Are there any legitimate reasons why someone would oppose DC statehood?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have no faith that a voting rep in Congress would be able to improve the local interests of DC or make a measurable impact on the national level. Congress is useless; why would I care if we had a vote there? Could you imagine us having statehood with one of Marion Barry's cronies as our senator?

So dumb. Are you arguing, e.g., Louisiana, Jersey have not had corrupt senators? What you are really saying is I think AA politicians are ipso facto corrupt and those any AA representation DC has will be corrupt - but that says more about you than DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The size of DC has already changed. It used to contain two counties: Washington and Alexandria. The county of Alexandria was returned to Virginia in 1846. (Which is why we call it Washington, DC. There used to be an Alexandria, DC.) There is nothing in the Constitution that mandates a minimum size for the federal district; it would be possible to make a smaller federal district that encompassed just the central federal buildings and make the rest of the territory a state.

And your easy solutions are not easy. Moving is difficult for many people, and people shouldn't have to move to vote, and there's not enough housing in the surrounding counties to absorb 700,000 new residents. And Maryland doesn't want DC, so you can't just return it.

Alexandria was never part of DC. Arlington was, which is why its borders look like it was part of the same square as DC. We returned it to Virginia in the mid 1800s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also if the residential areas form their own state, no more DC appropriations. You’ll need to fund those services on your own.

Your privilege slip is showing, DC is self-funded via taxes.

No DC receives additional federal payments through its appropriations beyond the operating budget. Sure there are negatives, no commuter tax, but that would be a bad idea now. Business and organizations can just relocate to where their employees live and anyone who works in federal buildings within the new, smaller DC would still be exempt from taxation. I’m not sure it’s that much a win for DC residents, but’s it’s definitely a win for democrats who want two more senators.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also if the residential areas form their own state, no more DC appropriations. You’ll need to fund those services on your own.

Your privilege slip is showing, DC is self-funded via taxes.

No DC receives additional federal payments through its appropriations beyond the operating budget. Sure there are negatives, no commuter tax, but that would be a bad idea now. Business and organizations can just relocate to where their employees live and anyone who works in federal buildings within the new, smaller DC would still be exempt from taxation. I’m not sure it’s that much a win for DC residents, but’s it’s definitely a win for democrats who want two more senators.

So ignorant. Kentucky gets appropriations. Alaska gets appropriations. Mississippi gets appropriations. Your point is no point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree residents should have voting representation in Congress. DC borders should include the White House, the Capitol, the Mall, and all contiguous federal land.

The residential areas should be offered back to Maryland because it is Maryland’s land. MD state government can then either accept or formally reject. If they reject, the residential areas become a new state with a new name.

I support DC statehood.

-Maryland resident

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree residents should have voting representation in Congress. DC borders should include the White House, the Capitol, the Mall, and all contiguous federal land.

The residential areas should be offered back to Maryland because it is Maryland’s land. MD state government can then either accept or formally reject. If they reject, the residential areas become a new state with a new name.

I support DC statehood.

-Maryland resident

I support:

DC Statehood
BLM
Eliminating racism and racist displays of behaviour
Nullifying white privilege
Defunding the police
Free healthcare for all
Increased subsidized housing
Expansion of Metro

-DMV Resident

[Anonymous]

Give the land back to Maryland

[Anonymous]

But yeah DC can be a state too

[Anonymous]

DC will never be a state because Republicans rather play politics instead of accept the will of the people; same with PR.

Heaven forbid a state vote a certain way, especially if its D. Maybe do more outreach rather than complain and BLOCK a state from existing.

[Anonymous]

Retrocession would be a far better option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Retrocession would be a far better option.

Sayeth racists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also if the residential areas form their own state, no more DC appropriations. You’ll need to fund those services on your own.

Your privilege slip is showing, DC is self-funded via taxes.

No DC receives additional federal payments through its appropriations beyond the operating budget. Sure there are negatives, no commuter tax, but that would be a bad idea now. Business and organizations can just relocate to where their employees live and anyone who works in federal buildings within the new, smaller DC would still be exempt from taxation. I’m not sure it’s that much a win for DC residents, but’s it’s definitely a win for democrats who want two more senators.

So ignorant. Kentucky gets appropriations. Alaska gets appropriations. Mississippi gets appropriations. Your point is no point.

Yes every state receives federal funds. For example, all states receive highway funding. I am speaking about the DC Appropriations bill where DC gets several hundred million dollars in addition to the funds available to all states. Those appropriations fund tuition assistance grants, courts, and prisons, and other services. DC will have to fund or cut those programs when it is a state. A commuter tax may not bring in as much as DC anticipates if Virginia and Maryland also impose commuter taxes. Do more people from Md and Va work in the non-federal parts of DC or do more DC residents work outside of DC? I'd guess the latter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Retrocession would be a far better option.

Sayeth racists.

So if thou be not what thou nameth, I assume you want to return the land to the Nacotchtank and Piscataway? Surely as a committed wokesperson you can point me to your writings on this subject, your pleas for the Native Indian downtrodden?

And the better lesson against retrocession can be found in the 1783 Pennsylvania Mutiny, as someone as woke as you would surely know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree residents should have voting representation in Congress. DC borders should include the White House, the Capitol, the Mall, and all contiguous federal land.

The residential areas should be offered back to Maryland because it is Maryland’s land. MD state government can then either accept or formally reject. If they reject, the residential areas become a new state with a new name.

I support DC statehood.

-Maryland resident

I support DC rejoining MD.

-DC resident

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other than not liking the way DC residents might vote? What could be the arguments against?

The city is already extremely over-represented in Congress, the vast majority of members of which live here for months on end.

If voting rights was really the issue, anyone living in DC has the option, by a $4.00 Metro ride, to move to MD or VA. I've lived in all three (DC, VA and MD) -- not a big deal -- and voting rights was never a consideration. Red herring.

Right - cause I can call Moscow Mitch to assist with my veterans claims issues. Sorry that you take civics so lightly, guessing it’s your white male privilege?

Leaving aside your odd race and gender assumptions, you think DC should get two senators and a representative to take care of your veteran’s claim issues? Each senate office costs about $4 million, so figure $10 million total (4+4+2). Why don’t we just send you a bigger check so we can all save on taxes?

Not so odd, actually.

Why does Vermont get two senators and congressman? As you obviously don’t know (or care), half of the children in DC live in poverty. You can pretend that this not a consequence or lack of congressional representative, but assuming you have a conscience, but do you think Moscow Mitch devotes two seconds of his day thinking about them. His children who incidentally are DC statehood activists, think he was a shitty parent to them.

The per capita GDP of DC ($160k) is (much) more than twice that of the wealthiest US state (Massachusetts, by per capita GDP, $60k) and 4x higher than your example of Vermont and of Mitch’s Kentucky (each at $40k). No doubt your heart is in the right place, but the facts are against you.

No, actually the CHILD poverty rates are facts that support the need for statehood. What a two, white-male household with no kids in Dupont makes does not negate the reality of poverty for many children in DC. But they are largely not white, so, I get that for you they are non-entities.

Congressional representation is not a factor. Mississippi has the highest child poverty rate in the country, yet has two senators and four representatives. In terms of American cities (a better comparison, since of course DC is merely a city, not a state), DC doesn’t break the top 25. Detroit’s child poverty rate is twice Washington’s. Fresno, Stockton, LA and Sacramento all have higher rates than DC, yet California has two senators and 53 representatives. “Non-entities”? Shameless.