Posted on 03/20/2007 3:57:04 PM PDT by RWR8189
WASHINGTON (AP) - The White House on Tuesday threatened a presidential veto of legislation giving the District of Columbia a vote in the House, possibly prolonging a two-century-long wait for representation in Congress. The bill, the White House said in a statement, violates constitutional language saying the House should be made up of representatives chosen by the people of the states. "The District of Columbia is not a state," it said, and if the legislation reaches President Bush's desk, "his senior advisers would recommend that he veto the bill."
The House is to vote Friday on the legislation that would give a vote to the D.C. delegate while creating, until the 2010 census, a new at- large seat for Utah.
That would increase House membership to 437, with the seat from overwhelmingly Democratic D.C. offset by the extra vote from Utah, a predominantly Republican state. Utah narrowly missed obtaining a fourth House seat after the 2000 census.
Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., who worked out that compromise with D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, said he hoped that Bush would override the advice of his aides and approve the legislation if it reaches his desk.
"I hope the president's legacy isn't vetoing democracy in the District of Columbia" while the United States is spending huge sums to promote democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq, he said
Davis, who said there are equally compelling arguments that the D.C. a vote is constitutional, said he expected it to pass the House. "Members will vote their conscience on this."
It would still have to pass the Senate before going to the president, and the constitutional question is also likely to be an issue there.
The White House cited Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution, which states that the House "shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states." It said the Constitution also contains 11 other provisions expressly linking congressional representation to statehood.
Others look at language in Article I, Section 8, which empowers Congress to "exercise exclusive legislation" over the federal capital, in arguing that Congress can, if it chooses, give D.C. voting rights.
"The difference between the House and the Senate is clear," Davis said. "The Senate represents states, the House represents people."
The White House said only a constitutional amendment could give D.C. a vote. Congress in 1978 approved a constitutional amendment extending voting rights to the District, but it died when it was not ratified by three-fourths of the states.
Norton, a Democrat, has full voting rights at the committee level, and, like delegates from territories such as Guam and American Samoa, can vote on amendments on the House floor as long as the votes do not change the outcome.
"violates constitutional language"
You mean someone still thinks we have a valid constitution?
only when it suits that someone's purpose.
The President would be quite correct in vetoing this bill -- but, historically, he's not seemed willing to veto clearly unconstitutional bills that show up on his desk, so who knows what he'll do?
FYI: Snarkiness is REALLY unbecoming (and getting VERY old)!
"I hope the president's legacy isn't vetoing democracy in the District of Columbia" while the United States is spending huge sums to promote democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq, he said...
What a freakin' moron. D.C. is the CAPITOL of our country, not a state. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't D.C. a self governing city? What's next, New York City having national representation? I think D.C. should remain a neutral zone in American national politics. That is what was intended.
This bill is horse hockey to begin with.
Eleonor Holmes Norton. Just what we need another racist member of the Congressional Black caucus.
DC is a gold mine for Dimocraps with 2/3 illiteracy rate.
Marion Berry is a good example of the constituents of D.C.
I know the truth hurts sometimes, but I would hardly consider speaking the truth to be "snarky". Have some more koolaid!
I wonder who wrote the Bill for her. Based on her being unable to gather her thoughts or read a simple statement at last Friday's Plame hearing, I'm wondering if she isn't in the 1/3 of D.C. found to be illiterate in a recent study.
They might as well be allowed to vote in Maryland. Thanks to DC refugees and bedroom liberals from Montgomery and PG county we cant get anything but Dumbocrats anyway.
Lets just say she isnt the sharpest knife in the drawer.
Maybe they should not pay taxes or something since they don't get a vote. Taxation without Representation or something to that effect. I bet that would shut them up. No taxes would do the trick for sure.
"You mean someone still thinks we have a valid constitution?"
YES I DO!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.