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

[Anonymous]

So weird. I know -- I can move. This is my choice. But just from a fairness point of view, it's so crazy that it is like this.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

The crazier and more polarized our political scene gets, the less I can get on board with statehood for D.C. The idea of a state being able to effectively shut down the federal government if they don't like what's happening isn't a comforting one to me at the moment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The crazier and more polarized our political scene gets, the less I can get on board with statehood for D.C. The idea of a state being able to effectively shut down the federal government if they don't like what's happening isn't a comforting one to me at the moment.

This makes zero sense. What are you on about? DC statehood and shutting down the federal government are not connected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The crazier and more polarized our political scene gets, the less I can get on board with statehood for D.C. The idea of a state being able to effectively shut down the federal government if they don't like what's happening isn't a comforting one to me at the moment.

Huh? Why would DC statehood give DC this power? It wouldn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The crazier and more polarized our political scene gets, the less I can get on board with statehood for D.C. The idea of a state being able to effectively shut down the federal government if they don't like what's happening isn't a comforting one to me at the moment.

How would they do that? We're not talking about giving back Federal lands. We're just giving the people who reside there representation?

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The crazier and more polarized our political scene gets, the less I can get on board with statehood for D.C. The idea of a state being able to effectively shut down the federal government if they don't like what's happening isn't a comforting one to me at the moment.

Huh? Why would DC statehood give DC this power? It wouldn't.

Right now Congress has a lot of power to overrule the decisions of the D.C. local government. Without that ability to overrule the local government, a state could decide to, for instance, shut down all roadways and pedestrian routes around the Capitol to keep Congress from convening to vote on legislation that's expected to pass but with which the local government disagrees.

[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.

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?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The crazier and more polarized our political scene gets, the less I can get on board with statehood for D.C. The idea of a state being able to effectively shut down the federal government if they don't like what's happening isn't a comforting one to me at the moment.

Huh? Why would DC statehood give DC this power? It wouldn't.

Right now Congress has a lot of power to overrule the decisions of the D.C. local government. Without that ability to overrule the local government, a state could decide to, for instance, shut down all roadways and pedestrian routes around the Capitol to keep Congress from convening to vote on legislation that's expected to pass but with which the local government disagrees.

Also, for those who would like a citation, see James Madison, Federalist 43.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The crazier and more polarized our political scene gets, the less I can get on board with statehood for D.C. The idea of a state being able to effectively shut down the federal government if they don't like what's happening isn't a comforting one to me at the moment.

Huh? Why would DC statehood give DC this power? It wouldn't.

Right now Congress has a lot of power to overrule the decisions of the D.C. local government. Without that ability to overrule the local government, a state could decide to, for instance, shut down all roadways and pedestrian routes around the Capitol to keep Congress from convening to vote on legislation that's expected to pass but with which the local government disagrees.

That would never happen. The feds shut down our roads all the time. They'd overrule us for sure.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.)