Feb 24 2009
Should the District of Columbia Be Allowed a Full Voting Member in the House of Representatives?
A Congressman/woman in the House of Representatives from Washington, D.C.? Say what??? It could happen soon.
According to The Washington Post, the Senate is expected to hold a cloture vote today on legislation that will grant our nation’s capital a full voting member in the lower house.
That’s just what this country needs, another Democrat in Congress! To be fair though, the legislation is being sugarcoated for Republicans with a provision that will give rabidly conservative Utah another seat in the House.
And just what do the American people think of this? Apparently a lot of them like it. A new Washington Post-ABC News poll reports that nearly 60 percent of respondents favor the measure. Only a third of adults nationwide oppose it. Also, “Support for the plan peaks among Democrats, with 67 percent backing the measure. Among independents, 58 percent are supportive, as are half of all Republicans polled. Even among conservative Republicans a sizable minority (46 percent) back the measure.”
Senior citizens are less likely to support the idea of giving a House vote to Washington – 49 percent favor it while 38 percent oppose. Two-thirds of people under the age of 30 want the nation’s capital to have a representative, and so do 58 percent of people between the ages of 30 and 64. 64 percent of women and 53 percent of men support the measure.
“Regionally, residents of the Northeast (63 percent) and Midwest (61 percent) express the most support for the plan,” the Post adds. “In the West (57 percent) and South (55 percent) support lags somewhat. Closer to home, 74 percent of those polled in the District and nearby states (DE, DC, MD, VA, WV, PA) said they favor a vote for nation’s capital.”
So what do you think? Should D.C. have a representative in the House? This animal does not believe it should. Call me old-fashioned, but I think our nation’s capital should remain separate and distinct from the states, and giving it a member in Congress would violate the District’s special status.
Just my two cents.
I really don’t see how having the vote on Congress or not affects DC’s special status as a District.
Initially, the idea was that the district would house the Federal Government and its workers, and as Federal employees, they should not have the vote so as to prevent them from skewing the nation’s policies in their favor.
Since that ideal was kind of off due to the fact that the District also included a lot of folks that were not employed by the Feds, but were the inevitable hangers-on that all governments attract, plus the descendants of slaves in the District that were freed after the War Between the States, it is kind of ridiculous to keep the original thought alive.
Many, if not a majority, of those employees now are living in Maryland and Virginia, and are large portions of those States’ near-to-the-District counties, so they still affect those policies, in spite of the original intent.
So remind me of why the District’s “special” status needs to keep its residents disenfranchised for two hundred plus year old reasons that are now badly outdated!
Taxation without representation is tyranny. Don’t want to give them a vote, don’t tax them.
http://obamacomics.today.com
Interesting history R. You guys make some good points. WE’ll have to see how this works out, as it appears likely to happen soon.
I think they should be able to have one senator. It’s not like Puerto Rico or anything, it’s the capitol of our entire country. 2 senators, now that would be a bit much, but one? I’d be ok with that. And like you said Republicans would be gaining another seat as well.
I wouldn’t be so quick to call it another seat for the democrats either. You never know, maybe it’ll be a libertarian!
?? Seems like a silly issue. Why shouldn’t everyone in the nation have equal representation? That the citizens of DC don’t have the same representation that any state should have is absurd. Or make ‘em part of another state. But to isolate them with reduced representation is undemocratic.