As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

Save DC

EvanderEvander Disappointed FatherRegistered User regular
edited September 2010 in Debate and/or Discourse
539w.jpg

As you may or may not know, the people who reside in the USA's capital city, Washington, are not afforded the same rights as those who live in any of the 50 states, namely those of representation in Congress. Washington, also called DC (short for District of Columbia, Columbia being the name of the state that would be formed, should the district ever be given statehood), is technically prevented from statehood by the US Constitution, and put under federal control, but hey, Constitutions were written to be amended.

[I reserve the right to add more information here. I'm just kind of rushing this OP to siphon off the DC Statehood tangents currently derailing two other threads.]

So, let us discuss DC Statehood, the concept, the possibility, and the implications.

Evander on
«1345678

Posts

  • Options
    adytumadytum The Inevitable Rise And FallRegistered User regular
    edited September 2010
    DC has a shadow congressperson. It's totally the same thing.

    adytum on
  • Options
    KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Sorry, no statehood. Too many black people.

    KalTorak on
  • Options
    dlinfinitidlinfiniti Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    they have their own baseball team though

    dlinfiniti on
    AAAAA!!! PLAAAYGUUU!!!!
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    My favorite anti-statehood argument is that having a state called columbia would be too confusing when Columbia, MD is just a half an hour outside of DC.

    Evander on
  • Options
    KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    My favorite anti-statehood argument is that having a state called columbia would be too confusing when Columbia, MD is just a half an hour outside of DC.

    Yeah it'd be like having a Kansas City just outside of Kansas.

    Or a state with the same name as the capital city.

    KalTorak on
  • Options
    FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited September 2010
    dlinfiniti wrote: »
    they have their own baseball team though

    You have no idea how much I hear about Strasborg being injured at work.

    Fencingsax on
  • Options
    Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    edited September 2010
    I bet if DC were made into the state of Columbia people would still call it DC.

    Captain Carrot on
  • Options
    Modern ManModern Man Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    DC isn't state material. It's too small and too oriented towards the federal government to be given representation as a state. It's an artificial creation that was never meant to be equivalent to the actual states.

    There's an easy solution when it comes to the question of representation. Before the election of 1808 (IIRC) DC residents voted either in Maryland or Virginia (depending on where they lived in the District). The Virginia portion was ceded back in the 19th century. So, simply make DC a voting district of Maryland and the problem is solved.

    Alternatively, cede the residential portions back to Maryland or (my personal favorite) give us the same status as Puerto Rico- no representation and no (federal) taxation.

    Modern Man on
    Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
    Rigorous Scholarship

  • Options
    KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Well, it's half the syllables.

    KalTorak on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    I bet if DC were made into the state of Columbia people would still call it DC.

    For a generation or two, sure. It will seem folksy.

    Evander on
  • Options
    matt has a problemmatt has a problem Points to 'off' Points to 'on'Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    D.C. shouldn't be a state. It should be absorbed by Maryland, and be a city-capitol just like every other country has.

    matt has a problem on
    nibXTE7.png
  • Options
    Brian KrakowBrian Krakow Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Modern Man wrote: »
    There's an easy solution when it comes to the question of representation. Before the election of 1808 (IIRC) DC residents voted either in Maryland or Virginia (depending on where they lived in the District). The Virginia portion was ceded back in the 19th century. So, simply make DC a voting district of Maryland and the problem is solved.
    Maryland and Virginia do not want DC.

    Brian Krakow on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Modern Man wrote: »
    DC isn't state material. It's too small and too oriented towards the federal government to be given representation as a state. It's an artificial creation that was never meant to be equivalent to the actual states.

    There's an easy solution when it comes to the question of representation. Before the election of 1808 (IIRC) DC residents voted either in Maryland or Virginia (depending on where they lived in the District). The Virginia portion was ceded back in the 19th century. So, simply make DC a voting district of Maryland and the problem is solved.

    Alternatively, cede the residential portions back to Maryland or (my personal favorite) give us the same status as Puerto Rico- no representation and no (federal) taxation.

    I'm willing to entertain a discussion of voting as Marylanders, but there are implications to consider. What would the responsibilities of the state of Maryland be towards residents of the district? Would they be paying Maryland state taxes? What authority would Maryland have over the District?

    And as for the Puerto Rico option, Puerto Rico is that way because they have chosen not to become a state when they had the option in the past. If you are denying DC the option at all then it will never be the same.



    Yes, DC would be a small state, in terms of geography, but why is that an issue? and in terms of population, they wouldn't be the smallest.

    Evander on
  • Options
    Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Modern Man wrote: »
    There's an easy solution when it comes to the question of representation. Before the election of 1808 (IIRC) DC residents voted either in Maryland or Virginia (depending on where they lived in the District). The Virginia portion was ceded back in the 19th century. So, simply make DC a voting district of Maryland and the problem is solved.
    Maryland and Virginia do not want DC.
    True. Also irrelevant, for this suggestion. Maryland would not have to take care of DC, it would merely have a representative answering to those constituents. If DC residents also got to vote for Maryland Senators (which is implied but not outright stated by MM's suggestion), I'd have no problem with it.

    Captain Carrot on
  • Options
    matt has a problemmatt has a problem Points to 'off' Points to 'on'Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Modern Man wrote: »
    DC isn't state material. It's too small and too oriented towards the federal government to be given representation as a state. It's an artificial creation that was never meant to be equivalent to the actual states.

    There's an easy solution when it comes to the question of representation. Before the election of 1808 (IIRC) DC residents voted either in Maryland or Virginia (depending on where they lived in the District). The Virginia portion was ceded back in the 19th century. So, simply make DC a voting district of Maryland and the problem is solved.

    Alternatively, cede the residential portions back to Maryland or (my personal favorite) give us the same status as Puerto Rico- no representation and no (federal) taxation.

    I'm willing to entertain a discussion of voting as Marylanders, but there are implications to consider. What would the responsibilities of the state of Maryland be towards residents of the district? Would they be paying Maryland state taxes? What authority would Maryland have over the District?

    And as for the Puerto Rico option, Puerto Rico is that way because they have chosen not to become a state when they had the option in the past. If you are denying DC the option at all then it will never be the same.



    Yes, DC would be a small state, in terms of geography, but why is that an issue? and in terms of population, they wouldn't be the smallest.
    The residential areas just become a part of Maryland like every other part of Maryland, and any federal buildings/ land is handled the way other states handle federal buildings/land.

    matt has a problem on
    nibXTE7.png
  • Options
    Brian KrakowBrian Krakow Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Modern Man wrote: »
    There's an easy solution when it comes to the question of representation. Before the election of 1808 (IIRC) DC residents voted either in Maryland or Virginia (depending on where they lived in the District). The Virginia portion was ceded back in the 19th century. So, simply make DC a voting district of Maryland and the problem is solved.
    Maryland and Virginia do not want DC.
    True. Also irrelevant, for this suggestion. Maryland would not have to take care of DC, it would merely have a representative answering to those constituents. If DC residents also got to vote for Maryland Senators (which is implied but not outright stated by MM's suggestion), I'd have no problem with it.
    Ah, I misunderstood. Still, that would probably require an amendment and MD would probably still be very hesitant to consent to such a plan.

    Brian Krakow on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Modern Man wrote: »
    There's an easy solution when it comes to the question of representation. Before the election of 1808 (IIRC) DC residents voted either in Maryland or Virginia (depending on where they lived in the District). The Virginia portion was ceded back in the 19th century. So, simply make DC a voting district of Maryland and the problem is solved.
    Maryland and Virginia do not want DC.
    True. Also irrelevant, for this suggestion. Maryland would not have to take care of DC, it would merely have a representative answering to those constituents. If DC residents also got to vote for Maryland Senators (which is implied but not outright stated by MM's suggestion), I'd have no problem with it.

    I'd have a problem with it, as a maryland resident. DC concerns are not Maryland concerns, neccesarily. Maryland is a diverse state, much of it rural.

    If DC were a part of Maryland, that would be one thing, but telling marylanders that their votes in senate are being devalued by people who do not have to live with the consequences of anything that happens to maryland, that doesn't seem right.

    and, for that matter, if we are adding new representatives to a "maryland district" to represent DC residents, and only DC residents, why is that any different or better from just giving DC representatives outright?

    Evander on
  • Options
    Modern ManModern Man Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Modern Man wrote: »
    There's an easy solution when it comes to the question of representation. Before the election of 1808 (IIRC) DC residents voted either in Maryland or Virginia (depending on where they lived in the District). The Virginia portion was ceded back in the 19th century. So, simply make DC a voting district of Maryland and the problem is solved.
    Maryland and Virginia do not want DC.
    True. Also irrelevant, for this suggestion. Maryland would not have to take care of DC, it would merely have a representative answering to those constituents. If DC residents also got to vote for Maryland Senators (which is implied but not outright stated by MM's suggestion), I'd have no problem with it.
    Yeah. I mean everything else about DC remains the same- we'd remain a federal enclave. The District government would remain subordinate to the feds, rather than Annapolis. The only change would be that Maryland would be treated as having one more Representative, who would be elected from DC and we would vote in Maryland senatorial elections. We wouldn't vote in Maryland gubernatorial or state legislature elections since the Maryland government would not have any power over the District.

    This is the most viable option, IMO, because it would add a pool of heavily Democratic voters to an already heavily Democratic state, so it wouldn't change the dynamics very much. No way is the GOP going to allow DC to become its own state because that would add 2 new Democratic senators.
    Evander wrote: »
    and, for that matter, if we are adding new representatives to a "maryland district" to represent DC residents, and only DC residents, why is that any different or better from just giving DC representatives outright?
    Because there is no way the GOP would agree to a Constitutional amendment that would allow 2 new permanent Democratic Senators.

    Modern Man on
    Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
    Rigorous Scholarship

  • Options
    Regina FongRegina Fong Allons-y, Alonso Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Modern Man wrote: »
    There's an easy solution when it comes to the question of representation. Before the election of 1808 (IIRC) DC residents voted either in Maryland or Virginia (depending on where they lived in the District). The Virginia portion was ceded back in the 19th century. So, simply make DC a voting district of Maryland and the problem is solved.
    Maryland and Virginia do not want DC.
    True. Also irrelevant, for this suggestion. Maryland would not have to take care of DC, it would merely have a representative answering to those constituents. If DC residents also got to vote for Maryland Senators (which is implied but not outright stated by MM's suggestion), I'd have no problem with it.

    I'd have a problem with it, as a maryland resident. DC concerns are not Maryland concerns, neccesarily. Maryland is a diverse state, much of it rural.

    If DC were a part of Maryland, that would be one thing, but telling marylanders that their votes in senate are being devalued by people who do not have to live with the consequences of anything that happens to maryland, that doesn't seem right.

    and, for that matter, if we are adding new representatives to a "maryland district" to represent DC residents, and only DC residents, why is that any different or better from just giving DC representatives outright?

    Because one place that small shouldn't get two senators?

    Regina Fong on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Modern Man wrote: »
    There's an easy solution when it comes to the question of representation. Before the election of 1808 (IIRC) DC residents voted either in Maryland or Virginia (depending on where they lived in the District). The Virginia portion was ceded back in the 19th century. So, simply make DC a voting district of Maryland and the problem is solved.
    Maryland and Virginia do not want DC.
    True. Also irrelevant, for this suggestion. Maryland would not have to take care of DC, it would merely have a representative answering to those constituents. If DC residents also got to vote for Maryland Senators (which is implied but not outright stated by MM's suggestion), I'd have no problem with it.

    I'd have a problem with it, as a maryland resident. DC concerns are not Maryland concerns, neccesarily. Maryland is a diverse state, much of it rural.

    If DC were a part of Maryland, that would be one thing, but telling marylanders that their votes in senate are being devalued by people who do not have to live with the consequences of anything that happens to maryland, that doesn't seem right.

    and, for that matter, if we are adding new representatives to a "maryland district" to represent DC residents, and only DC residents, why is that any different or better from just giving DC representatives outright?

    Because one place that small shouldn't get two senators?

    What does geographic size have to do with anything? DC has a higher population than some states.

    editL one state, Wyoming. It isn't very far behind Vermont, though.

    Evander on
  • Options
    Z0reZ0re Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Modern Man wrote: »
    There's an easy solution when it comes to the question of representation. Before the election of 1808 (IIRC) DC residents voted either in Maryland or Virginia (depending on where they lived in the District). The Virginia portion was ceded back in the 19th century. So, simply make DC a voting district of Maryland and the problem is solved.
    Maryland and Virginia do not want DC.
    True. Also irrelevant, for this suggestion. Maryland would not have to take care of DC, it would merely have a representative answering to those constituents. If DC residents also got to vote for Maryland Senators (which is implied but not outright stated by MM's suggestion), I'd have no problem with it.

    I'd have a problem with it, as a maryland resident. DC concerns are not Maryland concerns, neccesarily. Maryland is a diverse state, much of it rural.

    If DC were a part of Maryland, that would be one thing, but telling marylanders that their votes in senate are being devalued by people who do not have to live with the consequences of anything that happens to maryland, that doesn't seem right.

    and, for that matter, if we are adding new representatives to a "maryland district" to represent DC residents, and only DC residents, why is that any different or better from just giving DC representatives outright?

    Because one place that small shouldn't get two senators?

    What does geographic size have to do with anything? DC has a higher population than some states.

    North Dakoda, Vermont, Wyoming and Alaska all have populations within eighty thousand people of D.C.'s. Strictly speaking it only has a larger population than Wyoming, but the others are comparable.

    Z0re on
  • Options
    Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Modern Man wrote: »
    There's an easy solution when it comes to the question of representation. Before the election of 1808 (IIRC) DC residents voted either in Maryland or Virginia (depending on where they lived in the District). The Virginia portion was ceded back in the 19th century. So, simply make DC a voting district of Maryland and the problem is solved.
    Maryland and Virginia do not want DC.
    True. Also irrelevant, for this suggestion. Maryland would not have to take care of DC, it would merely have a representative answering to those constituents. If DC residents also got to vote for Maryland Senators (which is implied but not outright stated by MM's suggestion), I'd have no problem with it.
    Ah, I misunderstood. Still, that would probably require an amendment and MD would probably still be very hesitant to consent to such a plan.
    Amending the Constitution wouldn't be remotely necessary; retrocession was a bigger deal, and that didn't need one. Maryland's opinion of the plan is a good question.

    Captain Carrot on
  • Options
    DeShadowCDeShadowC Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    If it wasn't labeled on the map it would even look like a part of Maryland. It should just be made a large city inside of Maryland.

    DeShadowC on
  • Options
    Regina FongRegina Fong Allons-y, Alonso Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Modern Man wrote: »
    There's an easy solution when it comes to the question of representation. Before the election of 1808 (IIRC) DC residents voted either in Maryland or Virginia (depending on where they lived in the District). The Virginia portion was ceded back in the 19th century. So, simply make DC a voting district of Maryland and the problem is solved.
    Maryland and Virginia do not want DC.
    True. Also irrelevant, for this suggestion. Maryland would not have to take care of DC, it would merely have a representative answering to those constituents. If DC residents also got to vote for Maryland Senators (which is implied but not outright stated by MM's suggestion), I'd have no problem with it.

    I'd have a problem with it, as a maryland resident. DC concerns are not Maryland concerns, neccesarily. Maryland is a diverse state, much of it rural.

    If DC were a part of Maryland, that would be one thing, but telling marylanders that their votes in senate are being devalued by people who do not have to live with the consequences of anything that happens to maryland, that doesn't seem right.

    and, for that matter, if we are adding new representatives to a "maryland district" to represent DC residents, and only DC residents, why is that any different or better from just giving DC representatives outright?

