So there was trial and error in that regard, but what I am saying is that the Congress can never and should never be completely indifferent toward the welfare of the Nation's capital.

If Congress grants Home Rule, they can also take it away, as they did before.

Mr. GUDE. Well, I think Congress could show its concern not only passing this legislation, but passing the legislation for voting representation and I am also going to work on getting that bill out of the Judiciary Committee.

The CHAIRMAN. This Committee can't act on the bill to give a voting representative.

Mr. GUDE. That's right. I am well aware of that, and I introduced legislation on that I appreciate the efforts of Mr. Nelsen and Mr. Brovhill on this.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Mr. GUDE. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. The next speaker is Mr. Horton.

STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK HORTON, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Mr. HORTON. Mr. Chairman, I am deeply grateful for the opportunity to testify before this distinguished Committee. As a former member of the District Committee, I know you are aware of my very strong feeling about the need for providing necessary elements of self-government in the Nation's Capital.

I have co-sponsored two of the bills now under consideration in your Committee: H.R. 11215 which establishes a Commission on Government for the District of Columbia; and H.R. 11216, the District of Columbia Delegate Act, which establishes, as an interim step, a non-voting delegate from Washington in the House. Both these bills are Administration bills. They have the strongest possible backing from the President, who recognizes both measures as important steps toward extending the rights of our representative democracy to the 800,000 people of this city.

I am personally grateful to you, Mr. Chairman, for directing the attention of this committee toward this vital legislation. I know you have heard today from other distinguished members of Congress, and of this Committee, regarding the importance of prompt action on these bills. I can only add my own pledge to support these measures when they reach the floor.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much Mr. Horton, for appearing here.

Any questions?

Mr. ADAMS. Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Adams.

Mr. ADAMS. I have no questions, but I would like to say that Mr. Horton has worked hard with us for many years, and we appreciate support and we appreciate your coming here to testify, Mr. Horton. Mr. HORTON. Thank you.

his

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you for coming, Mr. Horton.

Mr. HORTON. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. At this point in the record, I would like to insert my statement.

(The statement referred to appears as follows:)

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN L. McMILLAN, CHAIRMAN, HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Mr. MCMILLAN. The Committee on the District of Columbia has for consideration 16 bills which deal with Home Rule and related subjects. The variety of these proposals is essentially similar to previous bills introduced and brought to hearing often in the past. Some bills are for home rule with a non-voting delegate in the House. Some propose only a non-voting delegate in the House or in the Senate. Some propose special studies of the District government looking toward another reorganization.

It may be observed that the press and others have given the impression that the Committee has given Home Rule advocates little chance for hearings on Home Rule bills. Because my feelings were to the contrary, I looked into the facts. I found that this is the 4th consecutive Congress during which hearings on such legislation have been held. It is safe to say that there is no single subject of legislation coming before this Committee that has been given so much time so frequently as Home Rule. In fact, during the ten year period ending with the 90th Congress, this Committee probably spent more time on hearings and consideration of Home Rule and similar matters than during any other ten year period in history.

During the years I have been a member of this Committee, the District Government has been reorganized three times. After each reorganization, the cost of the government increased from 50% to 100% within a few years.

Some of the pending bills will result in increased costs. The Delegate Bill will add about $200,000 per year to District Government expenses. Some of the pending measures are directed toward less costly operation of government.

If the proposed budget for the District is approved, and the District receives the usual Federal grants, the local government will be the most costly per capita, of any major city government in the nation.

The CHAIRMAN. I would like to say that tomorrow, they have scheduled a meeting on legislation for the police and firemen and teachers, and I hope that all Members can be present and get that bill voted out as soon as possible.

This Committee is scheduled to meet on Monday morning at 10:00 for another hearing on Home Rule bills.

(Whereupon, at 12:00 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.)

HOME RULE

MONDAY, MARCH 16, 1970

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE No. 3 OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,

Washington, D.C. The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:15 a.m., in Room 1310, Longworth House Office Building, Honorable John Dowdy (Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives McMillan (Chairman of the full Committee), Dowdy (Chairman of the Subcommittee and presiding), Adams, Cabell, Hungate, Nelsen, and Broyhill.

Also present: James T. Clark, Clerk, and Leonard O. Hilder, Investigator.

Mr. Dowdy. The committee will come to order. We will continue this morning the hearing started March 10, on the various bills relating to the commission study on government for the District of Columbia, the non-voting delegate, those bills retroceding part of the District to Maryland. I am sorry I was unable to be here that day, and I appreciate Mr. McMillan presiding in my absence.

We have several witnesses listed for this morning.
The first is Monsignor Ralph Kuehner.

Come around, sir, and we welcome you here.

