Comments on: By the People http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/ Tue, 02 Dec 2008 03:27:00 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Mark B. http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24323 Mark B. Tue, 25 Sep 2007 15:55:55 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24323 I may be the lawyer you thought responded earlier, Lamonte. I'm with those who are troubled by giving a voting representative to persons who live in the District of Columbia--as has been said above, there are clear procedures for admitting new states to the Union, and that's one way for the D.C. voting issue to be settled. The other thing, which I think is better, would be to have D.C. cede back most of it's territory to Maryland. Keep the Capitol, the White House, the Supreme Court, the executive office buildings, the Mall and all the museums and monuments in a newly reduced District of Columbia, and give all the rest of the District back to Maryland. There's a precedent for that, too. Look at where the southern line of the District is drawn--at the Potomac. All the Virginia portions of the District were ceded back to Virginia in July 1846, so why not give the Maryland parts back to them now--except for the actual seat of government. Now, maybe Maryland won't want it--but can't we just jam it down their throats? I mean, look at all the stuff the eastern states jammed down the throats of western territories as they sought statehood--and I don't just mean abandoning polygamy. How do you think Nevada ended up being owned 95% (or whatever) by the Federal government? And, imagine those Maryland senators and representatives fighting against it! Fighting to keep those poor folks in Georgetown and Anacostia from having the right to vote. Maybe they could be required to send a lot of money, the same as the West German states had to send a lot of money to the east to make the marriage work--but, hey, they can do it. All those folks up in Silver Spring and Wheaton and Columbia just need to dig a little deeper and pay more in taxes, and it'll be just fine. I may be the lawyer you thought responded earlier, Lamonte.

I’m with those who are troubled by giving a voting representative to persons who live in the District of Columbia–as has been said above, there are clear procedures for admitting new states to the Union, and that’s one way for the D.C. voting issue to be settled.

The other thing, which I think is better, would be to have D.C. cede back most of it’s territory to Maryland. Keep the Capitol, the White House, the Supreme Court, the executive office buildings, the Mall and all the museums and monuments in a newly reduced District of Columbia, and give all the rest of the District back to Maryland.

There’s a precedent for that, too. Look at where the southern line of the District is drawn–at the Potomac. All the Virginia portions of the District were ceded back to Virginia in July 1846, so why not give the Maryland parts back to them now–except for the actual seat of government.

Now, maybe Maryland won’t want it–but can’t we just jam it down their throats? I mean, look at all the stuff the eastern states jammed down the throats of western territories as they sought statehood–and I don’t just mean abandoning polygamy. How do you think Nevada ended up being owned 95% (or whatever) by the Federal government?

And, imagine those Maryland senators and representatives fighting against it! Fighting to keep those poor folks in Georgetown and Anacostia from having the right to vote.

Maybe they could be required to send a lot of money, the same as the West German states had to send a lot of money to the east to make the marriage work–but, hey, they can do it. All those folks up in Silver Spring and Wheaton and Columbia just need to dig a little deeper and pay more in taxes, and it’ll be just fine.

]]> By: Lamonte http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24234 Lamonte Mon, 24 Sep 2007 10:53:31 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24234 MArk D. - Your optimism is encouraging but an amendement to the constitution giving DC representation in both the House and Senate was passed by the Congress in 1978 but only 16 of the 38 required states ratfied the amendment. Hawaii, Oregon, Iowa and Louisiana were the only states west of the Mississippi to ratify the amendment. Since that time, several other attempts have been made to make DC a state, let DC voters vote in the Maryland election and many other options as well. All have failed and my reason for writing was simply to explore what it is that makes the majority of Americans, or their representatives, afraid to give those rights to the people of the District. MArk D. - Your optimism is encouraging but an amendement to the constitution giving DC representation in both the House and Senate was passed by the Congress in 1978 but only 16 of the 38 required states ratfied the amendment. Hawaii, Oregon, Iowa and Louisiana were the only states west of the Mississippi to ratify the amendment. Since that time, several other attempts have been made to make DC a state, let DC voters vote in the Maryland election and many other options as well. All have failed and my reason for writing was simply to explore what it is that makes the majority of Americans, or their representatives, afraid to give those rights to the people of the District.

]]> By: Mark D. http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24126 Mark D. Sat, 22 Sep 2007 20:47:47 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24126 No problem, Lamonte. It is worth mentioning there was a proposed constitutional amendent to make the District of Columbia into a state once that gained a surprising amount of support. The 23rd amendment, which gives Washington D.C. presidential electoral vote(s), passed easily enough forty some odd years ago. I imagine one that adds House representation alone would have a good prospect of passage. No problem, Lamonte. It is worth mentioning there was a proposed constitutional amendent to make the District of Columbia into a state once that gained a surprising amount of support. The 23rd amendment, which gives Washington D.C. presidential electoral vote(s), passed easily enough forty some odd years ago. I imagine one that adds House representation alone would have a good prospect of passage.

]]> By: lamonte http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24102 lamonte Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:10:23 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24102 Mark D - I'm sorry. I mixed you up with another poster named Mark. Mark D - I’m sorry. I mixed you up with another poster named Mark.

]]> By: Mark D. http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24081 Mark D. Sat, 22 Sep 2007 05:39:30 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24081 Lamonte, I am not a lawyer, but I am familiar enough with the law to know that a lawyers with opinions that haven't a chance of being upheld are a dime a dozen. Any resident of the District of Columbia who thinks they have a valid legal (i.e. constitutional) argument for representation in Congress should get together with like minded souls and file suit in federal court. Simple as that. Lamonte,

I am not a lawyer, but I am familiar enough with the law to know that a lawyers with opinions that haven’t a chance of being upheld are a dime a dozen.

Any resident of the District of Columbia who thinks they have a valid legal (i.e. constitutional) argument for representation in Congress should get together with like minded souls and file suit in federal court. Simple as that.

]]> By: Daylan http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24078 Daylan Sat, 22 Sep 2007 04:39:51 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24078 The argument for DC getting a representation seems to be based on "Taxation Without Representation". What about all the youth who pay taxes on their income, but are not allowed to vote? The argument for DC getting a representation seems to be based on “Taxation Without Representation”.

What about all the youth who pay taxes on their income, but are not allowed to vote?

]]> By: lamonte http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24066 lamonte Sat, 22 Sep 2007 01:03:54 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24066 Mark D - While I respect your legal opinion I believe I have provided a small bit of evidence that lawyers, like you, disagree with your assertion that the only remedy is to make DC a State or pass an amendment to the Constitution. Craig - Nobody os suggesting DC have Senators. My home county in Idaho is bigger thgan Rhode Island, geographically speaking,but Rhode Island has two senators and two Congressman. DC is only asking for one Congressman. Everyone - I know there is precedent for denying this vote for DC but so many seem to be making the argument in a tone that tells me they don't want DC voters to be represented. My question is why? Mark D - While I respect your legal opinion I believe I have provided a small bit of evidence that lawyers, like you, disagree with your assertion that the only remedy is to make DC a State or pass an amendment to the Constitution.

Craig - Nobody os suggesting DC have Senators. My home county in Idaho is bigger thgan Rhode Island, geographically speaking,but Rhode Island has two senators and two Congressman. DC is only asking for one Congressman.

Everyone - I know there is precedent for denying this vote for DC but so many seem to be making the argument in a tone that tells me they don’t want DC voters to be represented. My question is why?

]]> By: Mark D. http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24061 Mark D. Sat, 22 Sep 2007 00:14:38 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24061 The constitutional language is very clear. Article I Section 2 makes a particular reference to "State" in at least five places. The uppercase form is significant - uppercase is used when distinguishing a formal definition from the generic form. The District of Columbia may be a "state", but it is certainly not a "State". It is worth noting that territories and other possessions of the United States have always been without (voting) representation in the House of Representatives. Utah had no representation for almost fifty years. Article 4 Section 1 indicates that Congress has the power to admit new "States" to the Union. The District of Columbia has not been admitted. The only proper way to remedy the situation (short of admission as a state) is with a constitutional amendment. The constitutional language is very clear. Article I Section 2 makes a particular reference to “State” in at least five places. The uppercase form is significant - uppercase is used when distinguishing a formal definition from the generic form. The District of Columbia may be a “state”, but it is certainly not a “State”.

It is worth noting that territories and other possessions of the United States have always been without (voting) representation in the House of Representatives. Utah had no representation for almost fifty years.

Article 4 Section 1 indicates that Congress has the power to admit new “States” to the Union. The District of Columbia has not been admitted. The only proper way to remedy the situation (short of admission as a state) is with a constitutional amendment.

]]> By: Craig http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24057 Craig Fri, 21 Sep 2007 23:27:32 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24057 DC is too small of a geographic area to have two senators. If DC gets representation then I want my little NC county to have two senators from it elected as well. The attempt for DC representation is a transparent power grab by narrow minded lefties. Get a life. DC is too small of a geographic area to have two senators. If DC gets representation then
I want my little NC county to have two senators from it elected as well. The attempt for DC representation is a transparent power grab by narrow minded lefties. Get a life.

]]> By: Lamonte http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24036 Lamonte Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:11:34 +0000 http://www.nine-moons.com/2007/09/21/by-the-people/#comment-24036 Ardis -Are you suggesting that the capital district was created for the sole purpose of denying the residence of the district the right of representation? And please remember it was not this po-dunk farm boy from Idaho who made that statement - it was two recognized legal scholars. Ardis -Are you suggesting that the capital district was created for the sole purpose of denying the residence of the district the right of representation? And please remember it was not this po-dunk farm boy from Idaho who made that statement - it was two recognized legal scholars.

]]>