Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Screw Waxman: DC residents deserve democracy

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 01:20 PM
Original message
Screw Waxman: DC residents deserve democracy
NPR just ran a story on how Waxman is trying to block the DC representation bill. WTF? Isn't 200 years of taxation without representation enough for him? Does he want us to pay our dues a little longer first?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
1. The problem is
that it would require a constitutional amendement. D.C. isn't a state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. DC's delegates voted until 1810
It's a question of Congressional rules, and since many of the actual framers were in Congress when DC's delegates voted, clearly it wasn't against the framers intent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. Well, we know WHY they don't want to bring that up, don't we?
It's a nasty, ugly, awful reason, but I do think that the reason that this effort keeps getting shot down, despite your cogent point that the framers wouldn't be spinning in the graves, has to do with "Chocolate Clout." There was a bitter unwillingness to hand any clout over in the segregation era, and that unwillingness continues to this day. And it's wrong.

I don't care how they make it happen, they need to make it happen. It is long overdue.

Taxation without representation IS tyranny...and this is the United States of America. It's reprehensible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. I actually have thought about this, a lot. And I think my "non-amendment" way would work
It would involve ceding a shitload of land to Virginia and Maryland, and it would entail recreating and redefining what actually "is" DC. My plan would entail splitting DC down the middle, and handing the residents over to those two states. A small area that encompasses the Capitol, the Federal Buildings and any other chunks of land that the 'gubmint' wants to keep remains, in essence "DC." And if the government wants to expand and build new federal buildings, they reserve the right to snatch up any chunk of property within the old DC square (paying for it, of course) and creating another piece of "DC" as needed.

My point is that DC should be the place where the government WORKS, not lives. The only "resident" of DC should be the one at 1600 Penn.

If you have no residents, you really don't need a mayor or a city council. You do, however, need basic services, like public works, roads, sewers and so forth. A Congressional subcommittee can oversee that, and hire contractors to do the work, and coordinate with MD or VA when responsibilities overlap. The DC police force would get much smaller, in fact, it would merge with the Capitol Police and the remainder of the force would transition to MD and VA departments.

But....but....but!!! What about the DC CULTURE!!! Well, those chunks of property that were ceded could be termed District of Columbia, MD, and District of Columbia, VA, and keep their same zip codes. So the inhabitants, and the businesses, would still have a "DC" address, but it would be affiliated with a state.

The end result would put a couple more representatives in the Congress. It would not increase the Senate, but at least there wouldn't be taxation without representation.

There would be a few issues to work out, for example EMBASSIES--In or out of "DC?" but if everyone thought about it, they could work it out. And then, we'd have no more of this bullshit where the Congress acts like they're so put out and they're doing such a FAVOR to DC residents by "overseeing" them, and DC residents wouldn't have to continue to be sick of taxation without representation.

It's a different way of looking at it, but if you look at the "Arlington Military District" that's not terribly contiguous, either, but it remains an entity on ACOE maps.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catnhatnh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
2. I was going to argue against DC representation...
...based on a low population...but after checking, if DC was granted full statehood it would be only the second smallest of the (then) 8 states with populations of less than one million....guess I'll have to rethink this....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. We have 40,000 more people than Wyoming
And we're not even asking for Senators like they have (yet)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Let's call DC Wyoming, and move the Monkey out west, then!!!
Find a big old outhouse and paint it white, tell him it's his new "DC" home!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
3. I don't know the details, but wouldn't that give Utah another representative too?
I'm a DC area resident too, but I don't want another hardcore Republican in Congress. This shouldn't be a negotiation, quite frankly - we should just get voting rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Yes, though the seat will be up for grabs in 2010 and MA probably gets it then
That's the thing: Utah gets a seat for the next 3 years, but then that seat goes into the normal allocation pool for the 2010 census, and it looks like Massachussetts would get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 01:35 PM
Response to Original message
5. Waxman is a goddam DINO bastard
...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. *snort* n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enid602 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #5
12. Metro
He fought against the Metro subway in Los Angeles for years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC