It would make the stars on the US flag all messed up.

Anonymous wrote:Yes. I'm a liberal. I don't support statehood. The founders intentionally set DC apart as a federal district due to lessons they learned about the power of Paris over the French Govt. If you want to vote, we have 50 states, choose one.

I don't know why people continue to choose to reside in the federal district if this is so objectionable to you. Did you not know about it before you moved there? No one is forcing you to stay in DC.

I have to agree with this person.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Way too much bureaucracy added on top.

D.C. is the size of a small town. What's going to happen when its not just the city mayor/dc council, the federal government, the white house, and congress meddling?

Now we need a Governor, an extra Senator, and a state house of representatives?

This is BS.

DC has more people than Wyoming and Vermont, both of which have full representation.

Also, in the category of remedial learning, states get *two* Senators.

That's a straw man argument. Vermont wouldn't be it's own state now if we redrew state lines.

I'd vote for Puerto Rico before I'd ever vote DC to become a state.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You knew the deal when you chose to live there. That has been the deal for 200+ years. Suck it up.

I would support statehood even if I didn’t live in DC because, unlike you, I believe in the values held by those who rebelled against British rule. I don’t believe in second class citizens. This is really an issue of values.

Those who rebelled against British rule were exactly the ones who wrote the document that defines the (non-state) status of DC. That DC is not a state is self-evidently consistent with their values.

+1.

Previous poster speaking of values seems to love imperialist British values.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Because they have no representation in Congress. No voice. Isn't that good enough?

It's not as if this is a secret. They are welcome to move to an existing state if they want Congressional representation.

Would you be okay with treating DC residents as residents of Maryland for the purpose of Congressional representation? Or are you just opposed to these people having representation?

NP. Yes this is what I want. I don't see why a small town should need governor, senator and a representative. I think they should be able to have their votes applied to Maryland.

Yes. I'm a liberal. I don't support statehood. The founders intentionally set DC apart as a federal district due to lessons they learned about the power of Paris over the French Govt. If you want to vote, we have 50 states, choose one.

I don't know why people continue to choose to reside in the federal district if this is so objectionable to you. Did you not know about it before you moved there? No one is forcing you to stay in DC.

Anonymous wrote:Way too much bureaucracy added on top.

D.C. is the size of a small town. What's going to happen when its not just the city mayor/dc council, the federal government, the white house, and congress meddling?

Now we need a Governor, an extra Senator, and a state house of representatives?

This is BS.

DC has more people than Wyoming and Vermont, both of which have full representation.

Also, in the category of remedial learning, states get *two* Senators.

Meeee! I'm from DC and I like our weird status. We are unique. I like that. Sorry.

Anonymous wrote:Hot Take: not wanting 2 more Democrat Senators is a perfectly legitimate reason to oppose DC statehood.

Nice to be able to close your eyes to inequity so you can get what you want.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You knew the deal when you chose to live there. That has been the deal for 200+ years. Suck it up.

I would support statehood even if I didn’t live in DC because, unlike you, I believe in the values held by those who rebelled against British rule. I don’t believe in second class citizens. This is really an issue of values.

Those who rebelled against British rule were exactly the ones who wrote the document that defines the (non-state) status of DC. That DC is not a state is self-evidently consistent with their values.

Anonymous wrote:

Are you suggesting that the reasons of the founding fathers remain valid? That giving DC residents Congressional representation would give them too much power?

That seems like a good reason to me. I like the idea of the nation's capital being located in a neutral territory. Why should it be a state? Do we need another state? If we really want to make it a state, wouldn't it make the most sense just to annex it back to Maryland, which donated the land in the first place?

Agree. Make it Maryland down to the Taft bridge. Or some other reasonable line.

Anonymous wrote:You knew the deal when you chose to live there. That has been the deal for 200+ years. Suck it up.

I would support statehood even if I didn’t live in DC because, unlike you, I believe in the values held by those who rebelled against British rule. I don’t believe in second class citizens. This is really an issue of values.

Hot Take: not wanting 2 more Democrat Senators is a perfectly legitimate reason to oppose DC statehood.

You knew the deal when you chose to live there. That has been the deal for 200+ years. Suck it up.

Anonymous wrote:

What is the ethical basis for disenfranchisement of 700,000 people?

The idea that this is a nation governed by laws and not men. Congress's power is limited to what the Constitution provides.

As I asked above: what is the Constitutional basis for DC statehood?

(If you want to advocate for amending the Constition to allow it, that is fine.)

There is no need to amend the Constitution. Many of today's states became states via Congressional legislation. The Constitution requires a federal district no bigger than 10 by 10 miles square. Today's District is smaller than that. Tomorrow's District can be even smaller while the populated areas become the 51st state via Congressional action just like many other states. The Constitutional requirement for a federal district would be met while the residents of DC would get the same rights as other Americans.