Skip to main content

View Diary: Senate update (112 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think DC should get 2 Senators (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Geotpf, andgarden

    They should be granted statehood. People in DC don't have a voice in the Senate or the House.

    They like ALL Americans deserve a voice in the legislative branch.

    Both houses of our Congress.

    This is a democracy isn't it?

    "I have not yet begun to fight!" --John Paul Jones, Father of the United States Navy

    by Dave Montoya on Fri Mar 30, 2007 at 12:02:18 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Well if DC was given statehood than absolutely (0+ / 0-)

      but the reason why DC is not a state is the idea that no one state in the union should be in a position to house the capital - it would give the state more power and influence than any other in the union.

      So yes give them a representative, but you can't give them Senators because that would make them a state and destroy the purpose of the District of Columbia.

      Obama? '08? Oh yea!

      by Skulnick on Fri Mar 30, 2007 at 12:05:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So you are happy the residents of DC... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dave Montoya

        ...don't get to vote for Senators?

        •  Yes it gives me a sadistic pleasure....c'mon (0+ / 0-)

          Of course I am not happy with it.

          But it's the way our government was formed and I do believe in keeping the District of Columbia independent from any kind of State-level control.

          I would support giving them Senate representation if the Constitution was amended as such, but only if the Amendment recognizes that they couldn't become a state and must remain an independent territory.

          Obama? '08? Oh yea!

          by Skulnick on Fri Mar 30, 2007 at 12:19:50 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  They operate like a State (0+ / 0-)

            So, they ought to be granted statehood. Your argument makes very little sense.

            "I have not yet begun to fight!" --John Paul Jones, Father of the United States Navy

            by Dave Montoya on Fri Mar 30, 2007 at 12:23:21 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Oh they do? How many other states are subjected (0+ / 0-)

              to direct jurisdiction of the US Congress rather than an elected chief executive?

              How many other states are subject to the municipal government of one city and a mayor?

              Face it man, you can argue a case for the District to have Congressional representation fully, but as far as Senate representation things will have to be carefully reworded in the Constitution.

              Oh and for the record, the electoral college does consider them to have two Senators when they grant them 3 electoral votes.

              Obama? '08? Oh yea!

              by Skulnick on Fri Mar 30, 2007 at 12:32:13 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  What other city (0+ / 0-)

                has to run a DMV? What other city has to run a prison system and has a national guard and certifies teachers? DC has to bear the burden of many state functions. If not statehood, it deserves equal status with all the other states. Make it a special city or something. South Korea has that for Seoul and it works just fine.

      •  Eventually DC will be given statehood (0+ / 0-)

        There is no way it's population (which is growing) is going to continue to allow no legislative representation in our country.

        The drum has already begun to beat but in coming years or it may take decades I can't see how they can stop DC from becoming a state.

        So many people actually live in DC, it's pretty much telling them it's your choice to live/work here because it's the federal capital.

        And DC was built on land owned by Virginia and George Washington. The primary reason it hasn't been granted statehood is because the Democratic Party never has really had a majority of votes to do so.

        Because, it would really benefit us.

        I think they should merge Wyoming with other states and grant DC statehood.

        Or just grant DC statehood.

        "I have not yet begun to fight!" --John Paul Jones, Father of the United States Navy

        by Dave Montoya on Fri Mar 30, 2007 at 12:18:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  How about after Watergate when the Democrats had (0+ / 0-)

          a veto-proof majority in the Senate and the House?

          Regardless that argument makes no sense. To claim that the reason why they haven't had statehood is because of either Political Party not having the votes is absurd.

          And I am sure that the residents of Wyoming are thrilled to hear that your willing to make them second-class citizens and take away their statehood. I hope that was snark.

          Obama? '08? Oh yea!

          by Skulnick on Fri Mar 30, 2007 at 12:24:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And I'm glad that (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Geotpf

            you are willing to keep the citizens of DC as second-class citizens. I hope you're just being snarky.
            FYI, In case you haven't noticed,  conditions have changed since 1790. The states were much more important back then. People identified first and foremost as being a citizen of their state and then of their country.
            Added to that is the fact that a state that small wouldn't dominate power the way that PA, or NY, or Va would have if the capital city had been officially contained in them (back in the 1790's).

            Also, there are far more states. Sheer weight of numbers would hold DC's power in check, not to mention the fact that it's congressional representation would be so small that the argument that it would have more power than many states is just silly. You're telling me that it would be more powerful than CA, Texas, or NY?

            •  Agreed, they are second-class citizens which is (0+ / 0-)

              why I stated above that they absolutely 100% deserve congressional representation.

              However, what makes the United States system of federalism so unique in the world is that we do give a certain amount of power to our states that many other countries do not give to their provinces.

              While I agree the country wouldn't dissolve into chaos if DC were given statehood, I believe that in the spirit by which the country was founded on we should not allow our nations capital to be housed in one state.

              The compromise that I suggested above is that we allow the District of Columbia to have two senators by amending the constitution to say something to the effect of:

              "All territories and states housed within the continent of North America be given 2 Senators"

              By doing this, we are 1) allowing for equal representation for the district, 2) ensuring that we are not promising other US territories equal representation and 3) maintaing the autonomy our founders wanted with the capital.

              Thoughts?

              Obama? '08? Oh yea!

              by Skulnick on Fri Mar 30, 2007 at 12:43:28 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Kabul? Baghdad? (0+ / 0-)
        We set up governments in both those countries and didn't deny the capitol cities voting representation.  Retro-cede DC into Maryland for House and Senate and keep their presidential votes separate for 23rd amendment purposes

        Be a reporter, not a repeater

        by Plays in Traffic on Fri Mar 30, 2007 at 12:46:23 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Supposedly the provisional gov'ts of Iraq and (0+ / 0-)

          Afghanistan set up those governments through their own constitutions. And besides, I wouldn't use Dubya to defend our ability to properly export Democracy abroad.

          Though you pose an interesting scenario with the absorbtion into Maryland and autonomy for Presidential elections.

          In that scenario, would the District cease to be independent? I guess what I am asking is, would it just be Washington, Maryland - or would it remain independent with it's votes simply going to MD Sens. and Reps?

          Obama? '08? Oh yea!

          by Skulnick on Fri Mar 30, 2007 at 12:55:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Antiquated (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Hlinko, Skulnick

        Obviously you correctly cite the reason DC doesn't get representation, but isn't it time to throw out such notions? I lived there for 8 years (bush refugee) and always found it a little insulting that we couldn't have representation in Congress because if we did we'd put a stranglehold on the federal government and bend it to our local will. What nonsense! Websites have more power than the DC government, for gawdsakes. I'm sure that was a legitimate concern back when you needed three days just to ride your horse down from Baltimore, but those concerns are about 200 years out of date. The Pentagon is in Virginia and it seems to be holding up OK.

        An alternative: Carve DC up again. Make a state out of everything but the mall.

        "I didn't have good intelligence!"

        by el fuego on Fri Mar 30, 2007 at 01:30:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  That's a solution I like, keep the hill and white (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Hlinko

          house autonomous, but allow the rest of the city to become a state.

          It preserves the heart of the intention of DC, but allows for practical application today.

          Obama? '08? Oh yea!

          by Skulnick on Fri Mar 30, 2007 at 01:33:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site