What needs to happen is that we need to redefine what is Washington D.C. We need to separate the part that is related to the gov't and return the rest to the states that originally donated the land. This way, there's no one "living" in D.C. and no more issue.
Our nation has not always lived up to its ideals, yet those ideals have never ceased to guide us. They expose our flaws, and lead us to mend them. We are the beneficiaries of the work of the generations before us and it is each generation's responsibility to continue that work. - Laura Bush
Warmongers are plague to humanity and a constant thorn in the side of anyone that desires peace, but that is hardly the only problem in this country.
Last edited by Henrin; 09-16-14 at 02:02 PM.
No you don't understand my thinking because you completely misunderstand my argument, are drawing absurd conclusions from it, and you apparently misunderstand the Constitutional mechanism that the founders put in place for legislative representation.
First things first. DC should not be state. Not because it's small, as you've stated, but because Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution says so. Further Article 1 Section 8 essentially gives Congress responsibility to govern DC. It has nothing to do with the
size of the district. Nor do I think that every city "should have it's own state" whatever that means. How you reached that conclusion is beyond me.
As far as size goes I'm simply rebutting your assertion that land area matters. It does not. House membership is apportioned based on population, not land area. The Senators are fixed - every state regardless of land area gets the same number of Senators. No where does land area come into play.
The only thing I've noted is that the district's residents don't have effective Congressional representation, which violates at least the spirit of the Constitution if not the letter. Given that I would not oppose changing the Constitution, if need be, to allow district residents effective representation.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Trump, patientia nostra?
As it turns out, the notion that somehow congress will be beholden to the state in which it resides is nonsense. Congress has never given DC special treatment. Instead it uses the city as a playground to experiment on, in ways that no other population of Americans would tolerate. And, of course, few members of congress actually reside in DC. They live in Maryland or Virginia. There is just no reason at all to strip six hundred thousand Americans of the fundamental right to representation that this nation holds sacrosanct. It is a betrayal of the values of this country.
Not only are the people of DC denied representation in congress, they're also denied the real power to run their own city. Congress gets to override any law passed by the DC council. No one in this country would tolerate a complete lack of federalism, separation of powers, or checks and balances between state and federal governments of this kind. To have it exist in this country at all is un-American. The people of DC don't want to be a part of Maryland or Virginia. They have a culture all their own. It's not just about voting and congress. It's about self-governance.
It's amazing how cavalier Americans can be about oppressing their own people. And not just a few people either. DC has a higher population than Vermont and Wyoming do. The physical size of the city doesn't matter, either. This is an entire state's worth of people who are literally second class citizens. Everyone who opposes American citizens enjoying the basic rights of this country should be ashamed of themselves. It's also pathetic how often it boils down to conservatives wanting to deny representation to people who'll vote for liberals. Also Flamethrower's open racism. That's pathetic and disgusting.
Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.
Last edited by Henrin; 09-16-14 at 02:12 PM.