“House approves statehood for DC in 232-180 vote“

Housing costs shot up so dramatically in DC, I have heard that you need about a million to buy there, so the tax base must be affluent. (I have not verified this ...)

 

Another writer who would have liked the quote was Ambrose Bierce who is great fun to read.

 

Ambrose Bierce was a very savvy observer of human affairs.

"Politics: A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles.
The conduct of public affairs for private advantage." Ambrose Bierce

 

interests are the same as principles, and the public is elected by the private for its advantage.

 

The "protesters" found Jeff Bezos' little $23M DC hideaway and put a guillotine in front of it.
Probably intended to be a message of Peace and Love for The Bezos/Amazon.

 

Did Al Capone say that? Or was it Joe Biden?

“Politics in modern America has become a lucrative business, an industry that has less to do with policy and a lot more to do with accessing money and favors. … bills and regulations are often introduced not to affect policy change, but as vehicles for shaking down people for … money and favors. Indeed, the motive on both sides often has nothing to do with creating a “correct” policy but instead is often about maximizing profits.” EXTORTION, "How Politicians Extract Your money, Buy Votes, And Line Their Own Pockets, Peter Schweizer, HMO, NY, NY, 2013, p. 4.

 

Yea they don't want the system corrupted just to give the party that corrupted it an advantage. That's an obvious truth no one is denying. But whats just as obvious whistle lacking honest recognition is this isn't about representation its about stacking the Senate with seats that one party will control undoubtedly control for generations.

So you tell me why -if its just about representation and not about deck stacking- can the easy solution simply not be to give the land back to Maryland?

 

Because that does not give the Democrats 2 additional, and permanent, senate seats.
-That- is the goal here; anyone who argues otherwise is lying to you.

 

Yea, only reason I even bother to ask is to see if pro-DC statehood people will be honest about their motives.

 

Thus far, the answer is no.

 

Yup. Retroretrocession, same thing they did when the area south of DC retro-recessed back to VA.

Name the new Maryland County "Douglass" after the Great Frederick Douglass

Great American, Deeply Honorable Man​

Congress can give back what it took from Maryland and Virginia when it created the District in 1801. It’s called retrocession, and the job is already half done. In 1847, the federal government ceded the portion of D.C. south of the Potomac River back to Virginia. It is now the cities of Alexandria and Arlington. Residents elect a member to the U.S. House, vote for two Senators, and escape the direct federal oversight of their affairs that Washington D.C. endures.

It makes practical sense to simply allow the current residents of Washington, D.C., to become residents in a newly designated Douglass County, Md., and share in that state’s representation in Congress.

Last year, columnist Charles Lane of the Washington Post listed additional advantages of retrocession: District residents would have a large delegation in Maryland’s state legislature, they would regain control of prosecutors and courts, and they could streamline services by eliminating multiple layers of bureaucracy. “The federal government ought to be willing to grease retrocession by supplying transitional aid, possibly by reprogramming annual grants to the District.”

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/06/d-c-statehood-what-would-frederick-douglass-do/

 

They know they can vote higher wages and salaries and benefits with the Democrats and the huge expansions of government insuring their jobs. They voluntarily live in a federal district just like those who live in federal territories.

 

You'd have to amend the Constitution. Just leave it the way it is and demand the Democrat stop engaging in these trivial matters and get something done about the REAL problems we face.

 

It makes a buffer around it as Washington intended. The more you segment it the more you defeat the purpose and harder to manage.

 

Because Wyoming is a STATE, DC is NOT, don't know why you are having difficulty with that.

 

That's the argument England uses against the colonies, isn't it?

The colonies didn't like taxation without representation.

England's position was that if you want representation, then move to England.

And, you're OK with that. Fine.

But, that was not a position that Americans found acceptable, nor should they have.

 

That is not an excuse for taxation without represntation.

More generally, it's not an excuse for being governed by a government in which you don't have representation.

 

So, DC will become state number 58?

 

Doesn't need an excuse all it needs is the Constitution. They have representation in both houses. Don't like living in a federal district or territory move to a state.

 

The consitution only sets a maximum size. It does NOT set a minimum size.

In fact, within less than a hundred years Washington DC was reduced by more than 20 square miles ceded back to th state from which it had been reserved - and done so specifically because of the FACT that states are better able to make sound economic decisions and proper investments in infrastructure.

Today it is crystal clear that the size of DC is WAY more than what is reasonably required for operation of our federal government.

The way we know that is by LOOKING!! Almsot all of DC is used for private use by residents, NOT reserved for use by the federal government. And, that fact is not a hinderance.

 

No and the District is not a colony, it is the Federal seat of government.

 

No, DC does not have representation in EITHER side of congress.

They have an observer. Observing is not representation.

And, your idea that taxation without representation is acceptable is absolutely counter to what America stands for. We stand for a government of, by and for the people.

 

Then have the residental areas join Maryland.

 

Yes - that's a valid solution. In fact, ceding DC land to the state from which it came has been done in the past. It's not even a new idea!

One snag is that Maryland has been opposed, and forcing them to take it seems objectionable.

Also, DC is large enough to warrant being a state. And, it has unique issues that come from it having been ruled by the House since forever. Requiring DC to have to start lobbying Maryland to fix those issues seems pathetic.

What's the justification for refusing them statehood? They are larger than Wyoming and larger than Vermont!

 

They participate in debates and vote in committees and lobby for their district.