Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
And Puerto Rico......should be a state too.
nah. Just make a smaller district. But it's pretty crazy to do it. But any crazier than making "two dakotas"?Why should they have to?You don’t think they were born there?Why? They knew the rules when they moved there.No matter how it is accomplished
Residents of DC should have a right to vote for Congressional representation
They can move to a state. States have the constitutional right to Congressional representation. The District does not. It was never meant to.
Just to have a basic right as a citizen?
The purpose of the District is set within the Constitution. There would have to be an amendment to change it.
If you feel so strongly about it, why are you not fighting for the production and adoption of an amendment?
he territorial capital was Yankton from 1861 until 1883, when it was moved to Bismarck. Admission of new western states was a party political battleground with each party looking at how the proposed new states were likely to vote. At the beginning of 1888, the Democrats under president Grover Cleveland proposed that the four territories of Montana, New Mexico, Dakota and Washington should be admitted together. The first two were expected to vote Democratic and the latter two were expected to vote Republican so this was seen as a compromise acceptable to both parties. However, the Republicans won majorities in both the House and the Senate later that year. To head off the possibility that Congress might only admit Republican territories to statehood, the Democrats agreed to a less favorable deal in which Dakota was divided in two and New Mexico was left out altogether. Cleveland signed it into law on February 22, 1889, and the territories could become states in nine months time after that.nah. Just make a smaller district. But it's pretty crazy to do it. But any crazier than making "two dakotas"?Why should they have to?You don’t think they were born there?Why? They knew the rules when they moved there.No matter how it is accomplished
Residents of DC should have a right to vote for Congressional representation
They can move to a state. States have the constitutional right to Congressional representation. The District does not. It was never meant to.
Just to have a basic right as a citizen?
The purpose of the District is set within the Constitution. There would have to be an amendment to change it.
If you feel so strongly about it, why are you not fighting for the production and adoption of an amendment?
There's nothing "crazy" about the existence of North and South Dakota to anyone who's actually been educated in US history. The same is true for North and South Carolina, or Virginia and West Virginia.
he territorial capital was Yankton from 1861 until 1883, when it was moved to Bismarck. Admission of new western states was a party political battleground with each party looking at how the proposed new states were likely to vote. At the beginning of 1888, the Democrats under president Grover Cleveland proposed that the four territories of Montana, New Mexico, Dakota and Washington should be admitted together. The first two were expected to vote Democratic and the latter two were expected to vote Republican so this was seen as a compromise acceptable to both parties. However, the Republicans won majorities in both the House and the Senate later that year. To head off the possibility that Congress might only admit Republican territories to statehood, the Democrats agreed to a less favorable deal in which Dakota was divided in two and New Mexico was left out altogether. Cleveland signed it into law on February 22, 1889, and the territories could become states in nine months time after that.nah. Just make a smaller district. But it's pretty crazy to do it. But any crazier than making "two dakotas"?Why should they have to?You don’t think they were born there?Why? They knew the rules when they moved there.No matter how it is accomplished
Residents of DC should have a right to vote for Congressional representation
They can move to a state. States have the constitutional right to Congressional representation. The District does not. It was never meant to.
Just to have a basic right as a citizen?
The purpose of the District is set within the Constitution. There would have to be an amendment to change it.
If you feel so strongly about it, why are you not fighting for the production and adoption of an amendment?
There's nothing "crazy" about the existence of North and South Dakota to anyone who's actually been educated in US history. The same is true for North and South Carolina, or Virginia and West Virginia.
History of the Republican Party (United States) - Wikipedia
They can make it a county of Maryland if they want congressional votes and Maryland would get another representative in the House. DC is no fucking state.You gotta ask. Will D.C. admitted as a state open the flood gates to new states all over the place?Hey fine, we'll split WA and OR in half and CA into 3 states adding 4 new red states and 8 senators.
Residents of those states can be represented by Senators and Congressmen. Residents of DC cannot
DC residents pay more Federal Taxes than 22 other states.
