Posted on 02/23/2009 6:17:36 AM PST by BGHater
Conditions Appear Favorable in Senate, House and White House
Supporters of D.C. voting rights believe that they are on the verge of their biggest victory in at least 30 years as the Senate prepares to take up a bill this week creating a full House seat for the District.
Two years ago, a similar measure failed to clear a key procedural hurdle in that chamber by three votes. Democrats picked up at least seven Senate seats in the elections last fall, boosting the current bill's chance of passage. They also expanded their majority in the House, where the bill is expected to be approved as early as next month.
"I think the votes are there. I think it's going to pass the Senate," said Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), who is sponsoring the bill with Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.).
In decades of struggle for representation, D.C. residents' hopes have often been raised and then dashed. This time, they are counting not only on bigger majorities in Congress but also on a supportive White House. President Obama calls himself a "strong proponent" of congressional representation for the District -- unlike President George W. Bush, who had threatened to veto the measure.
Although passage is likely, it is not ensured.
"The question is whether there will be an attempt to foul it up by amending it," Hatch said in an interview. He also said important differences remain between the Senate and House bills.
Even if the bill becomes law, it will probably be challenged in court. Opponents note that the Constitution gives House representation to the "people of the several states," and the District is not a state.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Well...certainly Obama will veto it...because he’s a Constitutional Law professor.
If we want to be fair to DC, we should repeal the 23rd amendment in exchange for disallowing federal taxes of any kind to be imposed on DC residents. Govern it like a US territory.
This is unconstitutional and unlawful.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
You’re absolutely right, and if we still used the Constitution, this would be unconstitutional. (We stopped using the Constitution on 1/20/09).
A mere stepping stone to statehood. Obama, Acorn, Democrats, and the corrupt MSM will figure out a way to justify this and work to bring it to pass.
We don’t need no stinkin’ Constitution.
Oh please. We haven’t tried Constitutional principles or adhered to the Constitution long before Obama came into power.
There is only one reason to gived this to DC; To expand the dem majority. They don’t need representation as they get protty much anything they want anyway. If they want representation, they should move to a state.
Give DC a vote, and NYC will want 2 senators.
Bet on it.
In other words, the Democrats have found another way to put two more Permanent Liberal seats in the Senate.
Enjoy your Hope ‘n Change.
The Constitution is a dirty rag to BHO and his worshipers. Instead, they revere every word that proceedeth from the mouth of Obama.
Obviously unconstitutional.
Next.
I say give DC statehood — then move the US Capital to a district carved out along the Kansas-Oklahoma border. Then watch DC implode like Zimbabwe.
Today we have representation without taxation....
Why would Orin Hatch want to create a permanent Democrat House Vote that is unconstitutional?
This will go to the SCOTUS and be rejected by a 6 to three vote.
LLS
Our “call to the wild” should be something like “no taxation for the next generation”
Sure says something about Hatch.
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.