Reply to Supreme Court punting statehood is not the story. Eleanor Holmes Norton punting tax free is!

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Supreme Court punting statehood is not the story. Eleanor Holmes Norton punting tax free is! "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The Supreme Court was never going to side with the Statehood initiative. [b]A little thing called the Constitution stand in its way.[/b] But I am floored that DC was offered a bill which would have rescinded DC Federal income tax and Eleanor Holmes Norton would not even entertain in. We were offered the No Taxation part of our moto but turned it down...

Texas GOP Rep. Louie Gohmert said Democrats’ push for statehood for D.C. is based on an argument of “no taxation without representation.”

“They’re right: This should not be taxation without representation,” Gohmert said, noting other U.S. territories like Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands do not pay federal income tax because they do not elect a full voting representative.

“When I realized that, I filed a bill that would eliminate federal income tax for people in the District of Columbia,” he added to host Carl Higbie. “But even Eleanor Holmes Norton will not sign on to my bill, and no Democrats will.”

[/quote]

For the millionth time, the Constitution doesn't stand in the way of DC statehood.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics