including a rider quashing the D.C. initiative until after the 
event occurred.

If all this can unfold in a Washington where Democrats control the 
White House and half of Congress, the District's worst days may be 
yet to come. A Republican Senate and a more Republican House, both of 
them having a dim to dismissive view of D.C. independence, will come 
roaring into town in January.

What does that mean for the incoming D.C. administration of Muriel Bowser?

No longer can congressional relations be treated as a second-tier 
assignment. To date, much of the heavy lifting on Capitol Hill has 
been left to Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D), who has long kept her 
finger in the dike to keep major legislative disasters from flooding 
the District. Her role is irreplaceable.

But a new political dynamic is coming. Mayor Bowser needs to be adept 
at building relationships and keeping communications open with this 
new Congress, partisan differences notwithstanding.

Bowser requires a team of heavyweights, drawn from influential 
segments of the city and region, to serve as her liaisons to Capitol 
Hill. She and her team, while communicating with Norton, must 
interact directly with members and committees, both formally and 
informally, on policy and political matters important to the city. 
And Norton will have to respect the mayor's role in working with the 
new, all-GOP Congress.

The city must not get caught flat-footed, as it was with the 
anti-drug legalization rider - and as we were back in ' 73.

The District's freedom to make its own choices is at stake.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom