• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

There is a movement to make the District of Columbia the 51st state

M

Masterhawk

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2016
Messages
1,908
Reaction score
489
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Our capital is a bit of an oddball. It's the only city in America without any host state. As a result, the city council have a lot more control over their city but the federal government has a lot of power over that city. DC also lacks any representation in congress and until the 23rd amendment was passed, they couldn't vote. Because of these disadvantages, there is a movement to make DC the 51st state in the union. DC has a largely liberal demographic which conflicts with the mostly republican legislature which has blocked attempts to legalize marijuana.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...a6eec4-484f-11e6-90a8-fb84201e0645_story.html


A referendum for statehood has been approved in this November ballot but in order to achieve statehood, congress must approve of it and if it stays republican majority, the measure likely won't be passed. Should DC become the 51st state however, the new state would be called "New Columbia" but federal buildings such as the White House, Capitol Building, and Supreme Court Building would remain part of the federal capital.
 
Masterhawk said:
Our capital is a bit of an oddball. It's the only city in America without any host state. As a result, the city council have a lot more control over their city but the federal government has a lot of power over that city. DC also lacks any representation in congress and until the 23rd amendment was passed, they couldn't vote. Because of these disadvantages, there is a movement to make DC the 51st state in the union. DC has a largely liberal demographic which conflicts with the mostly republican legislature which has blocked attempts to legalize marijuana.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...a6eec4-484f-11e6-90a8-fb84201e0645_story.html


A referendum for statehood has been approved in this November ballot but in order to achieve statehood, congress must approve of it and if it stays republican majority, the measure likely won't be passed. Should DC become the 51st state however, the new state would be called "New Columbia" but federal buildings such as the White House, Capitol Building, and Supreme Court Building would remain part of the federal capital.
Click to expand...

Why would you want to do that. It seems alright as it is. Why waste time and political capital in fixing things that aren't broken and even make sense.
 
joG said:
Why would you want to do that. It seems alright as it is. Why waste time and political capital in fixing things that aren't broken and even make sense.
Click to expand...

Yeah. If it becomes the 51st state it should be kicked out of the Union.
 
shrubnose said:
Then what is now called the USA would be called the Dis-united States of America,eh?

:lol:

I predict that this won't happen anytime soon.
Click to expand...

Why does everyone take me so seriously?
 
joG said:
Why would you want to do that. It seems alright as it is. Why waste time and political capital in fixing things that aren't broken and even make sense.
Click to expand...

an area with a bigger population than Wyoming or Vermont has zero representation in congress and the federal government gets to approve the city's spending habits and laws.
 
It would give the Democrats two more Senate seats.

And it would take a constitutional amendment.
 
Masterhawk said:
Our capital is a bit of an oddball. It's the only city in America without any host state. As a result, the city council have a lot more control over their city but the federal government has a lot of power over that city. DC also lacks any representation in congress and until the 23rd amendment was passed, they couldn't vote. Because of these disadvantages, there is a movement to make DC the 51st state in the union. DC has a largely liberal demographic which conflicts with the mostly republican legislature which has blocked attempts to legalize marijuana.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...a6eec4-484f-11e6-90a8-fb84201e0645_story.html

A referendum for statehood has been approved in this November ballot but in order to achieve statehood, congress must approve of it and if it stays republican majority, the measure likely won't be passed. Should DC become the 51st state however, the new state would be called "New Columbia" but federal buildings such as the White House, Capitol Building, and Supreme Court Building would remain part of the federal capital.
Click to expand...

DC was never meant to be a State. It was meant to be the Capitol of the US. Separated so as to show no allegiance to any specific state. To show neutrality. I see no reason that it should change. If people want representation in the Senate/Congress then they should move to an actual state. There are other US territories without representation in the Senate/Congress. Those territories are far more deserving of representation imo.
 
Masterhawk said:
Our capital is a bit of an oddball. It's the only city in America without any host state. As a result, the city council have a lot more control over their city but the federal government has a lot of power over that city. DC also lacks any representation in congress and until the 23rd amendment was passed, they couldn't vote. Because of these disadvantages, there is a movement to make DC the 51st state in the union. DC has a largely liberal demographic which conflicts with the mostly republican legislature which has blocked attempts to legalize marijuana.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...a6eec4-484f-11e6-90a8-fb84201e0645_story.html


A referendum for statehood has been approved in this November ballot but in order to achieve statehood, congress must approve of it and if it stays republican majority, the measure likely won't be passed. Should DC become the 51st state however, the new state would be called "New Columbia" but federal buildings such as the White House, Capitol Building, and Supreme Court Building would remain part of the federal capital.
Click to expand...
Too expensive for no reason.
 
