House OKs bill giving D.C. voting powers

[cal04]

Source: Associated Press

The people of the District of Columbia moved a step closer Thursday to gaining voting rights denied to them for more than 200 years. But the legislation passed by the House on a 241-177 vote faced a veto threat from the White House, which said the bill was unconstitutional.

The bill would increase full House membership from 435 to 437, giving the largely Democratic half-million residents of the district a seat and adding a temporary at-large seat for Republican-leaning Utah. The House has consisted of 435 seats since 1960.

The bill now goes to the Senate, where its fate is uncertain. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell , R-Ky., echoing the position of the Bush administration, said it was unconstitutional and he would oppose it.

"This legislation corrects a serious flaw in our democracy," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. "We will not rest until full voting representation in the House is granted to the District of Columbia."

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070420/ap_on_go_co/dc_vote_13

[Just-plain-Kathy]

1. Recommend

:kick:

[MaineDem]

2. Excellent news!

Wonder if George will threaten to veto this one.

[Recursion]

3. * said he'd sign it during the lame duck session; seems to be having second thoughts though

We'll see; I'd sure love to not be taxed without representation anymore...

[SharonRB]

4. House Approves A Full D.C. Seat

Source: Washington Post

By Mary Beth Sheridan and Yolanda Woodlee
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, April 20, 2007; Page A01

A bill giving the District its first full seat in Congress cleared the House yesterday, marking the city's biggest legislative victory in its quest for voting rights in nearly three decades.

Democrats on the House floor burst into applause, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) grabbed the arms of the District's nonvoting delegate, Eleanor Holmes Norton, as the 241 to 177 vote was announced. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton with D.C. shadow representative Mike Panetta, left, and shadow senator Paul Strauss after the House vote. "There was nothing but joy in the chamber this afternoon," Norton said. (By Lois Raimondo -- The Washington Post)

<snip>

But the bill faces considerable obstacles. Democrats don't appear to have enough votes in the Senate to avoid a filibuster, and the White House has threatened a veto. If the measure becomes law, it probably will be challenged in court.


Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/19/AR2007041902849.html?referrer=email&referrer=email&referrer=email&referrer=email

---

I can't believe Bush says he'll veto this!

[sinkingfeeling]

5. We need to get a stronger, veto-proof majority in the Senate.

[hogwyld]

6. This is great news

Another safe Dem seat to counter the chimp and the pukes.

[SharonRB]

12. Of course, as a compromise,

they had to give an extra seat to Utah, with its Republican majority, to balance it out.

[formerrepuke]

7. I still find it incredible that DC residents couldn't vote for President until 1964!

[Hekate]

8. Wonderful! Eleanor Holmes Norton gave such impassioned speeches...

...that only a heart of stone (such as Bush's) could fail to be moved. I hope the Senate Republicans come across!

Hekate

[valerief]

9. What are the lip-service reasons for voting against this?

I know the real reasons are to control the number of Dems in Congress, but I don't know the Rethug lip-service reasons.

Edited to add
Never mind. I actually read the article and found this.

<<Several Republicans contended that the bill violated the constitutional requirement that House representatives come from states.>>

Imagine, Rethugs concerned about violating the Constitution!

[SharonRB]

11. They say it's unconstitutional...

that only the states get reps.

[valerief]

13. Thanks. nt

[wug37]

14. If the residents of DC pay taxes, they deserve representation.

At least that's the way I see it.

[SharonRB]

15. Me, too

It's the old "taxation without representation." If Bush vetoes it, maybe they should dump a bunch of teabags on the WH lawn.

[demnan]

10. Bush will veto this

I hate to say it, but until we impeach Bush, people in D.C. won't get the right to vote.

So not only is it vote to impeach. . .

it's impeach to vote!

Ironic that this bill is co-sponsored by a Republican (Tom Davis, R (VA-11), but can't get past the Republicans in the Senate and White House.

[MethuenProgressive]

16. Bush is supposed to be in favor of Democracy - but he will veto this as sure as you're born.

Why?
The D.ofC. votes Democratic.

[yasmina27]

17. I remember being appalled

in HS social studies class learning about this, and about the electoral college - that someone could become prez w/o winning the popular vote. Never imagined it would happen in my lifetime.

I still think it's criminal that DC residents have no representation in Congress.