DC and Utah lose bids for House seats

[brooklynite]

Source: AP

WASHINGTON - A bill that would have given District of Columbia residents their first-ever member of Congress died in the Senate on Tuesday, dashing hopes of finally gaining full voting rights after a 206-year wait.

Senators voted 57-42, just three votes short of the 60 needed to move the measure forward. The bill would have created two new House seats: One for the city of about 600,000 people and one for Utah, which narrowly missed out on a fourth seat after the last census.

The procedural vote effectively killed the best chance in decades to win the District a full-fledged House member. The city has been denied voting rights in Congress since 1801, making it the only major capital city in the world where citizens are denied a vote in the nation's representative body of government.

Advocates had hoped to resolve what they call a "national disgrace" and the most important civil rights issue of the era.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070918/ap_on_el_ge/dc_vote...

[saracat]

1. Where is that list of votes? Who voted against this on our side?

Do you think it was because of that extra Utah vote? That would have been "silly" IMHO!

[Greeby]

2. All Pukes

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/r...

[saracat]

3. Nope Baccus D MT voted NO and Byrd did not vote.Ugh.

We would have been 1 short!

[goclark]

15. Damn!

[Yupster]

57. I would think Byrd would vote no

He's such a stickler for the Constitution, and this law is so in your face unconstitutional.

[atreides1]

4. Once again

What are the troops fighting for? That's right they're fighting and dying for freedom and democracy, for a representative government for all Americans, with the exception of those from the nation's capitol.

Taxation without Representation, sound familiar?????

[KamaAina]

28. It certainly does to Washingtonians

That is not an extra-cost optional plate like MD's "Treasure the Chesapeake", but DC's ordinary, everyday plate.

[Frogger]

5. There are other ways

to address this issue that get pass the constitutional challenge that so many Senators saw. Whether they were right or wrong, I don't know, but they saw a problem.

However, there would be nothing unconstitutional about returning all the DC territory except the capitol, White House, and a few other government buildings to the state of Maryland, whence it originally came. Then they would be in a Congressional district. What's wrong with that?

Or, they could do it the hard way and get a constitutional amendment passed. But obviously, this WOULD be the hard way.

[atreides1]

7. Even if returned

Those buildings would still be federal buildings, just like all federal courthouses are federal buildngs, or VA centers/hospitals are federal buildings, or federal prisons are federal buildings!\

The ownership of the White House, the Capitol Building, or all of the National Monuments would still belong to the federal government.

The question is would Maryland want the responsibility?

[Frogger]

10. I don't know.

I wouldn't, if I were them. DC is basically dysfunctional as a city. However, that's not the point. The point is it would be a legal way for citizens to get representation that would pass constitutional muster with R senators and the Supreme Court.

Now whether therre is the political will or not, I don't know.

[northzax]

21. Heck, we'd be an upgrade from baltimore

Dc is in much better shape than ballmer. And there isn't a constitutional issue with the house, only the senate. The house determines its own eligibility rules.

[Frogger]

48. I think you're wrong.

Section 2 - The House

The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

From the Constitution. It says, "states". Now whether or not this can be interpreted some other way, I don't know. But this would go to the SC, and given the current make-up, what are the odds that it would be anything other than as I have described.

[spooky3]

44. I think DC citizens opposed it in the past--also 2 questions

1) wonder what will happen when the Dems pick up a few more Senate seats and the Presidency in 2008? There'll be no Utah compromise in that bill, because it isn't justified; Utah has sufficient representation, and it was offered only as a compromise to attract Rethug votes, which it didn't succeed in doing (sufficiently). Then the Rethugs will long for the days when they could have had the offsetting vote.

2) wonder how this outcome will affect Tom Davis' chances in the VA Senate race? He was a champion for the measure, and maybe he will look ineffective.

[Frogger]

49. Well in my opinion,

the first thing is to make sure those things happen. It's far from a sure thing, and a long time from the election. Then it has to get past the SC. Also, far from a sure thing.

As for your second question, sorry my crystal ball broke some time ago> I don't know.

[brooklynite]

6. Vote tally

nb - this was a cloture vote (60 votes required to advance)

YEAs ---57
Akaka (D-HI)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs ---42
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lott (R-MS)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Warner (R-VA)

Not Voting - 1
Byrd (D-WV)

[Renew Deal]

12. Can someone from Montana find out what Baucus was thinking,

I'd really like to know.

[rodeodance]

17. so so so close

[rodeodance]

18. i see Joe. L voted with the Dems on this one.---and some of the 'mod' Repugs

[MaineDem]

8. Damn!

Glad to see my two Senators voted the right way for a change.

[Benhurst]

9. Residents of D.C. may not have representation; but

at least they know they are free. Unless, of course, they want to speak out against The Leader, then they join the rest of us in a First Amendment Zone.

[DemKR]

23. Question

How would this passing be a good thing if it gave Utah an extra electoral vote?

[northzax]

26. utah will get it in 2010 anyway

They were so close in 2000 and only census irregularities denied them. And while i might not like what Utah does with that vote, i would never deny it to them based on who they might vote for. Plus, look forward, adding one more electoral vote (which this would do) can only help dems in the long run, blue areas are growing faster than red ones,

[Freddie Stubbs]

36. Red states are growing faster then blue ones

Red states gained 7 votes in the 2000 reapportionment:

http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-7.pdf

[northzax]

38. but look at those states

with the exception of Texas, they are getting more purple every year. Arizona has a Democratic governor, Florida, as we all know, should have been blue in 00, and is certainly up for grabs in 08, even though it trends GOP. North Carolina and Georgia are not nearly as Red as they were 15 years ago. Colorado is trending blue as well.

[Freddie Stubbs]

40. All of the states you mentioned save one got redder from 2000 to 2004

Although the official tally for Florida in 2000 had Bush ahead by only a few hundred votes, he carried the state by over 300,000 in 2004.

Bush won Arizona by about 100,000 in 2000. His margin was over 200,000 in 2004.

In 2000 Bush won NC by about the same percentages in 2000 and 2004: 56%-43%.

Georgia went for Bush by a margin of about 300,000 in 2000. In 2004 the margin was over 500,000.

source: http://www.uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/

[northzax]

51. 2004 was an abberation

if you don't think Florida, Ohio and North Carolina are in play in 2008, we might as well give up now.

[Renew Deal]

11. How is this even possible?

How is it possible that this could fail in the US in 2007? I am disgusted.

[qdemn7]

13. The ultimate goal is Statehood for DC....

Fuck that, no city deserves Statehood, especially that corrupt cesspit. Give all of the city back to Virginia except for a few Federal Buildings. People in DC don't like that, then they can remain without the vote, period.

[northzax]

24. Two things wrong here

First, VA already has their part of the District back, it's called Alexandria. The current District was taken (given, actually) from/by Maryland.

second off, i will thank you not to call my hometown, and that of 500,000 other Americans, a cesspit, when you obviously are relying on well-outdated information. DC has come a long way in the past 15 years, we are booming, for all our flaws, despite congressional meddling in our affairs, we have a AAA bond rating, run surpluses, we are the most culturally, racially and ethnically diverse city of our size in the world. How's your city doing? oh, and we are a majority black city, the only one of our size and wealth in the US. You think maybe having a majority black, overwhelmingly blue city attracts attention from certain media elements on issues that make the city look bad?

[Mike Daniels]

45. Amazing how DC really turned around once they got Barry out of the mayor's office

Sometimes that all it takes.

[northzax]

50. just as Cleveland really turned around

when Kucinich left the mayor's office. Don't forget that under Barry, the District had no financial authority at all. Barry wasn't really the problem, he couldn't take a piss without getting permission from congress.

of course, under Barry, DC passed the first civil unions bill (banned by Congress) medicinal marijuana (banned by Congress) commuter tax (banned by Congress) it just keeps going.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[northzax]

27. Thank you

Nice to see someone gets it!

[Solon]

29. Every citizen deserves representation...

I may not be a big D Democrat, by I am, without reservations, a little d democrat, and I believe in democracy, period. Let's not fucking compromise on that!

[Tiberius]

33. LOL

Why don't you tell everyone how you really feel?

Seriously, though, it reminds me of a certain meme in the rethuglican world after Katrina... "well, look at them, they're a corrupt city/state anyway, so it's useless to even try to help them!!!"

All the while, Bear Sterns-Halliburton-Morgan Stanley types plunder the economy every day.... unnoticed.

[Solon]

34. Shit, I was holding back!

Didn't want to get my post deleted, after all, actually, I'm surprised it last this long. But on a more serious note, the poster I responded to is a big part of the problem, period. Being a citizen, to me, means that we all should have one person, one vote, and allowed representation in the Government, without that, NONE of us are equal and we are NOT a democracy yet. The most evil thing I can think of is trying to justify why some citizens should be afforded more rights than others.

[High Plains]

46. What an ass. I was a disenfranchised DC resident for years.

If "people in DC don't like" your prescription "they can remain without the vote period."

Fuck off, Jethro.

[Tesha]

56. Perhaps you should look at a map before you post again? (NT)

[rodeodance]

14. 'died in the Senate"-like the Medicare Part D bill and and and and and......

[rodeodance]

16. Craig (R-ID) said NO

[rodeodance]

19. I had heard that CRAIG was back in DC

[Olney Blue]

35. Maybe he will change his vote, now that he cast it?

[brooklynite]

37. He was going to vote YES but he had a wide stance and...

[DRoseDARs]

20. What I don't understand is the bill didn't also call for two DC senators.

How can you have a voting seat in the House, but no voting seats in the Senate? To me, that seems to make the bill plainly unconstitutional in the first place.

