Manchin on DC statehood

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1. "Per capita"

2. DC receives more from the federal govt. than any other state or territory. We're also running a huge deficit.

Again, wrong.

There are only 5 states that receive less money that DC from the Federal government. IOW, there are 45 states that receive more than DC. DC is a net payer into the US treasury. Unlike, you know, Kentucky, Mississippi and a host of other states that are net taker states.

And no, DC is not running a huge deficit. In fact, it has had a budget surplus every year for the past 20 years, and has a AAA bond rating from all three rating agencies. Very few states can make this claim. And finally, the District of Columbia is prohibited by law of carrying a deficit.

I really don't know where you get your information, but you are just flat out wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the dumbest waste of time and just a power grab by democrats to get an extra 2 senate seats while barely holding a majority in both the senate and house.

If it is a power grab, then what was splitting virginia into two, or making two Dakotas? Or holding Merrick Garland's nomination while slamming Barret's through?

Please.

A little bit of history would help you.
The northwestern portion of Virginia splitted from the state because they didn't want to secede from the union. They didn't want to be traitors. They chose to remain within the union. That portion became a state (West Virginia) at the beginning of the civil war.

DP. Similarly, the ND and SD separate statehood had NOTHING to do with aggregating power for conservatives. PP is illiterate.

Ironic, you calling me illiterate - I am the PP you are quoting, and you couldn't be more wrong.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/dakota-split-states-senators/

I mean, in addition to a three second google, there are books written about the admission of the upper plains to the US as a so-called power grab.



But sure, let's keep denying 690,000 US citizens who pay per capital more in taxes than about half the country, and who have served in every war and who are a net positive in tax revenue to the US treasury, a voice in how that money is appropriated.

Your source certainly did not refute my assertion that it had nothing to do with aggregating conservative power. You’re even more illiterate than I thought.

There have been books and disseratations written about this. It is pretty commonly known fact. Read the Atlantic article that someone else posted.

[Anonymous]

If citizens wanted to ensure they were represented re statehood, why would they chose to within the District? By opting to live there, they chose other factors above representation, which is totally fine to do and their right. Clearly representation was not an important factor in deciding where to live. It’s not like representation was taken away once the citizens settled within the District.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. "Per capita"

2. DC receives more from the federal govt. than any other state or territory. We're also running a huge deficit.

Again, wrong.

There are only 5 states that receive less money that DC from the Federal government. IOW, there are 45 states that receive more than DC. DC is a net payer into the US treasury. Unlike, you know, Kentucky, Mississippi and a host of other states that are net taker states.

And no, DC is not running a huge deficit. In fact, it has had a budget surplus every year for the past 20 years, and has a AAA bond rating from all three rating agencies. Very few states can make this claim. And finally, the District of Columbia is prohibited by law of carrying a deficit.

I really don't know where you get your information, but you are just flat out wrong.

DC is tiny. It is amazing than it gets more than even 5 states!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Then move.

You're right, Republicans care so little about their fellow Americans that they'd rather force them to move somewhere else rather than do the right thing and give them them representation. You're right that this shows Republicans don't care about democracy, or American ideals – only pursuing power for the billionaires that run their party.

But I support democracy, freedom, and representation. I support a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Including all people. Including the families that live in DC. This is why DC should be a state.

Republicans support retrocession, which would give DC residents representation. The issue is the number of senators, nothing more.

You’ll say DC and Maryland have nothing in common, but that’s true for most states. The urban/rural divide is everywhere and cities also compete for influence within a state. Retrocession would make DC/Maryland the economic powerhouse of the region and reduce Va’s influence. Keeping DC and md separate works in Va’s favor.

Why should DC be forced to retrocede? If that's the only solution then North and South Dakota should be combined and there should be many other changes as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. "Per capita"

2. DC receives more from the federal govt. than any other state or territory. We're also running a huge deficit.

Again, wrong.

There are only 5 states that receive less money that DC from the Federal government. IOW, there are 45 states that receive more than DC. DC is a net payer into the US treasury. Unlike, you know, Kentucky, Mississippi and a host of other states that are net taker states.

And no, DC is not running a huge deficit. In fact, it has had a budget surplus every year for the past 20 years, and has a AAA bond rating from all three rating agencies. Very few states can make this claim. And finally, the District of Columbia is prohibited by law of carrying a deficit.

I really don't know where you get your information, but you are just flat out wrong.

DC is tiny. It is amazing than it gets more than even 5 states!

DC residents pay more in federal taxes than 22 other states. They more than carry their weight fiscally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If citizens wanted to ensure they were represented re statehood, why would they chose to within the District? By opting to live there, they chose other factors above representation, which is totally fine to do and their right. Clearly representation was not an important factor in deciding where to live. It’s not like representation was taken away once the citizens settled within the District.

Taxation without representation was the whole reason for the Boston Tea Party and movement to independence from the British. It's fundamentally American but we are stuck in an archaic construct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC resident here. I am sick and tired of not having my own Senators and Reps. It sucks. And DC gets screwed because of it.

Also, and not totally related, the Republican party has slid into fascism and wants to turn the US into Chile or Franco's Spain: a christo-fascist country, run by a handful of billionaires with free rein to pollute our water, leave our kids uneducated, expel the immigrants that are the lifeblood of America, and run our economy into the toilet. They will do this by continuing to suppress votes, buying politicians with billionaires' money, and taking advantage of the anti-democratic structure of the Senate and Electoral College.

The only way to fix this, and save America and what it stands for, is to fix the Senate. Making DC a state is one step down that road.

So, for both reasons -- giving representation to American citizens, and fixing America – I support making DC a state.

- real DC resident

Then move.

Right after you reimburse me all the fed taxes I paid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. "Per capita"

2. DC receives more from the federal govt. than any other state or territory. We're also running a huge deficit.

Again, wrong.

There are only 5 states that receive less money that DC from the Federal government. IOW, there are 45 states that receive more than DC. DC is a net payer into the US treasury. Unlike, you know, Kentucky, Mississippi and a host of other states that are net taker states.

And no, DC is not running a huge deficit. In fact, it has had a budget surplus every year for the past 20 years, and has a AAA bond rating from all three rating agencies. Very few states can make this claim. And finally, the District of Columbia is prohibited by law of carrying a deficit.

I really don't know where you get your information, but you are just flat out wrong.

DC is tiny. It is amazing than it gets more than even 5 states!

A lot of federal funds go to things like infrastructure. That is vastly more expensive in large states (which DC residents travel to and use).

DC residents pay more in federal taxes than 22 other states. They more than carry their weight fiscally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. "Per capita"

2. DC receives more from the federal govt. than any other state or territory. We're also running a huge deficit.

Again, wrong.

There are only 5 states that receive less money that DC from the Federal government. IOW, there are 45 states that receive more than DC. DC is a net payer into the US treasury. Unlike, you know, Kentucky, Mississippi and a host of other states that are net taker states.

And no, DC is not running a huge deficit. In fact, it has had a budget surplus every year for the past 20 years, and has a AAA bond rating from all three rating agencies. Very few states can make this claim. And finally, the District of Columbia is prohibited by law of carrying a deficit.

I really don't know where you get your information, but you are just flat out wrong.

DC is tiny. It is amazing than it gets more than even 5 states!

Please show where in the Constitution there is a designation for the geographical size of a state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If citizens wanted to ensure they were represented re statehood, why would they chose to within the District? By opting to live there, they chose other factors above representation, which is totally fine to do and their right. Clearly representation was not an important factor in deciding where to live. It’s not like representation was taken away once the citizens settled within the District.

Taxation without representation was the whole reason for the Boston Tea Party and movement to independence from the British. It's fundamentally American but we are stuck in an archaic construct.

Move.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If citizens wanted to ensure they were represented re statehood, why would they chose to within the District? By opting to live there, they chose other factors above representation, which is totally fine to do and their right. Clearly representation was not an important factor in deciding where to live. It’s not like representation was taken away once the citizens settled within the District.

Taxation without representation was the whole reason for the Boston Tea Party and movement to independence from the British. It's fundamentally American but we are stuck in an archaic construct.

Move.

BS. Let the people vote. Why do you want Americans who are not empowered to contribute to the management of iur country while taking their money?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC resident here. I am sick and tired of not having my own Senators and Reps. It sucks. And DC gets screwed because of it.

Also, and not totally related, the Republican party has slid into fascism and wants to turn the US into Chile or Franco's Spain: a christo-fascist country, run by a handful of billionaires with free rein to pollute our water, leave our kids uneducated, expel the immigrants that are the lifeblood of America, and run our economy into the toilet. They will do this by continuing to suppress votes, buying politicians with billionaires' money, and taking advantage of the anti-democratic structure of the Senate and Electoral College.

The only way to fix this, and save America and what it stands for, is to fix the Senate. Making DC a state is one step down that road.

So, for both reasons -- giving representation to American citizens, and fixing America – I support making DC a state.

- real DC resident

Maybe you should have thought of that when you moved into or remained in DC. It’s not like DC hasn’t been a state for a while.

Some of us have roots in the city that goes back more than a hundred years. Our family is buried here etc. Where would you have us go?

A few miles away... where you can vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If citizens wanted to ensure they were represented re statehood, why would they chose to within the District? By opting to live there, they chose other factors above representation, which is totally fine to do and their right. Clearly representation was not an important factor in deciding where to live. It’s not like representation was taken away once the citizens settled within the District.

Taxation without representation was the whole reason for the Boston Tea Party and movement to independence from the British. It's fundamentally American but we are stuck in an archaic construct.

Move.

BS. Let the people vote. Why do you want Americans who are not empowered to contribute to the management of iur country while taking their money?

But you knew this before you moved to DC? You knew the contract you were signing up for. Nothing has changed to that contract.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If citizens wanted to ensure they were represented re statehood, why would they chose to within the District? By opting to live there, they chose other factors above representation, which is totally fine to do and their right. Clearly representation was not an important factor in deciding where to live. It’s not like representation was taken away once the citizens settled within the District.

Taxation without representation was the whole reason for the Boston Tea Party and movement to independence from the British. It's fundamentally American but we are stuck in an archaic construct.

Move.

BS. Let the people vote. Why do you want Americans who are not empowered to contribute to the management of iur country while taking their money?

But you knew this before you moved to DC? You knew the contract you were signing up for. Nothing has changed to that contract.

Born here. Generations here. Freed slaves here. Sorry, we were here before that contract.