Reply to Bowser is testifying again in favor of statehood, while DC govt dissembles on statehood costs

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Bowser is testifying again in favor of statehood, while DC govt dissembles on statehood costs"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Wyoming, who are constantly cited as the reason why DC needs statehood, has a state senate with 30 members and 60 members in the house.

Imagine how ungovernable DC would be if the city council were expanded to 90! [/quote]

That's a good reason for DC not to do it that way, then.

Kinda makes you wonder why Wyoming does, though. Each Wyoming house member represents fewer than 10,000 people.[/quote]
Vermont is the other state with less population than DC, it has a 150-member House of Representatives and 30-member Senate.

If the suggestion is that DC needs statehood for representation, your idea is to make it the least democratic state in the country? Seems like not a great argument for statehood then. [/quote]

In that case, the least democratic state in the country is California: one US senator per 20 million people. And the US Senate may be the least democratic deliberative body in the US. Kinda ironic that it's a minority of US Senators who are blocking DC statehood, isn't it?[/quote]
You do understand the difference between state and federal governments right?[/quote]

Are you the person who came up with the idea that number of constituents per elected official is the measure of democracy?[/quote]
If you refuse recognize differences between state and federal governments, I am not sure there is much to discuss. You seem pleasant. Have a good night. Ta![/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