Should DC become a state and get 2 Senators and voting rights for residents?

[struth]

Nope, it's drunk on federal dollars.

it can make it without medicaid, and SS, it did before those programs

the state has businesses and a rural community that can make it on its own

DC however, never has made it on its own without federal dollars

without it, it’s an old unused port town with a couple colleges

 

[HappyJoy]

it can make it without medicaid, and SS, it did before those programs

Sure if you want to sink an entire generation into poverty go right ahead. Washington D.C. on the other hand is actually productive considering how much they pay in federal taxes as compared to a dependent state like Mississippi.

the state has businesses and a rural community that can make it on its own

It's ag. is subsidized and it's citizens are poor compared to other states.

DC however, never has made it on its own without federal dollars

They pay some of the highest federal taxes per capita in the country. With no representation in Congress. You think that's OK? Why?

without it, it’s an old unused port town with a couple colleges

But it's not an old unused port town now is it?

 

[struth]

Sure if you want to sink an entire generation into poverty go right ahead. Washington D.C. on the other hand is actually productive considering how much they pay in federal taxes as compared to a dependent state like Mississippi.



It's ag. is subsidized and it's citizens are poor compared to other states.


They pay some of the highest federal taxes per capita in the country. With no representation in Congress. You think that's OK? Why?



But it's not an old unused port town now is it?

1) haha they work for the federal govt they aren’t “productive”
2) true they are poor. Without Ag produced by other states the people of DC die
3) not at all…i’ve repeatedly called for the citizens of DC be exempt from federal taxes. easy solution…with that said though they do vote for President and VP so they aren’t without representation
4) without the federal govt it is

 

[boedicca]

The 23rd Amendment, though, gave DC 3 Electors' worth of voting rights. Then, DC got home rule under Nixon and a non-voting House Rep under Carter. Given that the Constitution was also designed to be changed over time, I'd say that establishes a pretty clear pattern of movement toward its potential statehood.

Only if you buy into the Living Consitution interpretation. Residents in DC can vote for their local city officials and in the national elections. The Constitution is very clear that this 10 square miles in which the entire business is to perform a public service (ha) should not be a state. It is supposed to be neutral ground, not a state competing with the other states.

 

[ColonelAngus]

The frauds on the left showed their asses once again.

This is not about getting voting rights for DC residents. It is about getting more Dems in Congress.

 

[candycorn]

Wake Island has no permanent residents.

Good to know.

 

[candycorn]

50 states is plenty.

No to statehood for PR, DC, etc...

 

[HappyJoy]

1) haha they work for the federal govt they aren’t “productive”

Some do, some don't. They are productive enough to pay way more in taxes than most in Mississippi.

2) true they are poor. Without Ag produced by other states the people of DC die

You mean the ag subsidized by citizens who live in DC and other areas and shipped off to Mississippi? The federal government literally pays the state billions per year.

3) not at all…i’ve repeatedly called for the citizens of DC be exempt from federal taxes. easy solution…with that said though they do vote for President and VP so they aren’t without representation

They have a non voting member in the House and zero senators. That's not equal. Are you going to make up the difference in federal taxes?

4) without the federal govt it is

Oh, yes. Of course. You're one of them dipshits who doesn't believe government does anything while your life is all but meaningless to most other Americans.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It, PR, Wake, US VI, Guam, etc... are either states or not. They need to either be made states or folded into the current 50 states.

You cannot demonstrate this to be true.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You obviously have never paid attention if you went there. There are apartment buildings inside the area on your map. Many of the hotels in that area are residences for federal employees.

My map was representative, not literal - and you note, I used terms like "large majority", etc.
The vast majority is in the square I drew.
There's absolutelty no reason the district cannot be ceded back to MD, after separating out the federal apparatus.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Of course maryland wouldn't want d.c. back. Maryland being one of the bluest states in the country would want to see 2 new Senators as well, but, and I don't know, but, has anyone asked them? Politics aside, I can't see any state refusing to acquire more land.

There is a constitutional argument here though. The constitution spells out the cession of land for the purpose of being the seat of government, not for the purpose of creating a state. So, what about the people in DC, well, it's not like one day they had representation, and then it was just ripped out from under them. They knew when moving into the state that they would not have proper representation. Sure, that doesn't solve the problem, they still need to be represented.

Granted, I'm fairly positive if D.C. trended red, that this topic wouldn't even be being discussed.

Also, there are many residents of DC who also have residency in other states. How many people are living in DC, and are actual residents of DC? There are people who live in DC that vote in other states.

Also, from what I've seen, their plan is to basically cut out all of the federal buildings and call that "DC" and then all the rest becomes a new state. OK, so...what if government needs to build a new building? Where do they get the land for that? Is it pretty much just a "demolish the old one and build a new one in its place"?. Where do the people that are currently in that office work if they have no building? What if the government needs to build an entirely new construction? Are we going to get into a situation where the new state and federal government pass land back and forth as needed?

Maybe the government doesn't need any expansion and this is all doesn't matter?

 

[Kondor3]

No.

The capital of the nation should remain neutral ground without anything beyond municipal-level local concerns or power.

Just as the Founders wisely intended.

Just as the Republic has enjoyed for the past two centuries or more.

If the residents don't like it, they can move.

Hell... it's time to 'Gentrify' the place anyway and price the riff-raff out of the market.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

The left wing never stops scheming up ways of increasing their power.
In reality, they should be loosing their ability to harm the rest of the nation.

 

[Pellinore]

The frauds on the left showed their asses once again.

This is not about getting voting rights for DC residents. It is about getting more Dems in Congress.

I would be okay with granting DC full representation in Congress, contingent on California splitting itself between Coastal California and Inland California. The latter trends red, so there would be two offsetting GOP Senators, but California would have to agree to it.

I would even be willing to repeat the process, by granting the same to all of the outlying islands as a group, and in return splitting Texas in two.

 

[struth]

Some do, some don't. They are productive enough to pay way more in taxes than most in Mississippi.



You mean the ag subsidized by citizens who live in DC and other areas and shipped off to Mississippi? The federal government literally pays the state billions per year.



They have a non voting member in the House and zero senators. That's not equal. Are you going to make up the difference in federal taxes?



Oh, yes. Of course. You're one of them dipshits who doesn't believe government does anything while your life is all but meaningless to most other Americans.

1) most do, if they don’t they are lobbyists
2) yes to keep the cost of food low for the people of dc to afford. cut the funding off, the people of mississippi still eat, DC not so much
3) yep, don’t live there…or better yet exempt them from federal taxes
4( no i am not…take your prejudice somewhere else.

 

[candycorn]

You cannot demonstrate this to be true.

It was just my opinion.

If you're a US citizen, you should have residency in a State; not some "territory" or protectorate or whatever.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If you're a US citizen, you should have residency in a State; not some "territory" or protectorate or whatever.

Why? You're a US citizen wherever you live.

 

[candycorn]

Why? You're a US citizen wherever you live.

Consider the make up of congress and try to give it some thought.

 

[struth]

It was just my opinion.

If you're a US citizen, you should have residency in a State; not some "territory" or protectorate or whatever.

huh? why? the people of PR are US citizens. Why don’t you think they should be considered such?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Consider the make up of congress and try to give it some thought.

So... you can't explain your reasoning.
Got it. Thanks.