Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Omaha Steve

(99,073 posts)
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 09:38 PM Jan 2015

D.C. Activists Urge Obama to Back Statehood in State of the Union

Source: WSJ

By BYRON TAU

Activists for Washington D.C. statehood are pushing President Barack Obama to advocate for the issue in his 2015 State of the Union address, describing the federal district’s subordinate status as a “moral cause.”

Josh Burch, founder of the grassroots group Neighbors United for DC Statehood, has launched a petition through a White House outreach website urging Mr. Obama to mention Washington, D.C.’s lack of congressional voting representation in his upcoming primetime address to Congress.

“We urge President Obama take the statehood cause directly to Congress & the American people by advocating for D.C. statehood in his State of the Union speech. This cause is a moral cause and we ask President Obama to embrace it and advocate for it thus emboldening a cause that would ensure that the people of the District of Columbia are finally treated fairly and equally as citizens in the 51st state in the union,” the petition on We the People reads.

Mr. Burch said that it was a simple matter of social justice that hundreds of thousands of District of Columbia residents remained disenfranchised on Capitol Hill. He said the president can drive the agenda and spark a national discussion by mentioning the issue in the State of the Union speech.

FULL story at link.



In addition to being the seat of the federal government, Washington is home to 650,000 people Agence France-Presse/Getty Images


Read more: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/01/05/d-c-activists-urge-obama-to-back-statehood-in-state-of-the-union/

11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
D.C. Activists Urge Obama to Back Statehood in State of the Union (Original Post) Omaha Steve Jan 2015 OP
Does anyone know the motives for the Dems refusal? bloomington-lib Jan 2015 #1
That it's currently unconstitutional for DC to be a state might be part of it jmowreader Jan 2015 #3
Yep. They can push all they want to rejoin Maryland but that's as close as it will get Action_Patrol Jan 2015 #5
"District of Columbia can't be a state" BumRushDaShow Jan 2015 #6
"Ten miles square" is one hundred square miles jberryhill Jan 2015 #9
Thanks for clarifying! BumRushDaShow Jan 2015 #10
It's not a matter of "refusal" BumRushDaShow Jan 2015 #4
Statehood, no. Voting Rep's, absolutely. Shemp Howard Jan 2015 #2
That would require a constitutional amendment. Angleae Jan 2015 #11
Population more than at least 3 States, maybe jaysunb Jan 2015 #7
I would like to see three new states: RoverSuswade Jan 2015 #8

bloomington-lib

(946 posts)
1. Does anyone know the motives for the Dems refusal?
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 09:46 PM
Jan 2015

"Republicans have also attached measures to spending bills that would limit the city’s ability to fund needle exchange and abortion programs. And during the 2013 government shutdown, Senate Democrats refused to allow the city to spend its own tax dollars in order to keep pressure on the GOP."

jmowreader

(50,453 posts)
3. That it's currently unconstitutional for DC to be a state might be part of it
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 10:35 PM
Jan 2015

Article I, Section 8 required the state or states that held the land (not exceeding 10 miles square) which would become the seat of government to cede that land to the federal government. Roughly translated, the District of Columbia can't be a state.

With the teabagger problem we currently have, I don't want to try amending the Constitution to allow a State of Columbia. Not going to church would become a felony.

Action_Patrol

(845 posts)
5. Yep. They can push all they want to rejoin Maryland but that's as close as it will get
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 10:51 PM
Jan 2015

And nobody wants that.
Virginia already took their portion back.

BumRushDaShow

(127,322 posts)
6. "District of Columbia can't be a state"
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 10:57 PM
Jan 2015

The current area of Washington D.C. is 68.3 square miles, only 10 miles of it needing to actually be "federal" per the Constitution.

[font size="4"]Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17[/font]

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of Particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a1_8_17.html


The rest is filled with a population not anticipated by the founders and that is the area needing representation but that lies in a nowhere land, not being a part of Virginia or Maryland. I.e., they (Congress) can redefine the "boundaries" of where the representative(s) would have jurisdiction to accommodate the "minimum" yet provide representation. The fact that the 23rd Amendment was passed actually designating a (semi non-voting) representative, indicates what is possible to go the next step -

23rd Amendment
Amendment XXIII
Section 1.


The District constituting the seat of government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct:

A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a state, but in no event more than the least populous state; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the states, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a state; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

Section 2.

The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxxiii

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
9. "Ten miles square" is one hundred square miles
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 11:15 PM
Jan 2015

That's why it is shaped the way it is, less the Virginia portion.

They didn't mean "ten square miles". That's little more than three miles on a side.

It is a square of ten miles on a side:

BumRushDaShow

(127,322 posts)
10. Thanks for clarifying!
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 08:10 AM
Jan 2015


I know over the years that they have proposed all sorts of options to give the 600,000+ population a say (beyond Presidential elections) within the language of Article 4.

BumRushDaShow

(127,322 posts)
4. It's not a matter of "refusal"
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 10:40 PM
Jan 2015

but the tricks the GOP continually plays to even entertain such legislation. I.e., if I recall correctly, the last time the issue made some progress, Oririn Hatch offered to help sponsor (because it would benefit Utah by creation of an additional seat in his state), but only if D.C. gutted their firearms restrictions in the District, and that caused the Democrats to pull the bill due to the anti-gun control amendments that were being added.

Shemp Howard

(889 posts)
2. Statehood, no. Voting Rep's, absolutely.
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 10:28 PM
Jan 2015

DC should have voting Representatives in the House, in proportion to its population. As it is now, DC has a single "delegate", who is not allowed to vote on the House floor. And that just doesn't seem right.

On the other hand, DC is, in every aspect, a city. Declaring it a "state", again that just doesn't seem right.




Angleae

(4,469 posts)
11. That would require a constitutional amendment.
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 08:22 AM
Jan 2015

Article I, section 2
"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."

So unless they become one of the "several states" they get no voting representation just like Puerto Rico, Guam, US Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and Northern Marianas.

RoverSuswade

(641 posts)
8. I would like to see three new states:
Mon Jan 5, 2015, 11:08 PM
Jan 2015

1 Washington DC
2 New York City
3 Puerto Rico
result: at least 5 new Dem Senators and several Dem electoral votes!
Shhhhhhh - don't tell Ted Rubio and Marco Cruz!

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»D.C. Activists Urge Obama...