    Because one place that small shouldn't get two senators?

    What does geographic size have to do with anything? DC has a higher population than some states.

    editL one state, Wyoming. It isn't very far behind Vermont, though.

    It's just a city though, it's not a state, and therefore isn't considered one.

    I have no problem with the residential areas being considered part of Maryland for representative purposes, but making it a state a) is never going to happen and b) isn't even a particularly great idea.

    But hey, if political impossibility is not an impediment to you, have at it. When you're done you can get to work on my plan to legislate making everyone be gay. Because that will surely happen too.

    Regina Fong on
  • Options
    DeShadowCDeShadowC Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    I'm also curious why Maryland would have such a big issue with it when a majority of Maryland's population lives in the areas around DC.

    DeShadowC on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    DC actually contains two cities, Washington and Georgetown. There were other cities formerly within the district on the Virginia side.

    And sorry, but, "it is not a state so it can't be a state" is actually an even worse argument than my fake Columbia one.

    Evander on
  • Options
    Brian KrakowBrian Krakow Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    DeShadowC wrote: »
    I'm also curious why Maryland would have such a big issue with it when a majority of Maryland's population lives in the areas around DC.
    DC itself isn't exactly in great shape and even if it was politicians are generally wary of introducing a large number of new voters (and with them, new politicians) into their political ecosystem.

    Brian Krakow on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    DeShadowC wrote: »
    I'm also curious why Maryland would have such a big issue with it when a majority of Maryland's population lives in the areas around DC.

    you're asking Maryland to take responsibility for 600,000 extra people. That is not just a quick decision.

    Evander on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    What are the negatives of giving DC statehood? Folks keep saying "it is too small" or "it is a bad idea", but I have yet to see anyone explain what bad thing would come of it.

    Evander on
  • Options
    DeShadowCDeShadowC Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    DeShadowC wrote: »
    I'm also curious why Maryland would have such a big issue with it when a majority of Maryland's population lives in the areas around DC.

    you're asking Maryland to take responsibility for 600,000 extra people. That is not just a quick decision.

    I'm not saying it is a quick decision. I'm asking what the major problems would be. The negatives of giving it statehood mainly in my opinion come down to it not making sense. Its a small area physically with a small population. It quite literally looks like someone drew a square on the edge of Maryland and removed it from the state.

    DeShadowC on
  • Options
    Regina FongRegina Fong Allons-y, Alonso Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    DC actually contains two cities, Washington and Georgetown. There were other cities formerly within the district on the Virginia side.

    And sorry, but, "it is not a state so it can't be a state" is actually an even worse argument than my fake Columbia one.

    It's amazing how a simple paraphrase can make someone look so dumb

    I said it's just a city, not a state, and so it's not a state.

    I stated a fact, you spun it into an argument, and ignored my actual argument (political impossibility).

    So address my actual argument. Tell me how DC could ever, ever get past the Republican Party and their very earnest desire to not add two brand new, guaranteed Democratic senators to the mix.

    Perhaps at some point in the future when the political landscape of this country is dramatically different this could happen, but it's not going to happen in my lifetime.

    Regina Fong on
  • Options
    DeShadowCDeShadowC Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Also the states with small populations are rural ones. There isn't a state with a small urban population.

    DeShadowC on
  • Options
    nstfnstf __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    DC actually contains two cities, Washington and Georgetown. There were other cities formerly within the district on the Virginia side.

    And sorry, but, "it is not a state so it can't be a state" is actually an even worse argument than my fake Columbia one.

    If you just turn it into a state you've now created a state that's subserviant to the fed and has it's courts run by the fed, that isn't going to fly.

    You have to get around that first. Which is the problem, unless you can convince congress to just give all that up, which isn't going to happen.

    nstf on
  • Options
    RentRent I'm always right Fuckin' deal with itRegistered User regular
    edited September 2010

    It's just a city though, it's not a state, and therefore isn't considered one.
    .

