Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How about we do an end run around Lieberman and just go get two more Senators elsewhere?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 05:35 PM
Original message
How about we do an end run around Lieberman and just go get two more Senators elsewhere?
The plan is very simple:

Statehood for The District of Columbia.

There are two schools of thought. One holds that it would simply take an act of Congress under Article Four, Section 3 of that quaint piece of paper, the US Constitution. It reads:


Clause 1: New states

New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.



There is one potential fly in this ointment: Maryland may have the right to claim back the land it ceded to the feds to form the national capitol. Virginia already has. If you look at a map of the District, and then look at the cities of Arlington and Alexandria. Collectively, the three jurisdictions (originally) form a square, which was the original area created for the US's capitol. I'm not sure what the circumstances were way back when in which Virginia took the land back, but I suspect Maryland would not object to statehood for DC.



We have a Democratic president and two Democratic houses of government. This is long overdue. The Lieberman thing is a bonus.

It is a slam dunk that DC would have two Democratic Senators. One would probably be this lady:



Eleanor Holmes Norton











Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
iamjoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 06:03 PM
Response to Original message
1. We Don't Need Two More
Edited on Sat Nov-15-08 06:04 PM by iamjoy
This is based on the false premise that no Senator ever breaks ranks.

We've gotten rid of some of the more progressive Republicans in the past two elections: Chafee, Smith and Sununu.

Meanwhile, we have Democrats like Nelson, Salazar and Casey.

But you still have some Republicans unlikely to over use the filibuster.

As for DC, I think it should get it's own Congressperson and be able to vote for Maryland senators.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Why would you create such a hybrid system?
The District has essentially the same population as

District of Columbia: 581,530

Alaska: 670,053

Montana: 944,632

Wyoming: 515,004

North Dakota: 635,867

South Dakota: 781,919

Delaware: 853,476

Following your logic, several of these states have no right to their own senators either.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamjoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Because...
It's better than nothing. DC is established in the Constitution as a District under control of Congress, not a state so it's an odd hybrid in the first place. I don't think the Founders of our nation ever intended people would actually live there. Until 1961, its citizens couldn't even be represented by electors in Presidential elections.

I also think there is an attitude that since representatives live in the Capital while Congress is in session, representatives from DC would have some sort of disproportionate or "home field" advantage. I thought that was a crazy Republican argument used to disenfranchise the people of DC, but I did some reading on the history of Washington City, and this attitude existed in the mid-nineteenth century. "Because the District, having nobody to represent it on this floor, has everybody” Some early Washington City mayors even thought the whole city was a national monument, and Congress should bear all costs of its maintenance.

If DC were considered a state, there might be an attitude that it was responsible for bearing a greater cost share for infrastructure. Right now, if you look at States Receiving Most in Federal Spending Per Dollar of Federal Taxes Paid, the top is North Dakota - $2 in government spending for every dollar in federal taxes. But DC receives about $6 in federal spending for every dollar its residents pay in federal taxes. So, it certainly doesn't need representatives to help bring home the bacon. Yes, that money is spent on National Monuments and sites, but it helps improves the life of all residents and visitors to the city.

If you are making the argument of "no taxation without representation" as a matter of principle, I don't debate that, but it can be attained through a compromise or hybrid. Since the land for DC was ceded by Maryland, I say let's give it back.

What about being aware of the needs of constituents? Well, I am one nearly 650,000 people my Congressman represents. I fear my voice is drowned out along with the rest of the masses. The only voices that stand out are the big campaign donors. That is unlikely to change no matter what the fate of DC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rpannier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 06:40 PM
Response to Original message
3. It's unfortunate Collins won in Maine
If she had lost (and lost bad enough) we might have turned Snowe.

With dwindling number of republikkan senators (most are now ardent conservatives), it will be difficlut to find new Senate seats to pick up.

The closest we're at are Ohio and Pennsylvania (I think Specter is going to retire)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ColbertWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
5. Appoint him Ambassador to ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC