There is no need to change the constitution to make DC a state. He didn’t know what he was talking about.
Assuming we are still talking about the House bill, it shrinks the size of the federal district.If we are talking about shrinking the size of the District and making the remainder a state then I agree the constitution has nothing to do with it. If we are talking about making the entire DC area a state I think that does involve the constitution and the reasons for not doing it in the first place.
Assuming we are still talking about the House bill, it shrinks the size of the federal district.
OK. That is fine. Still don't have a chance due to the political environment between the House and Senate.
I personally have no issue with it as long as the district is kept separate from the state and should be done as a Bipartisan Act if that is even possible.
The guy voting for the party of obstruction and grim reaper of D-House bills wants bipartisan compromise. That's a good one!
I guess it doesn't matter what I post. Shrug...
It is obvious neither the Dems or Reps want any kind of compromise.
Washington DC will not be a state unless someone is willing to bend a little. It doesn't appear that is going to happen.
So I guess those poor people will have to either suffer without or little representation or move to a real state.
Haha, your feels tho.
It doesn't hurt "my feels". On my list of impportant things this is really close to the bottom.
The residents knew they were going to be under represented when they decided to live in the district. It also wouldn't bother me if they did shrink DC and make the remainder a state.
Just stating the obvious. It isn't happening the House and Senate are too divided to do anything.
I think it is fine the way it is and has been............
Your Feels, HaHa.
A token seat in the house
Cotton really takes the long way around to say that he doesn't think black people count the same as white people for the purposes of representation.
I mean not a shock but just say it.
Both DC and PR should be offered statehood via legislation very early in the next congress and the filibuster destroyed to accomplish it.
This doesn't make any sense. It's populous and brings in quite a bit of GDP. Not sure how you're defining big enough...
Lol, I assure you they are deadly serious. If the Democrats control all three branches in 2021 you can bank on DC becoming a state.Because DC was a state in the past where they PREVIOUSLY had representation but it was later revoked because of all the black people moving in?
I mean, this isn't like it's something that anyone living in DC for the last 200+ years could have figured out.....
But in all seriousness - if DC is now a state, whats the qualification exactly? US Virgin islands next? Guam? PR?
I mean you DO Realize that the house only passed this because they know that it won't pass republican senate or Trump, right? This was a move they did to virtue signal - not because they were serious.
The ENTIRE foundation of the GDP is simply because it's where the government congregates at.
You end that, and DC is a shithole with zero economy - and anyone with half a brain knows and understands that.
Because DC was a state in the past where they PREVIOUSLY had representation but it was later revoked because of all the black people moving in?
I mean, this isn't like it's something that anyone living in DC for the last 200+ years could have figured out.....
But in all seriousness - if DC is now a state, whats the qualification exactly? US Virgin islands next? Guam? PR?
I mean you DO Realize that the house only passed this because they know that it won't pass republican senate or Trump, right? This was a move they did to virtue signal - not because they were serious.
I see. Then we should probably strip congressional representation from all the mooching red states.The ENTIRE foundation of the GDP is simply because it's where the government congregates at.
You end that, and DC is a shithole with zero economy - and anyone with half a brain knows and understands that.
So being an economically depressed area means the residents shouldn't have governmental representation? That's a slippery slope.The ENTIRE foundation of the GDP is simply because it's where the government congregates at.
You end that, and DC is a shithole with zero economy - and anyone with half a brain knows and understands that.
Can you explain why all citizens shouldn't have equal voting rights?
Not sure about Guam, but I know Puerto Ricans are US citizens. That means they should have congressional seats and presidential electoral votes.
So being an economically depressed area means the residents shouldn't have governmental representation? That's a slippery slope.
Like I said, DC has been this way from the start. It's not like they DID have voting rights and then said "Oh the darkies are here! Quick, lets revoke our voting right!" But that's the insinuation being brought here which is pathetic. It has been this way from the start of our country. People have had 200+ years to move to a state if they so choose.
I'm entirely open to other ideas brought here like making it a part of another state - or allowing DC residents to register for a different state, etc.
Then they shouldn't be paying federal taxes right? No taxation without representation.All of these places do have governmental representation - just not at the federal level like you want.
Like I said, DC has been this way from the start. It's not like they DID have voting rights and then said "Oh the darkies are here! Quick, lets revoke our voting right!" But that's the insinuation being brought here which is pathetic. It has been this way from the start of our country. People have had 200+ years to move to a state if they so choose.
I'm entirely open to other ideas brought here like making it a part of another state - or allowing DC residents to register for a different state, etc.
But in all seriousness - if DC is now a state, whats the qualification exactly? US Virgin islands next? Guam? PR?
I mean you DO Realize that the house only passed this because they know that it won't pass republican senate or Trump, right? This was a move they did to virtue signal - not because they were serious.
so you are okay with them voting in a different state for representatives that don’t represent their needs?
You would be okay of DC was assigned to Wisconsin where they would likely have an impact? The People in Wisconsin are going to be okay with the majority of their seats going to whom DC votes for?
Who cares if that's how we've always done it? The only question is if it's a good idea, which it isn't. There's no particular reason why any part of the United States that is not the actual federal governing area should be denied representation. This is common sense.
It's a tough call because right now I'm just spit-balling. Overall there's probably a decent solution somewhere, I just don't really have one off the top of my head.
Regardless, there is also a reason why the founders didn't want a particular state to benefit from the concept of being the place where the other states meet on a regular basis.