D.C. Overseer Becomes a Vocal Critic

Officially, he’s a congressman. But Rep. Julian C. Dixon (D-Los Angeles) has been moonlighting as a local politician here as well--ensnarling himself in some of the headaches of the average mayor or councilman.

As longtime chairman of the House appropriations subcommittee overseeing the District of Columbia, Dixon has pored over the D.C. budget, analyzed the D.C. charter and generally become an expert in the inner workings of a city far from his congressional district.

“I have gotten very familiar with municipal management and I probably know as much about it as any member of any city council,” Dixon says.

Despite his active involvement in the District, Dixon has always striven to remain a congressman--not a councilman--and let D.C. itself run the show. That hands-off philosophy, he now suggests, has resulted in a big mess.

With the District mired in a full-blown financial crisis, Dixon feels stung. He accuses District officials of mishandling federal money he fought so hard to provide. Almost overnight, he has become one of the District’s most vocal critics--his booming voice chastising officials during committee hearings for their financial shenanigans.

“There’s no doubt about it, I am now critical of the District,” Dixon says. “They do not have a good management system and they have been overly optimistic in their revenue projections and reckless in their spending.”

The situation is so bad that Dixon has recommended what was once unthinkable: The federal government should temporarily take over the district’s finances.

“He feels betrayed,” said a staffer who has worked with Dixon for years. “He has pointed out many of the problems that have come home to roost. He has tried to get the District to make the changes on its own. He wanted to give them every opportunity to get their own house in order. They didn’t, and it just pains him.”

As Kevin P. Chavous, a D.C. councilman, put it: “Now he’s adopted a tough love approach.”

*

When he arrived here in 1978, Dixon received a political prize--a spot on the powerful House Appropriations Committee, which doles out the country’s funds. On top of that, he became the first freshman to chair an appropriations subcommittee, a member of the so-called college of cardinals.

But Dixon would not oversee funding for defense, agriculture, commerce or energy--the broad issues that allow subcommittee chairmen to deliver for the voters back home. He became overseer of the District of Columbia.

“It’s a thankless job,” said one Capitol Hill veteran. “You’re not going to find many of your constituents who are all that concerned about the District of Columbia. Sure, they want it to be safe and clean when they come here as tourists, but they are interested in things a little closer to home.”

But for Dixon, former chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, this was close to home.

He was born in the District and wanted desperately to see its mostly black residents thrive. He approached the job with gusto, lobbying his congressional colleagues to support the District’s budgets and pushing for more funding.

“Because of home rule, I was reluctant to move forward when there were signs of financial problems,” he acknowledged. “They always had logical explanations. . . . I do feel betrayed, and it’s because I consistently asked them about their projected revenues and they would give me some rosy picture.”

*

There is nothing rosy about the District’s financial state today. Hundreds of millions of dollars in debt, it cannot afford to pay its creditors. Basic services are being cut and hundreds of layoffs loom on the horizon.

As the new Republican Congress begins to flex its oversight muscle, resentment along racial lines is developing among some in the District who have long distrusted Capitol Hill. The headline in one African American newspaper recently screamed: CONGRESS vs. BLACK WASHINGTON.

Yet Dixon’s critiques, harsh as they are, carry credibility even among those most suspect of congressional meddling in District affairs.

“This city has been victimized by 200 years of congressional colonization,” said Chavous, who represents a largely black council district. “But I think congressman Dixon is viewed as one of the few members who has realized that District residents do not have the same rights as other Americans. He is set apart from others on Capitol Hill.”

At the same time, supporters of District independence are looking forward to the day when Dixon can concentrate on other things.

“I really don’t think residents of places in California and New York and Texas elected their congressional representatives to help run our city,” said one backer of the long-shot struggle to make D.C. a state. “To Mr. Dixon’s credit, he’s done it with integrity. But someday, wouldn’t it be wonderful, if we no longer needed his help?”