DC Statehood - Do you favor it?

[elperromagico]

Poll question: DC Statehood - Do you favor it?

[terrya]

1. D.C statehood should have happened a long, long time ago.

[ronnykmarshall]

2. Not yes, but HELL yes!

Isn't the popluation of DC larger than some states?

[Wabbajack]

4. Just Solidly Republican Wyoming I think

[Wabbajack]

3. Hell yes

The ONLY reason they aren't a state is the repubs know that means 2 more Democrats in the senate. Dems should run on this issuse, the pubs have NO defense.

[apnu]

5. Its a very simple decision... Yes.

"No taxation with out representation"

When DC is represented as a state, then we'll be a little bit closer to a democracy.

[AspenRose]

6. You betcha

Howard Dean won the DC "Primary." You know, the "Primary" that didn't count.

Taxation without Representation!

www.dcvote.org

[theboss]

19. Actually, he won the DC caucus. Kerry later won the primary.

The caucus had no authority. The primary determied the delegates.

I live here and I still haven't quite figured out what the hell the DC caucus was.

[MrScorpio]

7. Yes - For all the right reasons beyond politics

No taxation without representation, baby!!

[Burma Jones]

8. Having lived in the Maryland 'Burbs almost my whole life

I think that they should carve a state out of the following counties and DC:

Maryland:
Montgomery
Prince George's
Charles

Virginia:
Fairfax
Arlington
Loudon
Prince William
Faquier



It'll never happen of course, these counties provide the vast bulk of their respective states' revenues

[phylny]

27. As a former resident

of Loudoun County, I can't say I disagree. The northern part of the Commonwealth of Virginia has its money taken and spent in the southern part. When it comes time to spend some money (for roads, transportation, etc.) the southern part of the state doesn't budge an inch.

[Wabbajack]

32. Great idea

[cmf]

9. HECK YEA!

No taxation without representation, baby. DC is getting screwed. People are scared to have a majority black state.

[AspenRose]

11. *ding* *ding* *ding*

There it is, right there.

[Doomsayer13]

10. Repubicans would never allow it

D.C. statehood = 2 dem senators 1 dem congressman

[calico1]

12. What is the reason

for DC having no representation? Because its the capitol and the capitol is supposed to be neutral?

[theboss]

18. Historical anomaly

Combined with modern racism.

DC was never intended to become as big as it currently is. At its creation it was supposed to be a small federal district with very few full-time residents. Congress would govern it almost as an after-thought.

For a hundred years, it didn't make sense for it to have any federal representation because it was essentially a swampy backwater. Now, it has a population larger than some states. It should have some form of representation at the federal level.

And the ugly fact is, if DC were a majority white city, it would have had representation decades ago. But it's majority black, so it doesn't.

[Yupster]

28. The Constitution

Article I

Section 2.1.

Section 3.1.

[blurp]

31. To prevent a conflict of interest?

The people should be telling the government what to do. Those in the government are there to serve the people, not themselves.

Giving DC statehood would give them an incredible advantage over other states.

[One_Life_To_Give]

13. What?

We carved DC out of Maryland just so the nations capital would not be in a state! Why do we want to undo this? Will the state of DC have undu influence over congreessional and international matters? What if Repubs buy up DC and convert it to condos full of freepers? Can you say ban gay marriage or your streets don't get plowed.

[AspenRose]

14. Taxation without Representation

They pay taxes, yet have no representation in government.

Our country fought a war over that.

On Edit:

Apparently some DC republicans aren't against the idea and the powers that be at the GOP see fit to ignore them.

http://www.dcvote.org/media/release.cfm?releaseID=132

Washington, DC - Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) said today that she was saddened to learn that despite the efforts of the D.C. Republican Committee, the GOP once again has denied D.C. citizens their recognition as U.S. citizens by refusing D.C. platform committee language endorsing minimum voting representation - in the House only. Norton said that she appreciated the efforts of D.C. Republican Committee Chairman Betsy Werronen and the District's delegates to the Republican National Committee Convention in New York, who submitted language calling for "voting representation in Congress, starting with the House of Representatives."

Norton has encouraged three bills recently submitted by Republicans, regardless of whether they have significant support here, and despite having her own voting rights bill, as an important bipartisan step that can lead to a bill all can agree upon. She said that the denial of platform language, first in 2000, and again this year, was particularly regrettable after Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA), Chair of the Government Reform Committee, has submitted his House-only bill and the D.C. Republican Committee has endorsed it.


I *do* think it's more important to focus primarily on getting DC the vote, moreso than statehood. Who knows, the statehood issue may die down after getting the vote.

[One_Life_To_Give]

22. They choose to live in the District.

The people in the district choose to live there. And they have been given representation in congress. The district is funded by federal/congressional funds.

I don't see this the same way my forbearer's saw England. Their charter has not been revoked, there are not currently any press gangs, there city offices have a fair degree of autonomy. And they use federal funds for services that in my state are paid with additional local taxes.

[fortyfeetunder]

33. Once again, oversimplified

It has nothing to do with choice. The government there really has NO say in how it governs, it's actually at the beck and call of Congress.

You may take for granted what your state reps to US Congress do, but the DC people have NO such option.

As one poster noted, probably won't happen while DC is predominantly black. I know for sure DC is becoming more ethnically diverse, and when the demographics shift - where blacks will become a minority, then Congress may have a clue by four that oh yeah, maybe they should have representation....

[SaveElmer]

15. Representation Yes, Statehood No

As much as I love DC (I've lived in the area for 24 years, and work in DC), and as much as I think it is imperative they get representation, I just don't think statehood is the answer. DC just wouldn't be economically viable as a state. There is no industry here but bureaucracy and government.

In a perfect world I think DC should be added to Maryland with a guarantee that it would remain it's own congressional district (not gerrymandered).

[WoodrowFan]

21. I like that idea

I like that idea. I love in the Northern Va burbs and work in DC. I love DC but gad it's badly run. (tho it's gotten better). Allowing its citizens to vote in Maryland would be a nice compromise.

[Cicero]

16. Not only no, but HELL no.

The reason the seat of federal government is in a seperate district is so that no state would have undue influence over the government. To make D.C. a state would then give that state plenty of undue influence, and vice-versa.

Instead, when it comes to federal representation and elections, the people living in D.C should be considered to be part of the state from which the district was taken, in this case Maryland. We should also repeal the amendment that grants D.C. 3 electors, instead counting the citizens as being part of Maryland. The resulting population increase would be enough to bump Maryland up at least 1 elector.

Later,

[Yupster]

29. Agree Cicero

Just make it part of Maryland and increase Maryland's representation accordingly.

[yellowcanine]

17. I voted Yes - but barring that - make it part of Maryland

And do it before 2006 so we can vote out Guv Goodhair.

[theboss]

20. Actually, I don't favor statehood exactly.

I think there should be a constitutional amendment that gives DC a Senator and at least one representative. But I don't think it should be a "state."

I think that would create some pretty redundant offices. I mean, do you have a governor of the District AND a mayor? Just give DC representation in Congress along with total home rule and most of us would be quite happy.

[mr_binklesworth]

23. apparently it's unconstitutional...

I heard once in the news that statehood for DC would be considered unconstitutional - by a repugnican. I asked my friend, who was once very involved w/ the DC statehood movement, who confirmed that it is, indeed unconstitutional. I can't give the specifics as to why, however (sorry).
Having said that, statehood or no, DC representation is more important. Can that be achieved w/out statehood?

Cheers,
MF

[louis c]

25. would it take a constitutional amendment?

What are the rules regarding states being admitted into the Union?

[newyawker99]

34. Hi mr_binklesworth!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[louis c]

24. I agree for all the reasons stated above and

we can use two more Democratic Senators and a congressman.

[slojim240]

26. I don't care about statehood. I just want them to have Senators and

Representatives who can vote in Congress.

[sampsonblk]

30. Not only no, but HELL no.

The seat of gov't has no business being a state. It wasn't intended to be that way - for good reason, and just because a lot of people moved there is no reason to change the rules.

If you live in DC and you want to be represented, move somewhere else. Or else press to be allowed to vote in MD or VA. I am all for that. Half of DC can be 1 EV from Maryland, and half of DC can be 1 EV from Virginia. No problem with that.