Kal'Stang said:
DC was never meant to be a State. It was meant to be the Capitol of the US. Separated so as to show no allegiance to any specific state. To show neutrality. I see no reason that it should change. If people want representation in the Senate/Congress then they should move to an actual state. There are other US territories without representation in the Senate/Congress. Those territories are far more deserving of representation imo.
Click to expand...

They're not actually making the capital of the United States an actual state. They're planning on splitting it.

DCstatehood1400.jpg

There will be a state called "New Columbia" and there will still be a federal capital called "DC". Washington DC will be drastically downsized should the city gain statehood and the rest of the city will be part of the 51st state.
 
It doesn't need to be a state but I am all for giving them representation.
 
Masterhawk said:
They're not actually making the capital of the United States an actual state. They're planning on splitting it.

View attachment 67208323

There will be a state called "New Columbia" and there will still be a federal capital called "DC". Washington DC will be drastically downsized should the city gain statehood and the rest of the city will be part of the 51st state.
Click to expand...

And if the Capitol has to expand to accommodate growth? IIRC 3 or 4 states ceded land specifically for DC to be formed, part of the reasoning was for accommodating growth. IF its decided that DC doesn't need to be as big as it is then parts of that land should go back to the States that ceded the land in the first place.
 
Kal'Stang said:
And if the Capitol has to expand to accommodate growth? IIRC 3 or 4 states ceded land specifically for DC to be formed, part of the reasoning was for accommodating growth. IF its decided that DC doesn't need to be as big as it is then parts of that land should go back to the States that ceded the land in the first place.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that maryland ceded most of the land used. Maryland and DC have similar political alignments so if the city of columbia got ceded by Maryland, at least the people of DC would be represented. The issue here is that the people of columbia have no representation and are under congress's sore thumb.
 
Masterhawk said:
I'm pretty sure that maryland ceded most of the land used. Maryland and DC have similar political alignments so if the city of columbia got ceded by Maryland, at least the people of DC would be represented. The issue here is that the people of columbia have no representation and are under congress's sore thumb.
Click to expand...

I know the issue. I just don't have much empathy for em to be honest. Minus the kids every single adult that lives there does so of their own volition. By staying there they are choosing to remain unrepresented. That's the price that they pay by living in the nations capitol which was never intended to become a state due to favoritism issues. And cutting the area down to what is currently held by national government buildings is a mistake imo because it doesn't allow growth. Some might consider that a good thing as they may somehow think that then the government won't be able to grow, stupid mentality imo as the government ALWAYS grows.

Now if this new State was willing to cede land when the government needs it for expansion purposes then I might be more inclined to accept such a thing. Essentially it'd be more of a status of "Temporary State" or some such. Something which I doubt they'd be willing to do.

In any case I still think that the land should be ceded back to the original states that gave up land originally in order to form the nations capitol in the first place if we are to accept land being taken away from the capitol just for representative purposes.
 
Masterhawk said:
I'm pretty sure that maryland ceded most of the land used. Maryland and DC have similar political alignments so if the city of columbia got ceded by Maryland, at least the people of DC would be represented. The issue here is that the people of columbia have no representation and are under congress's sore thumb.
Click to expand...

PS: Looked up the info and it was just two states that donated the land. Maryland and Virginia. The closest I could find in how much land was ceded by each was the two cities that were there when DC was founded. Georgetown Maryland, and Alexandria Virginia. Georgetown covered 750 acres and Alexandria covered 15 sq miles. I think those are current size though so don't know the actual size when DC was founded. Or even if all parts of those cities were incorporated into DC. If you can find better info I'd be interested to find out for sure. Don't have to if you don't want to. It's just a curiosity for me and the specifics aren't all that important to the discussion imo. I'm hoping your google powers are stronger than mine. :mrgreen:
 
The Federal government can follow the Constitution, Article 1 Section 8 Clause 17, and simply cede the land back to Maryland and Virginia.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Aberration said:
The Federal government can follow the Constitution, Article 1 Section 8 Clause 17, and simply cede the land back to Maryland and Virginia.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You betcha, these assholes have a pretty good deal, but if they dont want to do it anymore we all know what to do. Gaining the power of a state is not one of the options.
 
joG said:
Why would you want to do that. It seems alright as it is. Why waste time and political capital in fixing things that aren't broken and even make sense.
Click to expand...

Because the Democrats fear losing some of the fraud they've counted on and "New Columbia" would be a guaranteed two Senators and how ever many representatives. Saner minds say if they want representation they should be part of Maryland but that wouldn't help the Democrats.
 
Kal'Stang said:
DC was never meant to be a State. It was meant to be the Capitol of the US. Separated so as to show no allegiance to any specific state. To show neutrality. I see no reason that it should change. If people want representation in the Senate/Congress then they should move to an actual state. There are other US territories without representation in the Senate/Congress. Those territories are far more deserving of representation imo.
Click to expand...

It really is amazing that people really don't know US history all that well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom