White House Opposes D.C. Vote

[onehandle]

The White House declared its opposition yesterday to a bill that would give the District its first full seat in the House of Representatives, saying it is unconstitutional, and a key Senate supporter said such concerns could kill the measure.

"The Constitution specifies that only 'the people of the several states' elect representatives to the House," said White House spokesman Alex Conant. "And D.C. is not a state."

He declined to say whether President Bush would veto the bill, but the White House appeared to be sending a message to Congress just as momentum for the measure was building. It cleared two House committees this week, and the Democratic leadership has vowed to pass it on the House floor next week.

The bill seeks to increase the House permanently to 437 seats, from 435. In a bipartisan compromise, one seat would go to the overwhelmingly Democratic District, which has a nonvoting delegate in the House. The other would go to the next state in line to pick up a seat based on the 2000 Census: Utah, which leans Republican.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/16/AR2007031601923.html

The Bush White House is against giving people representation. Big surprise.

D.C. heavy with Democratic Party. Utah heavy with Republic Party.

[babylonsister]

1. I think the wh messages to Congress might finally be falling on deaf ears. nt

[CrazyOrangeCat]

2. The Repukes . . .

. . . sure have a problem with African-Americans exercising their voting rights, don't they?

Why am I not surprised that this White House insults its neighbors . . .

[no_hypocrisy]

3. Announcing my dearth of knowlege in this area. Can someone tell me

if the WH can get the Supremes to agree that D.C. has no constitutional right to representation in the Congress and the Senate, then alternatively, could D.C. petition to become the 51st state in the Union, or is it doomed to remain a "district" in perpetuity due to the residence of the federal government within its borders?

Just askin' . . .

[Captain Hilts]

15. They should register as citizens of Wyoming like Dick Cheney did. nt

[BearSquirrel2]

26. The White House is actually correct on this one ...

We may all believe and say that people have the inalienable right to vote for their representatives. Unfortunately, the US is a Democratic Republic, not a Democracy. The carefully laid structure of the US government was debated and agreed to by our founding fathers. All powers are derived from the states. The current status of D.C is that of a non-state. It's a feifdom of the Federal Government.

Now D.C was once part of Maryland and a possible loophole would be to return the District to Maryland along with a forced redistricting and then D.C would be represented by a a Maryland Congressman as well as two Maryland Senators. Beyond that, it would take a petition for statehood or a constitutional amendment granting the district special status.

Statehood will NOT happen as there is NO WAY Republican dominated states would allow two Democratic Senators into Congress from DC. States have and ALWAYS will be admitted in pairs that preserve the balance of power. It would be far more likely to get an amendment passed granting D.C. citizens special constitutional status with rights to proportional representation in the house and no representation in the Senate while maintaining Congress as the DeFacto governors of the district.

[Bacchus39]

27. it would be interesting if Puerto Rico or Guam would try

to get voting representation IF this Washington DC measure occurs.

[BearSquirrel2]

30. Puerto Rico had a referendum on statehood ...

Puerto Rico had a referendum on statehood and they voted no. I don't expect that will change so long as Puerto Ricans enjoy U.S. Citizenship. I don't know what the taxation policy is there, but I would hope eventually Washington tells Puerto Rico to either join or go be their own country.

Personally, I think that the entire Carribean is a problem. I would hope that we could ultimately statehood to all of these Islands collectively and call them Carribea. I would much rather try to fix the social ills their through acceptance and aid then social ills in the Middle East through military power.

BTW even if Puerto Rico petitioned the Democrats would need 60 Senators in order to make it happen as Puerto Rican Senators would surely be Democratic. The last two states added were Alaska and Hawaii, a conservative state and a liberal state. Unless either party has 60 Senate votes, they have to be added in a manner that preserves the balance. Are there any conservative US Territories or Protectorates???

[liberalpragmatist]

33. States haven't always been admitted in pairs

If Puerto Rico were to be admitted, it would likely pass with bipartisan approval.

And actually, there are several constitutional scholars that disagree with you on this part. Including, ironically, Ken Starr and Viet Dinh, both conservative legal scholars. The constitution grants Congress extraordinary power to administer DC as it sees fit and provide for it as it intends and many have argued that there is nothing to prevent Congress from granting at least House representation to DC. Moreover, courts have consistently backed Congress in treating DC as a state, even for constitutional purposes.

See here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/15/AR2006091500935.html

As for retrocession to Maryland, neither Maryland nor DC are interested. DC'ers don't see themselves as part of Maryland and Maryland doesn't want the burden of annexing and taking control of a large, major city.

One solution that has been suggested, should there be a Democratic president and a Democratic majority, would be to redistrict the "Federal District" so that it only included the capital building and the administrative buildings of the government; the CITY of DC would then be admitted as a state. As for the 23rd amendment, which would grant this rump "Federal District" 3 electoral votes, that might be ruled inoperative or it might have to be repealed.

[KingFlorez]

4. They pay taxes

Even if they aren't a state, they are entitled to representation if their tax dollars are going to be spent. The White House has no coherent understanding of the constitution.

[Robbien]

5. Bull. That is just semantics

Representative slots are assigned to states based on US population. DC more than qualifies to get a representative based on their population.

[onehandle]

6. They have a bigger population than Wyoming (Cheney's "home state"). nt

[iamjoy]

7. Can They Secede?

Can Washington City secede from the District of Columbia and be annexed by Maryland? Only the federal buildings would remain part of the "District"

[iamjoy]

8. Since When Does Bush Care

about the Constitution?

[Bacchus39]

29. when it is convenient

n/t

[sutz12]

9. This is a very old debate that comes up nearly every congress..

The Dems want the District to get full representation, because it is almost a guaranteed Democratic seat.

The Repubs oppose it for the same reason.

I imagine it could pass the House, but would be filibustered in the Senate. Not sure what SCOTUS would do; it's never got that far.

[dkofos]

10. Who represents these people?? I think it is unconstitutional that

these people are not represented in congress.

[kurtyboy]

11. Read the license plates here in DC

The officially issued plates state "Taxation without representation"

[journalist3072]

13. No one represents us here in DC.

Our delegate, Eleanor Holmes Norton, can only vote "in committee." That means that she does not even have a final say in legislation that effects the citizens of this great city of ours. We are voiceless---we have no representation on Capitol Hill; yet we pay federal taxes like everyone else.

[journalist3072]

12. I am a DC resident, and I pay federal taxes just like everyone else in America

Yet, I have no representation in the U.S. Congress. I get angry whenever I hear someone say "Contact your elected officials" to let them know how you feel about this or that issue. I have no one on Capitol Hill to contact, who is working on behalf of my interests as a DC resident (Delegate Norton can only vote "in committee.")

The legislation that the U.S. Congress debates, and sends to the White House for the President's signature, effects me just like it does any other American. Whenever George W. Bush signs something into law, it effects me just like everyone else. Yet, I am voiceless because there is no one on Capitol Hill who has been elected to represent me and my interests.

If the federal government does not want DC to have representation, then we should be excluded from paying federal taxes. It's just that simple.

[Captain Hilts]

14. 'Democracy' everywhere but here. nt

[Pab Sungenis]

16. Utah is over represented as it is.

In addition to that, the move would give Utah an extra electoral vote (and, by inference, a permanent Republican elector) while DC's electoral votes are capped at three by the 23rd Amendment.

THIS IS A VERY BAD MOVE.

[w4rma]

18. Everything is reevaluated at the next Census. I support this bill. (nt)

[Pab Sungenis]

20. I support DC getting a vote, yes

...but not giving Utah an extra vote they don't deserve.

[w4rma]

22. Utah does deserve it from what I understand. The state is next in line for an electorial vote. (nt)

[Pab Sungenis]

23. If they deserve it

then they deserve it after the census actually confirms that they deserve it.

We need to scrap the electoral college entirely, but until we do we need to stop willfully giving the Republicans unfair advantages.

[w4rma]

24. Republicans will filibuster it without the offset in Utah. I support this bill. (nt)

[Pab Sungenis]

25. You're better off seeking full statehood.

This bill will hurt in the end.

[DemKR]

17. I'm for full statehood for DC, but as for Utah

it should not be getting more electoral votes unless the population is growing (just like with all the other states). Texas is already the second most populous state in the union (moreso than New york) and red states like Florida and co. are growing. I think we need to stop the trend.

I feel sympathy for DC voters they should have full statehood, two Senators and a Congressman for all remaining electoral votes. Only fair.

[Bacchus39]

28. stop the trend??

the population rate will do what it does. red states may even become blue. if Utah has the population then they deserve the corresponding representation.

[MaineDem]

19. Why, all of a sudden, does the WH quote the Constitution?

I hope he vetoes this only so Congress can override it!

[Big_Mike]

21. The problem, as I see it, is that the Constitution lays it out

Article 1, Section 8

The Congress shall have power -- ...
To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States...

So they must amend the Constitution, and not just change a line in the C.F.R. in order to effect this idea. Frankly, I wish them good luck, but I do not think this will pass in the Senate.

[ProudDad]

32. That woudn't be necessary

if we just cut out a little Bantustan for the Govt. buildings and left the rest of the District become a state.

Ain't gonna happen until there are 60 rational Senators -- which means never...

[ProudDad]

31. All repukes are against

DC having representation.

If admitted as a state it would mean 2 more Dem Senators and 1 more Dem CongressCritter from DC.

Trying to make a deal where DC gets ONE voting rep and Fucking UTAH gets another congressperson!!! WTF???? :wtf:

All we need, another fuckin' rep from utah for Dog's sake

[AnnieBW]

34. Since when does * follow the Constitution?

It's "just a piece of paper", right???

[Laura PourMeADrink]

35. duh...nt