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.
Anonymous wrote:How bout DC fixes it's joke of a city government and Justice system before reaching for statehood?
Anonymous wrote:Yeah, the arguments are pretty flimsy. Pretty sure it has to do with the demographics. Sigh.
Anonymous wrote:At least DC gets 3 electoral thanks to the 23rd amendment. That is one electoral vote per 200,000 people. I moved to California and there is one electoral vote per 678,000 people.
Anonymous wrote:As a Puerto Rican DC native, I ann keenly aware that colonialism is alive and well *today.* I would love to see DC statehood in my lifetime.

Anonymous wrote: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 wrote:Wah. DC functions pretty much exactly as the founders intended. And the citizens get so much more govt cheese back than they pay in. They should be thankful the feds prop up the local economy, because without them the city would have little reason to exist.
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.