[northzax]

22. Constitutional issues

The House is allowed to determine its own membership eligibility and distribution, the senate specifically says Two per state.

of course, one can make the arguement that the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that DC is a state on matters of taxation, interstate commerce and inter-state legal disputes, so why not in Representation?

[armodem08]

30. Yet another filibuster by the repukes!

and AP conveniently says 60 votes are required for passage. Where are the Dems pointing out this filibuster like the repukes used to do every time we filibustered? We need to get stronger on this. THIS IS A FILIBUSTER! It is a obstruction tactic. As the article notes, 57 senators are in favor of this bill, a clear majority. It makes me sick.

[tom_paine]

31. Exactly. The whole nation has gone insane like an Orwell novel

I no longer ask why, especially why the Democrats allow this double-standard without screaming bloody murder.

"60 votes are required for passage" yeh...a far cry from FILIBUSTER! FILIBUSTER! FILIBUSTER! when the Democrats dared even THINK about doing what the Busheis do as a matter of course.

[Xithras]

32. There is a much simpler solution to this. Abolish DC.

Seriously. DC was originally deprived of voting rights partially because it was never meant to have a permanent population in the first place. It was supposed to be a separate capital, independent of the states and beholden to none of them, which was intended only to house the functions of government. It was never supposed to have a permanent population, was never supposed to have ANY kind of municipal government, and wasn't intended to deprive anyone of their rights.

The simplest solution to the issue is to simply adjust the borders of DC itself. Create borders for a "federal zone" within DC that is under the exclusive control of the U.S. government, a zone which includes NO residents, and cede the rest of the city to Maryland. You will end up with a much smaller federal "District of Columbia", and a large new city called "Washington, Maryland".

This change would add about 600,000 Democratic leaning citizens to the state, tipping it further to our own party. In fact, with this change and natural growth, Maryland would be eligible for an additional Representative in a few years anyway, without congressional action.

[Hippo_Tron]

42. Politically it would be smarter to give it to Virginia

Half a million Democratic votes would help turn the state blue at a much faster pace than it is already going.

[Xithras]

54. I don't know if that's even possible.

The original DC territory was ceded willingly by both Virginia and Maryland in the 1700's, but the entire Virginia portion was handed back in 1847. All of modern day DC sits on land ceded by Maryland. According to Article IV of the Constitution, land cannot be transferred from one state to another without the approval of BOTH state legislatures and Congress. Since a ceding of DC to Virginia would essentially mean that the federal government took land from one state, held it for a while, and gave it to another, I'm fairly sure it would qualify as a transfer under Article IV.

I rechecked, and it actually looks like retroceding the land to Maryland would mean an automatic seat pickup in the House for the party. There are already enough "overs" in the state to make up the population difference. The population difference in Virginia may not be enough to pick up any additional seats.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

39. Warner from VA voted nay...

Some neighbor. Asshole.

[Laughing Mirror]

52. He's more than a neighbor

Most of his professional life has been spent in DC. And does he still have that house in Georgetown?

But why should he bother if DC has a vote in Congress, when he can cast his vote in Virginia.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

55. I would imagine he still has a house in the District...

He's just another good ol' boy who wants to deny blacks a vote any way he can. Funny how some folks in the "upper class" can have so little class.

[mr moosers]

41. Deligates

Im all for giving D.C. State hood. But this bill doesn't really do this. It give D.C. a seat in the house AND they get to keep their delegate. Explain why D.C. needs a member in the house AND a Delegate?

[ToeBot]

43. Hatch and Bennett couldn't persuade any of their Senator buddies to vote for this?

Pathetic losers both of them. Not that the country needs any more low caliber representation from Utah. With 4 divisions, the Republican controlled legislature will finally be able to gerrymander Salt Lake City and whats left of the Labor vote, doing away with the faux Democrat from 2nd district. It's a pity the Democratically controlled congress couldn't figure out a way to bring democracy to the District of Columbia without ceding anything to the Republicans.

[SoCalDem]

47. Not surprising, really.. I don't think that DC was ever intended

to be what it has become.. Think of how it was when the constitution was written..

DC was intended to be a "neutral zone", and most of the landed gentry who did their business there had homes elsewhere.. The only people who lived there day in and day out..24/7/365 were the servants, and we all know what color most of them were. "those people" did not have the vote.. hell ...women didn't even have the vote, so why would the constitution see DC as anything but "the office"?

the fact that DC is as big as it is now, was probably unforeseen, and of course it will take an amendment to change things, since the constitution specifically names "states"..not districts or cities..

the original idea was that the people who went to DC and worked there a SHORT time (that WAS their original plan y'know?), had residences in their home districts/states, so they did not need any additional representation at the "office"..

The founders did not anticipate LIFETIME careers.. they did not expect legislators to live there full time..FOREVER..

It's too bad they cannot just section off the housing areas and cede them over to a neighboring state..but we all know that won't happen.

[Mz Pip]

53. Lieberman voted Yes

I guess he occasionally comes to his senses.

Mz Pip