[ClearCase_guy]

It's not quite the burning issue of slavery, and it's not as open-ended as western expansion, but this made me think of the issue of new states in the first half of the 1800's. Which political faction would "own" the new state? Pro-slave, or pro-Free? It was a big problem.

Now the issue of political power for DC, which would clearly help the Democrats (historically pro-slave). Sometimes I do agree with those who say this country is headed for another Civil War.

[Wonder Warthog]

"The election's real purpose is to protest the fact that, along with children and felons, D.C. residents don't get to vote for members of Congress."

If they don't like it, they should move outside the limits of DC, and vote as citizens of their state of residence. They knew/know up front that by residing there, their "national" voting rights would be limited. No amendment necessary.

[2banana]

In 1978, a heavily Democratic Congress passed an amendment to the Constitution that would have given the district the same Congressional representation it would have had if it were a state, including two senators. The Amendment had a time limit of seven years, however, and in 1985 the amendment died when only 16 states had ratified it out of the 38 required.

If it didn't pass then, it will NEVER pass now - thank God

[BlackRazor]

With the district's population counted as part of its own for apportionment purposes [Maryland] would gain at least an additional seat in the House and one more electoral vote, increasing its political clout in the federal government.

Would that mean that DC's 3 electoral votes would vanish, in return for Maryland getting one additional House seat and 1 additional electoral vote? If so, I would be willing to make that tradeoff. Of course, I doubt the Democrats would go along with it, since they'd be losing 2 sure electoral votes in the exchange.

[fqued]

Interesting? Yes.
long-standing argument? Yes.
Any chance of passing? No.
End of question? No.


Do the DC residents have representation? YES! They are represented by the whole of the Senate and House, because the Legislature controls DC.

[goldstategop]

Repeal the racist Organic Acts and hand the populated part of D.C back to Maryland. Problem solved.

[rabidralph]

Twelve percent of DC's voters voted yesterday. The mayor said this sends a strong message that DC deserves voting rights. LOL.

[uncbob]

Marion Barry would make an excellent senator

His credentials are almost as good ad Teddy's

[FRgal4u]

NO NO NO

We don't need two Dems senators from a tiny district.

What a stupid idea.

[Timesink]

Or we could just do nothing and let DC rot in a stew of its own irrelevance.

Actually, the preferable solution would be to take the "taxation without representation" argument off the table by making Washington a tax-free zone (other than those imposed by the local government to run basic services). Not only would it solve the problem, but it would also almost instantaneously turn a dying city of crime and slums into one of the cleanest, safest places in America as capitalists buy up property by the mile and turn it into middle- and upper-class commercial and residential properties.

Which would also take away the RATS' stranglehold on the populace at the same time.

[DoctorMichael]

Completely ridiculous non-starter.

With 600,000 (?) residents, DC is a little less than the average Congessional District. They SHOULD be absorbed by either Virginia or Maryland, if anybody could stand their unruliness and corrupt politics.

[theDentist]

Nope. I believe the COnstitution forbids it.

[rhinohunter]

Interesting idea.

Would the rats trade 2 of their 3 permanent electoral votes for a permanent House seat? I doubt it.

Should they? Probably.

One sticky point that the proposed Amendment does not address, however, is redistricting. Would the MD legislature be in charge? If so, what stipulations would they have to observe regarding the DC portion?

[Clemenza]

No to DC, No to "Puerco" Rico. The latter would give us 7 Dem congressmen to DC's 1, with two Democratic Senators each.

[pgkdan]

No way. you want a Senator? Move to MD or VA

[nicollo]

From the Dec. 1912 annual Address to Congress, President William Howard Taft wrote of this pesky and insolent question:

From time to time there is considerable agitation in Washington in favor of granting the citizens of the city the franchise and constituting an elective government. I am strongly opposed to this change. The history of Washington discloses a number of experiments of this kind, which have always been abandoned as unsatisfactory. The truth is this is a city governed by a popular body, to wit, the Congress of the United States, selected from the people of the United States, who own Washington. The people who come here to live do so with the knowledge of the origin of the city and the restrictions, and therefore voluntarily give up the privilege of living in a municipality governed by popular vote. Washington is so unique in its origin and in its use for housing and localizing the sovereignty of the Nation that the people who live here must regard its peculiar character and must be content to subject themselves to the control of a body selected by all the people of the Nation. I agree that there are certain inconveniences growing out of the government of a city by a national legislature like Congress, and it would perhaps be possible to lessen these by the delegation by Congress to the District Commissioners of greater legislative power for the enactment of local laws than they now possess, especially those of a police character.

Taft gave a speech in 1909 dedicated to this question that blew away the DC statehood agitators. I don't have it digitized. I'll try and type it up one day and post it here. Great speech.

Nicollo unmasked: Bromleyisms here

See also: William Howard Taft pages

[unixfox]

I say let em have their "representatives", just don't ask the rest of us to bail them out when the socialists of that city destroy it even further than it is now.