Message auto-removed

[Name removed]

[Voltaire2]

1. That is a bonus.

DC can fund its government with a state income tax. Daytime working pop would pay in to that.

[Darwins_Retriever]

2. When I lived in Kansas City, MO (until 1980)

KC had an E-Tax. It was a tax on income earned in Kansas City by those who did not live in KC. A large portion of the executives live in the Kansas suburbs of KC.

DC would have to do something simular.

[BoringUsername]

3. Yeah, for the GOP there is.

They'll have a way harder time maintaining dominance over the Senate.

[Hoyt]

4. Only downside is that it won't happen anytime soon. Nor will N and S Dakota be combined.

[marie999]

10. Why would they even think of combining?

[Hoyt]

14. Because one combined state would have only 2 GOPer Senators, not 4 as now. Point is,

all this discussion of trying to put Democrats in control of Senate by changing states, etc. -- which would be great -- isn't going to happen.

[forgotmylogin]

5. Where do we put the extra star on the flag? n/t

[marie999]

12. Top row 9 and second row 8, repeat.

[Miguelito Loveless]

6. Only if you are a

Q-Confederacy member.

[TxGuitar]

7. What would it be called?

Columbia?

[marie999]

13. It should not be any form of Columbus.

[Silent3]

11. Figuring out what to call this new state

It wouldn't be the "District" of Columbia anymore, because it would be a state. There will still be a District of Columbia anyway, probably by that same name, as there has to be a purely federal district of some sort, even though it will be a lot smaller.

I doubt anyone wants to call it the State of Columbia, or just Columbia, especially since Columbus was a nasty piece of work.

How about something that makes it easy to create a new postal abbreviation, like Xanadu?

[Polybius]

16. Maybe calling it Columbia will get Republicans to vote for it

I'm all for compromise.

[Act_of_Reparation]

17. An asymmetrical star field on the flag?

[GregariousGroundhog]

19. If Congress makes Washington D.C. a sovereign state, they lose a lot of their jurisdiction

One of the things to keep in mind is that powers not granted by the Constitution to the federal government are reserved by the states. Right now, Congress maintains oversight of D.C.'s water/sewer/electrical/gas services, police department, fire department, zoning rules, and so on. If D.C. became a state, those oversight responsibilities would be usurped by the state government and the federal government would lose a lot of its say in those matters.

A better solution would be a constitutional amendment granting whatever district housing the federal government an apportionment of senators and representatives the same as if it were a state, without granting it a statehood outright.

[GregariousGroundhog]

22. Correct, when things are running well, they don't care. But what about when things don't?

January 6th would be a good case in point.

[Tommy Carcetti]

24. A level in anxiety of OCD people nationwide.

51 states? 102 Senators?

Think of the angst it will cause!

( , duh)

[meadowlander]

27. The meter of "Fifty Nifty United States" has already been strained to breaking point.

[Amishman]

25. it's too small and the federal administration areas would still need to be excluded

Plus the legitimacy shadow given that it would be seen (and rightfully so) as having been driven by a political power play to give two more Democratic senators.

I'm not a fan.

The better option is to return all of the residential areas to Maryland, as was done with the VA portion back in the 1800s