Crazy that DC has 100K more people than Wyoming and has no congressional representation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I hear you. I hate it. And I hate when people say "You can move." Such a facile solution to a real injustice. I would LOVE to see DC statehood in my lifetime.

It's not an injustice. You knew the conditions of residency before you bought or rented in the district--you CHOSE this situation or at the least accepted it, by deciding to live there. An injustice would be if you had the right to vote when you bought/rented, but then lost the right to vote by a decision made after you chose to do so. If it was an unacceptable injustice, you could have opted to buy or rent somewhere else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I hear you. I hate it. And I hate when people say "You can move." Such a facile solution to a real injustice. I would LOVE to see DC statehood in my lifetime.

It's not an injustice. You knew the conditions of residency before you bought or rented in the district--you CHOSE this situation or at the least accepted it, by deciding to live there. An injustice would be if you had the right to vote when you bought/rented, but then lost the right to vote by a decision made after you chose to do so. If it was an unacceptable injustice, you could have opted to buy or rent somewhere else.

I'm from DC. Born and raised. It's an injustice.

[Anonymous]

I think MD would take you back if it was really important to you. DC belongs to MD ... It was donated not taken .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate the citation but it's also worth noting that the statehood proposals include a federal district, just a much smaller one that includes the mall, ellipse and federal triangle essentially. Presumably that could be open to Virginia to prevent geographic encirclement!

Also, in case anyone mentions retrocession to Maryland -- one interesting wrinkle is that it would result in D.C. getting less representation in the presidential election (we currently get three electors but Maryland would add only one elector if it got D.C.)

How are you going to connect that up to Virginia without leaving some residential in the federal area?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, the arguments are pretty flimsy. Pretty sure it has to do with the demographics. Sigh.

Yep, I'm sure the Founders decided to create that pretext after they used their time machine to travel to the future and see slavery had ended and the population of D.C. was disproportionately black.

[Anonymous]

Agreed

[Anonymous]

As a Puerto Rican DC native, I ann keenly aware that colonialism is alive and well *today.* I would love to see DC statehood in my lifetime.

[Anonymous]

At least DC gets 3 electoral thanks to the 23rd amendment. That is one electoral vote per 200,000 people. I moved to California and there is one electoral vote per 678,000 people.

[Anonymous]

^am

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At least DC gets 3 electoral thanks to the 23rd amendment. That is one electoral vote per 200,000 people. I moved to California and there is one electoral vote per 678,000 people.

Please don't act like California is underrepresented.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I hear you. I hate it. And I hate when people say "You can move." Such a facile solution to a real injustice. I would LOVE to see DC statehood in my lifetime.

It's not an injustice. You knew the conditions of residency before you bought or rented in the district--you CHOSE this situation or at the least accepted it, by deciding to live there. An injustice would be if you had the right to vote when you bought/rented, but then lost the right to vote by a decision made after you chose to do so. If it was an unacceptable injustice, you could have opted to buy or rent somewhere else.

I'm from DC. Born and raised. It's an injustice.

+2!!!!!

Residents of Paris can vote, why not us?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason the Founders did what they did is just as valid today as it was then. The wanted the nation's capital to be hostage to the whole country and not a band of localized politicians.

It's 68 square miles. If you can't live with it, move.

Well right now we're pretty much the last colony. How about we not pay federal taxes? Because right now we pay the most. Would that work for you?[/quote]

Actually no, Puerto Rico, Guam and CNMI are the last colonies. You pay a lot of taxes because you make a lot of money, most of you suckling off the federal teat. Again, if you don't like it, move. You don't have to go very far and can keep your high paying job, your friends, your church if you have one and everything else. You made an adult choice to live there. Deal with it.

NP here. You're an idiot. What the hell are you talking about?

I don't live in DC, BTW. Anyone who knows the situation knows that this is taxation without representation.

Telling people to move is ridiculous. Maybe black folks who don;'t liek conferedate statues should all move to? People have rights. No matter where they live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reason the Founders did what they did is just as valid today as it was then. The wanted the nation's capital to be hostage to the whole country and not a band of localized politicians.

It's 68 square miles. If you can't live with it, move.

It is really just a city, and not the most populated one.

It is not even in the top.20 populations of cities.

If they want representation they should join MD as DC is essentially a MD city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think MD would take you back if it was really important to you. DC belongs to MD ... It was donated not taken .

Yep. They should get representation through Maryland. They will still be better off than 21 other cities, including most of the cities in California, Texas and Illinois.

[Anonymous]

"You can move" is definitely the most stupid thing anyone can say about this. I wonder if those people that say "You can move" would have told the same thing to George Washington and the other founding fathers.