Posted on 06/16/2020 2:07:27 PM PDT by Meatspace
WASHINGTON (AP) Democrats controlling the House have slated a vote next week to make the District of Columbia the 51st state, an issue that they say has become far more important in the aftermath of protests for racial justice in both Washington and across the nation.
Next Fridays vote, if successful, would pass a D.C. statehood bill for the first time in the House, but the legislation faces insurmountable opposition in the GOP-controlled Senate. It comes even as the COVID-19 pandemic has forced delays in the consideration of most other legislation. More than enough lawmakers are officially backing the bill for it to pass. In 1993, the Democratic-controlled Congress defeated a D.C. statehood bill by an almost 2-1 margin.
(Excerpt) Read more at pbs.org ...
How do you figure that?
Collins, Gardner, Tillis and Daigle are gone.
Jones will probably lose - that's 50-50, but that increases the value of a Murkowski switch to astronomical levels. Romney is a less likely switcher, but possible.
Most likely outcome is a 49-51 Senate, with 48-52 possible.
GOP majority is very unlikely.
If a Constitutional Amendment isn't needed then could you please prove your assertion.
Might I suggest, as a starting point, the proposal in The Federalist No. 43 titled...
The Same Subject Continued (The Powers Conferred by the Constitution Further Considered)
...and in particular point #2.
Translation: “Two more Liberal Senators”
I’d be okay with this....
Why you ask?
Well that would mean we would have to move our FEDERAL CAPITAL to a new NON-STATE owned land.
I am sure Texas would cede some nice land in the driest hottest part to house the new government buildings!
DC would just become another idiot Atlantic seaboard liberal states with a lot of monuments in it.
/s
This is a single city - ridiculous to even consider making it a state. It was part of a state but it was carved out as it was believed the nation’s capital should not be part of any state. That is the whole reason it exists. If we’ve changed our minds on that, give the territory back to Maryland if we want it to be a part of a state.
I think it was in the 80’s when DC statehood was being floated an some conservative pointed out that DC was “too small to be a state and too large to be an asylum.”
This is a pathetic election year stunt. And it is more pathetic than most.
How come this issue wasn’t important when Dems controlled both houses of Congress and the Presidency in 2009?
[ Its the District of Colombia precisely so that the Executive, legislative and judicial branches will NOT be subject to the jurisdiction of any state! How stupid can anyone be to not know that? ]
They don’t even know the first amendment!!!!
Even a Ramen eating teenager knows it better than they do:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvgTq-pk710
Cannot do this. D.C, is explicitly not a state and cannot be made into a state without a change to the constitution. Not going to happen.
Collins is not gone.
She and her presumed opponent are hammering the air waves, spending $55 million between them.
Collins received 67% of the vote in 2014.
All she needs is 50.1% to win this time. It’s doable.
And Puerto Rico the 52nd and Guam the 53rd and Wake Island the 54th and and and etc.
Nancy is a busy little beaver doing completely useless things
Fixed it.
how about they make DC a state and then move the federal government out west to Galts Gulch and make a new capital? we can remove and relocate all the statues too.
LORD, I wish they’d make the Eastern Shore of Maryland its own state. It is SOOO different from the Western Shore (i.e., conservative).
They can go back to being a part of Maryland and Virginia if they are that unhappy.
Just a cheap attempt to grab 2 more Senators.
If we're counting on this Supreme Court to do the right thing, the constitutional thing, we are sadly mistaken.
The US Supreme Court stunned court watchers on Monday with its ruling that has redefined the very meaning of the word "sex" to protect LGBTQ workers from discrimination in the workplace. However, when the law was written in 1964, there were only two options: male or female. Now "sex" also means both one's sexual orientation and one's gender identity. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act already protected people from employer sexual discrimination as well as discrimination based on race, color, religion, or national origin.
Also, this same Supreme Court just let California sanctuary law stand.
We cannot trust the current Supreme Court. Like liberal courts before them they are "making" laws, which is unconstitutional.
State of Deep
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.