Taxation without representation
Are you claiming anything he posted is not true?he territorial capital was Yankton from 1861 until 1883, when it was moved to Bismarck. Admission of new western states was a party political battleground with each party looking at how the proposed new states were likely to vote. At the beginning of 1888, the Democrats under president Grover Cleveland proposed that the four territories of Montana, New Mexico, Dakota and Washington should be admitted together. The first two were expected to vote Democratic and the latter two were expected to vote Republican so this was seen as a compromise acceptable to both parties. However, the Republicans won majorities in both the House and the Senate later that year. To head off the possibility that Congress might only admit Republican territories to statehood, the Democrats agreed to a less favorable deal in which Dakota was divided in two and New Mexico was left out altogether. Cleveland signed it into law on February 22, 1889, and the territories could become states in nine months time after that.nah. Just make a smaller district. But it's pretty crazy to do it. But any crazier than making "two dakotas"?Why should they have to?You don’t think they were born there?Why? They knew the rules when they moved there.No matter how it is accomplished
Residents of DC should have a right to vote for Congressional representation
They can move to a state. States have the constitutional right to Congressional representation. The District does not. It was never meant to.
Just to have a basic right as a citizen?
The purpose of the District is set within the Constitution. There would have to be an amendment to change it.
If you feel so strongly about it, why are you not fighting for the production and adoption of an amendment?
There's nothing "crazy" about the existence of North and South Dakota to anyone who's actually been educated in US history. The same is true for North and South Carolina, or Virginia and West Virginia.
History of the Republican Party (United States) - Wikipedia
Ah, yes. Wikipedia, the leftist substitute for actually having knowledge.
All of those islands already have a right to voteAnd Puerto Rico......should be a state too.
And right after that island comes Martha's Vineyard, Nantucket, Block Island, Naushon, St. Lawrence Island, Fisher's Island, Plum Island (germ warfare lab there - so you want to discriminate against Germs voting?), Catalina and about 500 more. Oh, I left out Diomede (Little Diomede - Big Diomede is Russian but the people there might vote to become an American state if given the chance by The U.N.)
the constution says so.
The Constitution says no to DC statehood - The Boston Globe
It’s not an oversight that the nation’s capital isn’t a state: the Founding Fathers designed it that way.www-bostonglobe-com.cdn.ampproject.org
The Constitution says:
"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"
They'd have to redraw the boundaries of the Federal District first, but then the remainder of D.C. would be returned to Virginia & Maryland.
That would shake up the politics of those two states!
Too big to move, let's move the UN somewhere else.What's the Capitol city gonna be?You gotta ask. Will D.C. admitted as a state open the flood gates to new states all over the place?Hey fine, we'll split WA and OR in half and CA into 3 states adding 4 new red states and 8 senators.
Residents of those states can be represented by Senators and Congressmen. Residents of DC cannot
DC residents pay more Federal Taxes than 22 other states.
Taxation without representation
DC Anchor babies.. we,'re looking at this backwards.They chose to live in DC, moron.Why should they have to?You don’t think they were born there?Why? They knew the rules when they moved there.No matter how it is accomplished
Residents of DC should have a right to vote for Congressional representation
They can move to a state. States have the constitutional right to Congressional representation. The District does not. It was never meant to.
Just to have a basic right as a citizen?
No matter how it is accomplished
Residents of DC should have a right to vote for Congressional representation
If they don't like it let them move out to Baltimore, Maryland or Alexandria or Fredericksburg, Virginia.DC residents
Didn't Virginia get its part back when the Feds won the Civil War?Or just give the parts of DC with people living in them back to Virginia and Maryland.
That's a little more difficult than you probably realize based on where the federal government property is located.Or just give the parts of DC with people living in them back to Virginia and Maryland.
Try reading.So, I'm curious, the constitution says the seat of government, Washington DC was to be 10 miles Square. How then, did it become 68 miles square?
The word you are desperately searching for is "secede" I would hope states can succeed or they would be failures.No state may / can succeed.
Without a Constitutional amendment it would be unconstitutional.Giving the land back to Maryland wouldn't be unconstitutional, and probably the only constitutional way for those people to get Senatorial representation.