STATEMENT OF MONSIGNOR RALPH KUEHNER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF URBAN AFFAIRS OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF WASHINGTON, REPRESENTING INTERRELIGIOUS COMMITTEE ON RACE RELATIONS, JEWISH COMMUNITY COUNCIL OF GREATER WASHINGTON, COUNCIL OF CHURCHES OF GREATER WASHINGTON, AND THE CATHOLIC ARCHDIOCESE OF WASHINGTON

Monsignor KUEHNER. My name is Monsignor Ralph Kuehner. I am executive director of the Office of Urban Affairs of the Archidiocese of Washington. However, today I am speaking for four separate organizations: the interreligious committee on race relations, which is composed of 60 religious leaders in this community, both clergy and laity; the Jewish Community Council of Greater Washington, which is the central body of 154 synagogues, organizations, and institutions in this metropolitan area; the Council of Churches of Greater Washington, representing 29 Protestant denominations with 450 churches: the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington, which has 123 parishes an some 400,000 members.

HOME RULE

These four organizations once again declare their unequivocal support of the principle of full home rule for the District of Columbia. It is an unfortunate fact that though these groups and many others have been reaffirming their support of home rule for the past 20 years, this support has met with very limited success.

There are opponents of home rule who would deny the District self-government because of what they feel to be the city's problems; namely, crime, educational shortcomings, poverty. In answer it should be noted that thousands upon thousands of Washingtonians lead useful, decent, exemplary lives. Nor is there a major city in this country which does not have similar problems. With full home rule-rule by interested and elected members of the community-the District could better combat its problems.

In any case, full citizenship is not a reward for good behavior! It is a moral, a constitutional right. The lack of full citizenship for the residents of the District is a blot on our national honor. The fact that a city of 850,000 Americans is unable to choose its representatives, unable to exercise any meaningful control over how its tax revenue shall be spent, and is denied many elementary rights of citizenship is an anomaly in a professedly democratic nation. The continued denial of home rule robs the residents of the District of an important element of human dignity in a democracy; namely, the right to vote for those who govern so large a part of their lives.

NON-VOTING DELEGATE AND CHARTER COMMISSION

Our four organizations endorse any measure that promises District citizens the greatest amount of self-determination and participation in the democratic processes. As first steps, we urge the House of Representatives to support President Nixon's proposals which provide for a non-voting delegate to the House and which would establish a charter Commission to study appropriate means of self-government for the District, proposals which have already received the unanimous support of the Senate.

Let me point out that we support these measures as first steps, urging Congress to work speedily for full home rule for the District of Columbia.

We thank you for this opportunity to reaffirm our support for these desperately needed suffrage measures, and urge you to exercise your influential leadership toward their speedy passage.

Mr. DOWDY. Questions?

Mr. Cabell, do you have questions?

Mr. CABELL. No questions.

Mr. Dowdy. Mr. Hungate?

Mr. HUNGATE. No questions, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Mr. Dowdy. I was reading some of the hearings last week. Mr. Kyl had a suggestion, that the populated areas of the District of Columbia be retroceded to the State of Maryland which would give Maryland one or two more Congressmen and also give the resident of that area the benefit of the two senators which every State has.

Do you have some comment about that?

It seems to me that just on the face of it, that that would give the population of the District of Columbia a greater voice and take them completely out from under the federal jurisdiction and put them on the same basis as any other state.

Monsignor KUEHNER. Surely. I think this would be an improvement over the present situation.

Whether this is the ultimate answer, I would like to see more comment and more discussion with people in the District who are knowledgeable in this area as to, you know, the best possible proposal. But I think it would be an improvement over the present situation. Mr. DowDY. Of course, I have never been able to just exactly make up my mind as to what is the best thing to be done, in view of the fact that the District was set up as a seat of the Nation's government because of problems that had demonstrated themselves, so that the capital of the United States would be a separate entity in order for it to be controlled by the Federal Government, itself. And it seems the thing that have drifted through my mind is whether the area under the control of the Congress-the control of the present Congress, of course is really too big.

Monsignor KUEHNER. I agree with that. You know, the actual space that could be allotted for federal government would not, I do not think, have to include the residential areas, the commercial areas of the city. It could be confined, I think, rather easily, to the national government uses of it.

Mr. DOWDY. Now, we are pleased to have with us this morning General Prentiss, who was a former Commissioner of the District of Columbia, and who is now the president of The Association of the Oldest Inhabitants of the District of Columbia.

Now, General, I did not know that you were one of the oldest inhabitants of the District of Columbia.

General PRENTISS. I was born here in the previous century.

Mr. Dowdy. We are pleased to have you with us again this morning.

STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. LOUIS W. PRENTISS, RETIRED, PRESIDENT, THE ASSOCIATION OF THE OLDEST INHABITANTS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

General PRENTISS. Mr. Chairman, I am Major General Louis W. Prentiss, Retired, and I appear here before your committee as President of The Association of the Oldest Inhabitants of the District of Columbia.

The Association of the Oldest Inhabitants of the District of Columbia is comprised of over 500 members, is the oldest civic organization in the city, having been founded in 1865. Ever since its start it has worked for everything that would be helpful to improve the conditions of our nation's Capital and for things that will be of the greatest benefit to all our citizens and taxpayers, and I have been instructed to appear here before you and firmly oppose the approval of all bills granting home rule to the District of Columbia.

To be eligible for membership in our Association a candidate must be 50 years old and have been a resident for at least 35 years. I am a native of the city. My family has resided here since 1789 when they