The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Save DC
Evander
Disappointed FatherRegistered User regular
Disappointed FatherRegistered User regular
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
0
Posts
Yeah it'd be like having a Kansas City just outside of Kansas.
Or a state with the same name as the capital city.
You have no idea how much I hear about Strasborg being injured at work.
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.
Rigorous Scholarship
For a generation or two, sure. It will seem folksy.
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.
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?
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.
Because there is no way the GOP would agree to a Constitutional amendment that would allow 2 new permanent Democratic Senators.
Rigorous Scholarship
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
This is the literal definition of circular reasoning
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'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.
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?
Even if the influx of money coming in would benefit Maryland in the long term?
Because that's not the way the system is designed?