[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 39 (Thursday, March 5, 2009)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E576]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   INTRODUCTION OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA HATCH ACT REFORM ACT OF 2009

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON

                      of the district of columbia

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, March 5, 2009

  Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, today, I introduce the District of 
Columbia Hatch Act Reform Act of 2009, to eliminate discriminatory 
treatment of the District of Columbia, which alone among U.S. 
jurisdictions still falls under the federal Hatch Act, as it did before 
the Congress made the District an independent jurisdiction that today 
enacts its own local laws. This bill would retain federal Hatch Act 
authority concerning prohibited partisan and political activity that 
applies to every state and locality upon receipt of federal funds or 
functions, and importantly, would require the District to enact its own 
local version of the Hatch Act barring similar local violations to 
become effective. Local Hatch Act violations in the District are rare, 
but the District needs its own Hatch Act to fully account and be 
responsible for local violations, with which only a local, objective 
body would be familiar.
  This bill will leave in place the federal Hatch Act restrictions that 
apply to other jurisdictions on the use of official authority, 
specifically as it relates to elections; the solicitation, acceptance, 
or receipt of political campaign contributions; the prohibitions on 
running for public office in partisan elections; and the use of on-duty 
time and resources to engage in partisan campaign activity when federal 
funds or responsibilities are involved. My bill would remove only the 
federal Hatch Act jurisdiction that applies solely to the District of 
Columbia and would require the District to have its own local Hatch 
Act, like every other jurisdiction, instead of requiring the federal 
Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and its Special Counsel to devote 
staff time and other resources on investigation, fact-finding and 
judgment of unfamiliar local matters.
  Indeed, OPM has asked for the federal guidance my bill offers. In 
recent cases, OPM cited an ANC (Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner) 
commissioner for violations of the Hatch Act when he ran for higher 
office, even though ANC commissioners are ``elected officials'' under 
D.C. law. As a result of the failure to clear up the confusion between 
local and federal jurisdictions, the application of the Hatch Act to 
ANC commissioners has been selectively enforced by OPM. For example, 
OPM recently filed cases charging Hatch Act violations against an ANC 
commissioner running for the D.C. Council but did not file when several 
members of the current D.C. City Council ran for the D.C. Council from 
positions as ANC commissioners. The present law results in possible 
violations of the federal Hatch Act while leaving OPM with local 
responsibility that does not implicate its federal jurisdiction.
  The House recognized that the present federal Hatch Act jurisdiction 
over the District was inappropriate and obsolete and removed this 
federal responsibility several years ago, but the Senate failed to act. 
The District should bear this local responsibility. My bill will 
eliminate the double indignity of placing a local burden on the federal 
government and depriving the District of a responsibility, which only 
local jurisdictions familiar with local laws can be expected to handle 
responsibly.
  The Hatch Act Reform is the fourth in the ``Free and Equal D.C.'' 
series of bills that I have introduced to eliminate anti-Home Rule or 
redundant bills that deprive the city of equal treatment and 
recognition as an independent self-governing jurisdiction. This 
uncomplicated and straightforward bill is not controversial, has been 
enacted before by the House and should be passed forthwith.

                          ____________________