Reply to Republicans are revving up for a D.C. smackdown

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Republicans are revving up for a D.C. smackdown"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Maybe republicans should focus on their own trash districts, many of which have far higher crime and poverty and crappier education than DC. [/quote]

We are a large and complicated city and congressional representatives are already tied down with addressing the needs of their own constituents that they are supposed to represent.

There is no possible way that congress has the time to actually get into the nitty gritty detail of governing our city.... other than to enact some 'pet' issues for show and media sound bytes.[/quote]

It is really a simple three step process:

1. Arrest those who commit crimes. 
2. Have actual trials for those arrested. 
3. Have those convicted of crimes spend time in jail.   Extra 15 years if a weapon is used in commission of the crime.

Even those dim witted representatives from the South and the flyover states can figure it out. [/quote]

lol then why haven’t they figured it out yet? there are many reforms that could improve criminal justice in DC - confirming judges in a timely manner is a big one. there’s nothing stopping Mr Jr Rep from Flyover State from drafting a bill to improve criminal justice in DC.

But we all know what this really is: just another node in the culture wars. Instead of judges, blather about right-on-red being an American entitlement. [/quote]

+1 the fact they aren't working to confirm judges and fill vacancies RIGHT NOW is evidence they don't actually give a sh*t. [/quote]

Have you seen some of the gems Biden has sent up for confirmation? These folks aren’t there to convict criminals. [/quote]

Judicial nominations have to be a political compromise. If not it becomes a stalemate and no judges will ever get confirmed. This may be less disruptive for federal judges but it’s extremely disruptive for DC. [/quote]

+1 and is a reason DC needs self government rather than being dependent on the whims of congress regardless of who has the majority

We already are held hostage between political parties and it would only get worse to put more bureaucracy in the hands of people who have no interest motivation nor time to govern our city. [/quote]

Self governance would be great, but DC has demonstrated time and again that it is not capable of self governance. This is in part because DC is a one-party town, so there is no natural check to the worst behaviors of the governing party. DC absolutely needs some sort of outside force to achieve any sort of sanity. Give DC more control over itself in its current state, and it will descend into madness that much quicker. [/quote]

Give some examples of how D.C. has demonstrated that time and again, that it is "not capable of self governance." "Elected officials make decisions I disagree with" does not count. [/quote]

We generally consider children capable of self-governance when they stop making decisions that harm themselves and others. Additionally, the ability to accept responsibility when things go wrong, and correct behavior are hallmarks of being ready for self-governance.

So let's just take crime for example. Raising the age of childhood to 26, hobbling the police, no-papering anyone actually arrested, shaming anyone who actually cares about crime, denying there was a problem and then trying to blame anyone but themselves for the problem seems pretty governance-incapable to me. What do you think? [/quote]

I think your metaphor of a city of 700,000 people as a child who needs adults to give it permission to run its own affairs is a little ridiculous. What other cities do you think aren't capable of self-government?[/quote]

Interestingly no one has yet asserted that DC actually behaves in a responsible manner. Plenty of other cities aren't capable of self-government. They can't manage their money, or poison their citizens with lead, or fail to teach children, etc...  DC has had or has all of these problems btw.

Other cities get taken over by their states, but since DC is a Federal district, they get taken over by Congress. Those states then get to prove they learned their lesson, and possibly get self-governance back.

Home rule defenders are largely in denial that there is a problem. They probably won't even begin to think of solutions until their rice bowls are in danger.

So in my opinion, the sooner those rice bowls get endangered, the better for everyone involved. You could probably even forestall federal intervention by doing some pretty simple stuff now. [/quote]

I think the onus ought to be on the people who are demanding an end to local control to show why that step makes sense, not for those of us who believe our locally elected leaders should run the city to somehow prove that.

No idea what you mean by rice bowls.

The last time the feds seized control of the city, it wasn't because of crime, it was because the budget was a disaster. The city is taking steps now to head off such a disaster. You may or may not like those steps -- like raising property taxes -- but the financial  situation is way better now than it was when the control board was first imposed.[/quote]

Not the PP you are responding to, but they made a great point I had never thought about with state takeover. It does seem equivalent. I've lived in a couple cities that had declared bankruptcy and were under stringent conditions. Eventually things turned around. Rice bowl is an expression I've heard before. My husband uses it to mean the things a person is really focused on / cares about - sometimes (not always) to the detriment of the bigger picture. I wonder if he's posting, but he claims not to go in DCUM. More of a x guy.[/quote]

Right, and D.C. had this happen from 1995 to 2001, when its finances were in horrible condition. D.C. has AAA-rated bond and more than a month's operating expenses held in reserve. Why would you think it should be taken over when it's nowhere near bankruptcy?[/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