Wrong.
Right can refer to “a legally, morally, or traditionally just claim: “I’m a champion for the Rights of Woman” (Maria Edgeworth).” cite
If the right to vote is a morally just claim, then you can claim that you have the right to vote.
Look, Bricker, we’re debating the merits of a political change here. An appeal to things-as-they-are is irrelevant.
“Again?” Have we discussed tis before?
I really like Disneyland. Disneyland was designed to be visited for a one- or two-day stretch, and then you’re meant to go home. Not take up permanent residnece and demand senate representation. For DC, the design was for four or eight years. You want to move there permanently? I can’t stop you. But you’re bucking the original design, and at my expense, so don’t expect my enthusiastic cooperation.
If you need space, move to Utah. If you like the hustle and bustle of the big city, move to Manhattan. If you need representation in congress, move to somewhere other than DC. It’s really that simple.
Washington, D.C. was not designed to be some sort of government compound; it was self-consciously designed to become a great city. It’s true that the Framers of the Constitution apparently had no problem with a great city existing under the control of a Congress in which it had no representation. (Of course, they didn’t have any problem with lots of things which we have changed since then; fortunately, they were prudent enough to include means of amending the Constitution they wrote.) But to suggest that Washington, D.C. ought to continue under the control of a Congress in which it has no representation because it was never intended that anyone should live there is historically untrue.
The original plan for Epcot Center was to include permanent residential neighborhoods…
Can you provide a cite for the proposition that DC was intended to be a city where nobody would live on a permanent basis? Remember, they drew its boundaries to include the pre-existing towns of Georgetown and Alexandria, whose contemporary residents were simply there, and had nothing to do with the business of national government. And they laid out an enormous grid of streets on Pierre L’Enfant’s baroque design. This is not how you would lay out a town intended to be inhabited only by transients. If they wanted that, they would have gone with Thomas Jefferson’s proposal for a much smaller capital limited to the area around what is now the National Mall.
And what’s this crap about “bucking the original design”? I repeat, we’re discussing the merits of a change. Any change involves “bucking the original design.” That does not mean discussion is foreclosed.
Interesting you should mention Disneyland. Thanks to some sweetheart deals they offered Walt in Tallahassee to attract the project, Disney World is, in fact, for all intents and purposes a separate political jurisdiction within Osceola County, Florida. It’s been described as “the Vatican with mouse ears.” The Disney Corporation has its own police force and controls pretty much everything that goes on. Of course, almost nobody actually lives there. When they built the planned town of Celebration on land within Disney’s special district, they redrew the district lines to exclude the town – because a large population of permanent residents might want representation in the district’s management.
In light of the above discussions, I guess retrocession to Maryland would be the solution with the fewest political obstacles. But does anybody know how the Maryland state government would feel about that? It would be quite an honor to have the national capital within their borders, and there’s a lot of rich Washingtonians to tax, but do they want to take on Washington’s urban problems?
True enough. The other scenario, taking several counties out of MD and VA and tying them to DC is so unlikely as to not merit further discussion. VA voters would be opposed. VA businesses would be opposed - their taxes would probably go up, and the climate would be less business friendly. (VA is a right to work state.)
VA govt officials and pols would be opposed - at a minimum, they’d have to learn a completely new government system and establish a new set of relationships.
While your new state wouldn’t be majority black, black voters and politicians would have much more power in the new state than they currently hold in Virginia, requiring some difficult adjustments for people not eager to share power with blacks.
I don’t recall the issue ever coming up for a vote in MD. I do recall conservative columnist James Kilpatrick once writing that “Maryland wouldn’t take DC back on a bet.” I agree with his assessment. Right now, Maryland collects a great deal of property tax on homes owned by its residents who work in DC. The state also collects millions of dollars in sales taxes from residents who work in DC. If DC becomes part of MD, DC politicians will at least get more leverage (through the state legislature and in statewide elections) in getting ahold of some of that money. Right now, DC has no way of making a claim on it.
Maryland normally leans quite Democratic, and is already a quarter black in population. Adding another half million Democrats to the state population, not to mention another 400, 000 or so black people, would have to be opposed by MD Republicans simply because it would make it much harder for them to be elected to statewide office. Republicans nationwide would be oblilged to oppose retrocession for the same reason. There’d be no chance of a Pub senator coming from that state in the forseeable future.
Then maybe statehood for DC-as-it-is would be the most achievable solution, if not necessarily the best one?
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
Can you provide a cite for the proposition that DC was intended to be a city where nobody would live on a permanent basis? Remember, they drew its boundaries to include the pre-existing towns of Georgetown and Alexandria, whose contemporary residents were simply there, and had nothing to do with the business of national government.
[QUOTE]
Transience is part of DC’s culture. One phrase one seldom hears out loud is “You’re from DC! I can tell by your accent!” Permanent, birth-to-death residency is relatively new in DC.
Good point about G’town and Alexandria, though.
I think you meant to amend that with “amongst whites”, and even still… The are definite DC accents, & I often say “You’re from D.C., I can tell by your accent!”
49% of the population of the District of Columbia were born there.
41% of the population of Florida were born there.
Transience is part of America’s culture.
I think you meant to amend that with “amongst whites”, and even still… The are definite DC accents, & I often say "You’re from D.C., I can tell by your accent!"
Yeah, but those other folks don’t count…
No, the most prevalent Black accent in DC is one associated with South Carolina. Or so I’m told.
Could you give me some examples of Black DC dialect that differentiates it from, say, Baltimore or Richmond Black dialect?
That comes pretty close to a personal accusation. In fact, it comes real close.
It’s true that the city got off to a slow start – http://www.publicbookshelf.com/public_html/Our_Country_vol_2/washington_bgf.html:
And from http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/north_america/washington_dc/history.htm:
But it didn’t stay that way. I went to college at Georgetown University. Take it from me, Washington has a lot of local history, and has had a substantial, native-born, permanent population at least since the Civil War. Many of the houses and commercial buildings – not just in Georgetown, but all over the city – date from around 1920 or earlier – long before the Roosevelt-era boom in the federal government.
J. Edgar Hoover, by the way, was a D.C. native.
That comes pretty close to a personal accusation. In fact, it comes real close.
No. If I wanted to say that, I would have accused you directly. Why beat around the bush? In the eyes of many government officials and much of the general public, DC’s black population doesn’t really count, except as a problem.
Chief among these officials are the black folks who run the DC public schools. Black officials have had effective control of the schools system for over 20 years, and they’ve done an abysmal job educating the residents. The city would be much more attractive for business with a better skilled and educated population.
WRT to DC’s problems, there’s plenty of blame to go around.
Suppose the statehood activists got their way. What kind of state government would New Columbia have? Would it be any better or worse than the city government they’ve got now?
Better in some respects because DC would have more control over its own laws and be less subject to Congressional fiat. DC senators and representative would also have a vote on any Federal legislation that affected their state.
Still, the best assurance of good government is an educated, aware population.
Without checks, power corrupts.
It’s worth noting that if DC were to become a state today, it would zoom to the top of the worst-state-in-the-Union list in several categories: infant mortality, homicide, literacy etc. The new state govt. would have a lot of work on it’s hands.
If you’re interested in DC govt issues, Wash Post columnist and DC native, Colbert King, covers this beat exceptionally well: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/opinion/columns/kingcolbert/ (Registration’s required, but it’s free.)
This “if you don’t like it, move” argument really stinks up the thread. It doesn’t work on a national level, so why should it work on a local level? Those seniors don’t like Bush’s prescription drug plan? Why don’t they all just move to Canada then? It’s really that simple.
I have a hard time believing that you moved Alexandria because you were miffed about your lack of representation. But when you say this:
That really makes it sound like that was your prime mover. If I did that, I’d suddenly find myself with a daily three hour commute. I’d pick up an automobile loan, gasoline and auto insurance bill (none of which I have now). I’d also lose a prime piece of real estate in what is currently the hottest part of midtown DC. So yes, I do need to live here.
So far I’ve heard a lot about the mechanics of why I don’t have congressional representation. I have yet to hear a good reason why that situation shouldn’t be changed.
Since you’re a Washingtonian, Patty, what kind of state government do you think a state of New Columbia would have? Better or worse than the present city government of Washington?