    This is the literal definition of circular reasoning

    Rent on
  • Options
    DeShadowCDeShadowC Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    DeShadowC wrote: »
    I'm also curious why Maryland would have such a big issue with it when a majority of Maryland's population lives in the areas around DC.
    DC itself isn't exactly in great shape and even if it was politicians are generally wary of introducing a large number of new voters (and with them, new politicians) into their political ecosystem.

    Quoting an old post here but don't you think having its problems and budget handled by a real state, that it itself belongs to, rather then Congress might be a step towards fixing those problems?

    DeShadowC on
  • Options
    Brian KrakowBrian Krakow Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    DeShadowC wrote: »
    Also the states with small populations are rural ones. There isn't a state with a small urban population.
    So? If anything, this is an argument for DC statehood as one could say that there are no Senators that represent exclusively urban interests (well, maybe a couple) but there dozens of Senators that represent exclusively rural interests.

    Brian Krakow on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    DC actually contains two cities, Washington and Georgetown. There were other cities formerly within the district on the Virginia side.

    And sorry, but, "it is not a state so it can't be a state" is actually an even worse argument than my fake Columbia one.

    It's amazing how a simple paraphrase can make someone look so dumb

    I said it's just a city, not a state, and so it's not a state.

    I stated a fact, you spun it into an argument, and ignored my actual argument (political impossibility).

    So address my actual argument. Tell me how DC could ever, ever get past the Republican Party and their very earnest desire to not add two brand new, guaranteed Democratic senators to the mix.

    Perhaps at some point in the future when the political landscape of this country is dramatically different this could happen, but it's not going to happen in my lifetime.

    I'm not playing with your strawman. DC's size has nothing to do with the republican objections (it's political leanings do)

    I asked you why it SHOULDN'T be a state, not why it couldn't.

    Evander on
  • Options
    Brian KrakowBrian Krakow Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    DeShadowC wrote: »
    DeShadowC wrote: »
    I'm also curious why Maryland would have such a big issue with it when a majority of Maryland's population lives in the areas around DC.
    DC itself isn't exactly in great shape and even if it was politicians are generally wary of introducing a large number of new voters (and with them, new politicians) into their political ecosystem.

    Quoting an old post here but don't you think having its problems and budget handled by a real state, that it itself belongs to, rather then Congress might be a step towards fixing those problems?
    I have no idea. I do know that Maryland does not want to deal with those problems.

    Brian Krakow on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    DeShadowC wrote: »
    DeShadowC wrote: »
    I'm also curious why Maryland would have such a big issue with it when a majority of Maryland's population lives in the areas around DC.
    DC itself isn't exactly in great shape and even if it was politicians are generally wary of introducing a large number of new voters (and with them, new politicians) into their political ecosystem.

    Quoting an old post here but don't you think having its problems and budget handled by a real state, that it itself belongs to, rather then Congress might be a step towards fixing those problems?

    You are dumping all of this part and parcel in the lap of a state that already has its own stuff to deal with.

    Haave you ever had some one at work quit or be fired, and have their work load dumped on you? Does it make you MORE efficient, or less?

    Evander on
  • Options
    DeShadowCDeShadowC Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    DeShadowC wrote: »
    DeShadowC wrote: »
    I'm also curious why Maryland would have such a big issue with it when a majority of Maryland's population lives in the areas around DC.
    DC itself isn't exactly in great shape and even if it was politicians are generally wary of introducing a large number of new voters (and with them, new politicians) into their political ecosystem.

    Quoting an old post here but don't you think having its problems and budget handled by a real state, that it itself belongs to, rather then Congress might be a step towards fixing those problems?
    I have no idea. I do know that Maryland does not want to deal with those problems.

    Even if the influx of money coming in would benefit Maryland in the long term?
    DeShadowC wrote: »
    Also the states with small populations are rural ones. There isn't a state with a small urban population.
    So? If anything, this is an argument for DC statehood as one could say that there are no Senators that represent exclusively urban interests (well, maybe a couple) but there dozens of Senators that represent exclusively rural interests.

    Because that's not the way the system is designed?

    DeShadowC on
Sign In or Register to comment.