Over the last few days, the effects of the government shutdown have wreaked havoc on D.C.’s budget. As the Voice went to press it seemed that Congress was moving toward a compromise that would reopen the government, the shutdown has proven that fundamental changes must be made to the District’s budget autonomy in order to ensure operational stability in the future.
Throughout the shutdown, D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray (D) tapped into the District’s $144 million Contingency Cash Reserve Fund to pay the 32,000 workers on the District’s payroll. As these emergency funds dwindled, Gray considered asking D.C. courts to move up the implementation date of an amendment to the District’s charter that will allow D.C. to appropriate its own tax and fee revenue.
D.C. voters approved the charter with a ballot referendum on April 23, 2012 and, if implemented, it would allow the D.C. government to spend its own tax revenue without seeking Congressional approval. But, this solution is not without problems. D.C. Mayor spokesperson, Pedro Ribiero, raised questions about the legality of moving up the implementation date of the charter amendment. D.C Attorney General Irving Nathan accused Gray of violating the Anti-Deficiency Act, which prohibits government officials from spending funds that Congress has not legally appropriated.
D.C. is the only local jurisdiction in the United States that requires Congress to approve its budget, even though it relies largely on locally-raised taxes for revenue. During the shutdown, the legal dilemma created by the Act added to D.C.’s financial burden by severely limiting the legal options District officials can pursue to fund local operations. Without government funds many city services such as the school system, would be paralyzed.
Despite the legal conflict the charter amendment creates, it will be implemented unless Congress steps in to stop it. In this case, where the government shutdown proved that the District cannot continue to function under federal budgetary control, Congress should simply take a laissez-faire approach to the issue and allow the amendment to stand.
The guiding principle of government should be to do no harm. By doing nothing on the charter amendment, Congress would do the District a service by freeing it from the partisan squabbling that plagues federal government and allowing it the room to breathe.
