By D. Kevin McNeir
Special to the AFRO
kmcneir@afro.com
Washington, D.C., officials are decrying federal legislation that, they say, pose as threats to Home Rule – the law which has allowed the District to self-govern since 1975.
On Nov. 17, the House Rules Committee considered 13 D.C.-related bills. Ahead of the vote, the District’s delegate to Congress, Eleanor Holmes Norton, released a statement that criticized the motivations of legislators, specifically Republicans in the House, who represent far-away constituencies yet continue to promote bills that undermine the autonomy of the District.
“D.C.’s local legislature, the D.C. Council, was elected by D.C. residents. Its members are accountable to D.C., and they are the appropriate elected officials to dictate D.C. laws,” Norton said. “It is paternalistic and condescending for Republican members of Congress to substitute their own judgment for that of D.C.’s local legislature.”
The Democrat also pointed out the disparity between the rights afforded to residents of other U.S. states compared to Washingtonians.
“D.C. residents have all the obligations of American citizenship, including paying federal taxes, serving on juries, and registering with the Selective Service,” she said. “Yet Congress denies them full local self-government and voting representation in Congress. They deserve full control of their own local affairs.”
Two of the proposed bills have previously elicited significant public scrutiny – the first bill, introduced by Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), that would require mandatory pretrial and post-conviction detention for certain crimes; and the second bill, introduced by Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.), which would repeal D.C.’s Comprehensive Policing and Justice Reform Amendment Act of 2022.
Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) Chair Yvette D. Clarke (D-N.Y.) said the group opposes efforts led by House Republicans to legislate crime in Washington, which counter decisions supported by voters and elected officials, with specific reference to the two bills introduced by Reps. Clyde and Stefanik.
“These bills are nothing more than another blatant attempt to strip residents of their right to self-governance, roll back police accountability reforms, and reimpose discriminatory cash bail practices against the will of residents and D.C.’s elected officials,” Clarke said in a Nov. 19 statement. “Despite the Trump Administration’s continued claims that violent crime in D.C. is increasing, the Republican-led review of the Metropolitan Police Department has confirmed what we have long known: crime in D.C. is declining.
“The CBC strongly opposed these anti-D.C. home rule bills and will continue fighting to protect D.C.’s right to self-governance,” the statement continued. “We will continue to oppose any effort to silence D.C. residents, and we call on our colleagues to reject these harmful, anti-democratic pieces of legislation and join us in the work to advance D.C. statehood.”
While neither of the two bills introduced by Reps. Stefanik and Clyde were approved by the House, two others received the necessary notes and were advanced to the Senate for their consideration.
The first, the D.C. CRIMES ACT, introduced by Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.), would have changed the age at which a court is allowed discretion to impose alternative sentences on a person from 24 to 18. The second, introduced by Rep. Brand on Gill (R-Texas), would have lowered the age minors can be tried as adults in D.C. to 14 years old.
Norton voiced her discontent following the House vote.
“Today’s vote is yet another shameful assault on the democratic rights of more than 700,000 taxpaying D.C. residents,” she said in a statement. “This is about denying D.C. residents the basic right of self-government that every American deserves and treating the nation’s capital as Republicans’ own fiefdom, democracy be damned.”
Norton further stated that the cycle of “disingenuous partisanship,” in which Republicans take steps to decrease the District’s ability to make its own decisions while claiming to be concerned about the city, must end.
Local D.C. officials, including Mayor Muriel Bowser, Attorney General Brian Schwalb, and D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson, have echoed Norton’s sentiments.
“We are united in our forceful opposition to the bills recently advanced by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,” the trio said in a joint statement. “These bills are an affront to Home Rule and the principles of democracy and local self-governance on which this country was founded.
“The District is home to more than 700,000 residents who pay taxes and serve in the military. Like all Americans, they deserve the right to elect local leaders who have the authority to determine the local policies that govern them. We urge members of Congress to reject this unprecedented federal overreach and vote against these bills.”
Since Congress passed the Home Rule Act of 1973, D.C. has had its own government elected by residents. The bill went into effect in 1975 after President Richard Nixon signed it into law, officially establishing the roles of the city council and the mayor, and allowing the District limited autonomy and the ability to pass its own laws. However, the bone of contention has always been the fact that all D.C. legislation requires the approval of Congress.
Unlike states, D.C.’s home rule is not guaranteed by the Constitution, but rather by a simple law. Advocates have long pressed for D.C. statehood because under the Home Rule Act, Congress can unilaterally repeal any of the District’s laws and even abolish D.C.’s government.
The ramifications of that vulnerability is no more evident than in President Trump’s decision earlier this year to seize control of the D.C. National Guard and federalize the police department–despite the lack of data to support his claims of rampant crime. It would take an act of Congress, however, if the president wanted to completely take over D.C.
