As a geographic area, an economy and as a population, D. C., (far more than any other) benefits from a massive, powerful, centralized government. Giving those citizens (many of them direct employees of the government) incrementally more control over the levers of power would be a mistake from the point of view of every state and citizen. As a group, their interests are in many ways not generally aligned with those of other citizens.
There was a reason the national capitol was situated in an area that was not governed by any state. That is why Maryland gave up the land in the first place. If the residents who moved there knowing that now want state representation, give it back to Maryland.
They should absolutely be able to elect voting members of the House and Senate. Whether that happens through statehood, or voting in Maryland, is of little concern to me.
(Although even if they are deemed part of Maryland for the Senate, they ought to be their own congressional district.)
For DC to become a state, the states that donated the land will need to vote to give up the land first. They donated it for use as the Nations capitol, and nothing else. I will bet they will not vote to give it to a new state.
Rather than make it another state, just give it back to the states from whence it came, Maryland and Virginia. By making it a new state, you are defeating the reasoning behind the capital as a separate entity.
2) More seriously, that was not the only reason we declared independence. In fact, that principle didn’t even make it into our Constitution. I do wonder why not.
pschearer Premium Member almost 3 years ago
We the People of the United States . . . do Ordain and Establish these Suggestions for the United States of America.
dwane.scoty1 almost 3 years ago
Voting Rights for sheep in Wyoming !
Pickled Pete almost 3 years ago
People living in D.C. are not legitimate citizens of the U.S. Why not deport all aliens to DC?
cdward almost 3 years ago
No taxation without representation, right?
uniquename almost 3 years ago
It’s gonna mess up the flag.
LKrueger41 almost 3 years ago
As a geographic area, an economy and as a population, D. C., (far more than any other) benefits from a massive, powerful, centralized government. Giving those citizens (many of them direct employees of the government) incrementally more control over the levers of power would be a mistake from the point of view of every state and citizen. As a group, their interests are in many ways not generally aligned with those of other citizens.
rhpii almost 3 years ago
There was a reason the national capitol was situated in an area that was not governed by any state. That is why Maryland gave up the land in the first place. If the residents who moved there knowing that now want state representation, give it back to Maryland.
fritzoid Premium Member almost 3 years ago
They should absolutely be able to elect voting members of the House and Senate. Whether that happens through statehood, or voting in Maryland, is of little concern to me.
(Although even if they are deemed part of Maryland for the Senate, they ought to be their own congressional district.)
asndad1948 almost 3 years ago
For DC to become a state, the states that donated the land will need to vote to give up the land first. They donated it for use as the Nations capitol, and nothing else. I will bet they will not vote to give it to a new state.
ChukLitl Premium Member almost 3 years ago
Wyoming was first to allow women to vote because they needed enough voters to become a state.
Andylit Premium Member almost 3 years ago
Have DC give back most of the land to MD. Those who live in that section become MD residents.
Retain a sufficient chunk to cover the Capitol, the WH and the monuments.
Problem solved.
capral almost 3 years ago
Another is to let them vote in the state which gave the land they reside in.
pchemcat almost 3 years ago
Rather than make it another state, just give it back to the states from whence it came, Maryland and Virginia. By making it a new state, you are defeating the reasoning behind the capital as a separate entity.
gammaguy almost 3 years ago
“No taxation without representation.”
1) That’s so 2½ centuries ago! /s
2) More seriously, that was not the only reason we declared independence. In fact, that principle didn’t even make it into our Constitution. I do wonder why not.
c001 almost 3 years ago
Strange phrasing indeed. “Representation of citizens”? In politics???