DC, representation in Congress, and home rule

Great Debates
1

I carried this discussion over from another thread on taxation, where I mentioned that DC residents are the only US citizens who pay federal taxes without voting representation in Congress.

That comment was met with this response:

The residents of DC did not vote for any of those members of Congress, the way that you voted for the ones that represent your interests.

Also, Congress provides oversight of DC, but IMHO they are looking out for the interests of the federal government, not the residents. (I lived in DC for a year, and have lived in the Md. and Va. suburbs for the last 23 years. I am not particular interested in DC politics but it’s hard to live here and not know about this issue.)

2

This is not a bug, it’s a feature.

Washington was not supposed to be a normal city, ever. It was deliberately designed, from the ground up, as a federal playground, and deliberately set such that no state could unduly influence it. If you don’t like it - move. This is not like the situation with the American colonies. You have the choice of two states within easy driving distance. You can practically throw a stone and hit either of them from the center of DC. People choose to be without representation, and it’s not a place where any city would exist sans the daily life of the Federal government. heck, I half suspect the site was chosen precisely because no sane man would want to live there (blazing in the summer, chill in the winter, and miserably humid year-round).

Moreover, the residents have very little grounds to complain, as they’ve generally made their town a festering craphole filled with grotesquely corrupt buffoons and violent criminals, although I understand it’s gotten a bit better than the late 80’s days. The federal hgovernment kindly grants them some representation (which is far more than ethics requires) and allows them a city government, which is mostly wasted.

Rarely does one see me defend the government against the “common man,” but this is one case which is absurd and ridiculous. They have no standing at all.

3

I care little about how the city was supposed to be designed as. All I care about is that the city has no representative of its own. That should be corrected.

4

I think that they should give back the bulk of the city to Maryland and keep only the Capitol/White House immediate area as “D.C.”.

5

It is a feature to solve a problem that existed once in Britain, and simply cannot happen in DC. Moreover, the wise British found a better solution to the concern that local officials would harass Parliament. That solution was not depriving the people of London of represenatation.

There have been several “features” of the Constitution that have been shown to be not the product of wisdom in forming a government, but acknowledgements of the politics of two centuries ago. Of those artifacts remaining, I’d say the top two are the lack of representation in the Nation’s capital, and the electoral college.

As for the “if you don’t like it, move” argument, how many civil rights should be based upon where in the US a citizen happens to live? If freedom of speech were restricted in Connecticut, is it fair to tell newspapers to move to New York? If there is discrimination in Iowa, shall we tell minorities to move to Illinois?

I would like someone to construct a case that explains why some American citizens shouldn’t be allowed to have represenatation in Congress. Let’s pretend that the Constitution doesn’t exist, and we’re at a convention to rewrite the thing. Someone please explain why some Americans shouldn’t have the same rights as other Americans, assuming we’re talking about sane, law abiding people.

It comes down to this question: if voting (and represenatation) is a fundamental human right for some people, then everyone should enjoy it. The risks of adverse consquences coming from a right should be managed, but not to the extent it negates the right. Drawing geographical boundaries within a country to define exceptions to a fundamental American principle is absurd.

6

I will admit that, say, Senator Tester represents Montana a great deal more than he represents the District of Columbia. I do think it’s reasonable, though, to assume that each member of Congress devotes at least 1% of his or her attention to Washington, which, owing to the large number of such individuals, ends up adding up to considerably more total representation for Washingtonians than for those in the rest of the country.

Now, you do have a point that none of those men and women are elected by the Washingtonians themselves, but then, the representation that the Founding Fathers complained that they lacked wasn’t elected, either.

7

I dont think you can consider charity by other congressman to equate to representation. The fact that nobody living in DC voted for Tester or any other congressman. That is abhorrent

8

Maryland wants it ceded to whatever state’s senator made this suggestion most recently (Georgia, I think). Maryland does not want DC.

I’ve lived for extended periods in DC, Maryland and Virginia. My reason for leaving DC had nothing to do with the injustice of my lack of representation (I was there for the last of Marion Barry’s last term).

My brother in Seattle is indignant that his coast is represented by six senators (eight if you count Alaska, but Alaskans are a squirrely bunch) and mine is represented by over thirty. Fenty and Williams have both been fine mayors, but the three words that keep this idea from gaining ground anytime this generation are “Governor Marion Barry.”

9

Much of the East Coast is humid like D.C. Big parts of the interior U.S. are both hotter in the summer and colder in the winter. I think that southern Florida is nearly as inhospitable as the surface of the moon – should we take away representation from southern Floridians? Wait, hold that thought, given the problems with elections down there . . .

Wow, a festering craphole? Spoken like someone who has never experienced any of the good parts of D.C. Like any decent-sized city, it has its unattractive areas, but it also has historic architecture, a diverse offering of restaurants and communities from all over the world (probably because it is a hub of international travel and immigration), cute neighborhoods with everything within walking distance (the reason people live in cities instead of suburbs), art galleries, theaters, and musical attractions. D.C. proper is home to several well-regard liberal arts colleges, including the only university that specifically caters to the deaf community. Gosh, I can’t imagine why anyone would want to live there. :rolleyes:

Corrupt buffoons in office are hardly unique to D.C. Should we have taken away a Senate seat permanently from Illinois because of Blago?

That said, there are federal lands within other states, why not make the government properties federal and let the residential and commercial areas be a separate entity or part of MD?

I’m not buying that other representatives are consistently looking at D.C. with the interests of the residents of D.C. in mind.

10

The entirety of the DC city is less than, IIRC, 40 blocks. And those are washington blocks, which are irregular and often smaller than other cities. And most of that is covered by federal buildings and services. It’s hardly more than a postage stamp, which is why the fact that it doesn’t get its own representative while still having the (off-and-on attention of the entire U.S. Congress) does not really bother me. Take away the “non-government” areas, and you wouldn’t change anything. Plus, there’s the nontrivial fact that maryland would rather see it burned to ashes than joined onto their state.

This does not say anything very flattering about the people who live there.

Moreover, the people who live there and whine usually ignore the fact that they can move a stone’s throw away, often for less. They don’t, probably because they want to be called a state without paying any more taxes.

And yet, almost nobody does want to live there unless they are very rich and can afford the best accomodations. I have talked to dozens of ex-Washingtonians, and not one indicated the slightest desire to go back. In fact, every one of them regarded it as a pestilent hell they were gratefull for escaping.

That should also tell current Washingtonians something.

11

DC has 61.4 square miles(I have no idea where your 40 blocks figure comes from). At most, 30 percent of DC is occupied by federal buildings (some of that might be federal parkland, not clear from the reference).

And the geographical size isn’t really the issue anyway. DC has 95% of the population of Vermont, and 11% more than Wyoming, which each elect two Senators and one member of the House.

So any attempt to wave away right to representation due to small size doesn’t wash.

12

I’m sure it’s overstated for effect, but why the antipathy towards DC from Maryland?

13

The situation faced by the people of the District of Columbia is hardly unique. The people of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico face the same issue. There are other unrepresented territories of the United States.

The only difference with the District of Columbia is that those people have no opportunity to join the “states” by constitutional decree. If/when Puerto Rico becomes the 51st state, that might become an issue.

14

Indeed.

smiling bandit, with every post you reveal your utter ignorance of the subject at hand.

Does DC have it’s problems, yes, indeed. But so does New York, or Los Angeles, or Chicago, or small towns across the country. I currently reside in a small town in rural Ohio in which the methamphetamine problem is entirely out of control. Should the citizens therein lose their right to representation?

Now, get me, I don’t believe in statehood. Or, for that matter, representation. The constitution is plain on this issue and I believe it would take something like an amendment to change it.

However, in the interests of ‘no taxation without representation’ I might move to make the residents and businesses resident inside the borders exempt from federal income and sales tax. You want a boom? That would do it.

Nonetheless, your uninformed generalization about what is one of the great American cities is foolish in the extreme. There are areas into which I wouldn’t go (which includes, sadly, Capitol Hill after dark) but this is true of all major cities and should not be considered prima facie evidence of death, decay, and unworthiness.

In fact, I challenge you to find another 60 square miles that contain…
[ul]
[li]The greatest museum complex in the country, possibly the world[/li][li]A godawful amount of higher education (American University, Georgetown, Catholic University, Howard University, The University of the District of Columbia, John’s Hopkins School of International Affairs, and so forth)[/li][li]The Folger Shakespeare library and theatre[/li][li]The Kennedy Center for live cultural events[/li][li]The Niteclub 9:30 for events that would make the cultured blanch[/li][li]An astonishingly good subway system (currently taking one on the chin[/li][li]A central park-like area second, in the nation, only to the actual Central Park[/li][li]A higher concentration of advanced degree holders than anywhere else in the country (26% according to 2004 data)[/li][/ul]

Etc and so forth, ad nauseum, really.

15

In all honesty, i’d tend to think somewhere with problems would be more in demand of representation, not less. At least with an elected representative, someone who manages to muck things up can be voted out - no representative, and you can’t choose to vote out whoever’s fucking things over for you.

16

I doubt it. He’s not elected to represent DC, so why should he work on its particular behalf? We also have as a matter of record representatives like Tom Davis on traffic issues hurting DC to help Alexandria. I don’t think Congress gives a shit about the people of DC, or any of the buildings the government doesn’t use.

17

I’m really not following your last point. Are you saying that the Founding Fathers should have been satisfied with the representation that they had in Parliament?

I’m also not clear on your view on representation. What good is representation if one has no means of effecting a change in it? If one believes that one can be adequately represented in a democracy without being able to choose one’s representative, then shouldn’t every bureaucrat in every agency be regarded as adequate representation for the views of every person in the country?

Finally, surely you know that Congress holds plenary authority over every matter pertaining to the governance of the District. We are not subject to the same Constitutional restrictions as states in dividing between state and Federal powers. For example, the courts might rule that a law passed by Congress unconstitutionally infringed upon the rights of a state, and then that law would be stricken down. There is no such barrier to how Congress may govern the District, although Congress chose in the 1970s to delegate most responsibilities to the city council – a law that can be revoked or ignored at the pleasure of Congress. If Congress is subject to no check and balance in the name of state’s rights/home rule, doesn’t that further the case that DC residents should have at the very least one vote in Congress?

18

I fully support giving District residents representation - I just want that done in a constitutional manner. None of the plans put forth so far have met that test, frankly.

The best model here is retrocession, and while Maryland might not want Anacostia, the tax revenues from Downtown and Georgetown would make up for it. Complaints about power shifts ring pretty hollow - Maryland already has big power centers in MoCo and PG, and Virginia has a major population center in Northern Virginia, including Arlington and Alexandria that were once part of the District themselves. This hasn’t been the end of the world.

19

Because he has to work there, and in fact lives there for a good part of the year. If something’s important to a resident of Washington, then it’s important to Senator Tester (and all the other senators and representatives), because they live there, too.

And there seems to be some confusion in this thread between the concepts “representation” and “democracy”. One might argue that the governance of Washington is undemocratic, but that does not imply that it’s unrepresentative.

20

When my grandfather sold houses in El Segundo, CA (literally across the street from LAX), he would take his clients to the front yard and point out the airport and tell them, “If you don’t want to live next to the airport, don’t buy this house.”

Washington DC has been without representation longer than you’ve been alive. If you want 2 senators and at least 1 representative, live somewhere else.