Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

DC and Utah lose bids for House seats

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
brooklynite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 03:13 PM
Original message
DC and Utah lose bids for House seats
Source: AP

WASHINGTON - A bill that would have given District of Columbia residents their first-ever member of Congress died in the Senate on Tuesday, dashing hopes of finally gaining full voting rights after a 206-year wait.

Senators voted 57-42, just three votes short of the 60 needed to move the measure forward. The bill would have created two new House seats: One for the city of about 600,000 people and one for Utah, which narrowly missed out on a fourth seat after the last census.

The procedural vote effectively killed the best chance in decades to win the District a full-fledged House member. The city has been denied voting rights in Congress since 1801, making it the only major capital city in the world where citizens are denied a vote in the nation's representative body of government.

Advocates had hoped to resolve what they call a "national disgrace" and the most important civil rights issue of the era.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070918/ap_on_el_ge/dc_vote_2
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. Where is that list of votes? Who voted against this on our side?
Do you think it was because of that extra Utah vote? That would have been "silly" IMHO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greeby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. All Pukes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Nope Baccus D MT voted NO and Byrd did not vote.Ugh.
We would have been 1 short!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goclark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #3
15. Damn!
:mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yupster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-21-07 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #3
57. I would think Byrd would vote no
He's such a stickler for the Constitution, and this law is so in your face unconstitutional.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
4. Once again
What are the troops fighting for? That's right they're fighting and dying for freedom and democracy, for a representative government for all Americans, with the exception of those from the nation's capitol.

Taxation without Representation, sound familiar?????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #4
28. It certainly does to Washingtonians


That is not an extra-cost optional plate like MD's "Treasure the Chesapeake", but DC's ordinary, everyday plate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frogger Donating Member (217 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
5. There are other ways
to address this issue that get pass the constitutional challenge that so many Senators saw. Whether they were right or wrong, I don't know, but they saw a problem.

However, there would be nothing unconstitutional about returning all the DC territory except the capitol, White House, and a few other government buildings to the state of Maryland, whence it originally came. Then they would be in a Congressional district. What's wrong with that?

Or, they could do it the hard way and get a constitutional amendment passed. But obviously, this WOULD be the hard way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Even if returned
Those buildings would still be federal buildings, just like all federal courthouses are federal buildngs, or VA centers/hospitals are federal buildings, or federal prisons are federal buildings!\

The ownership of the White House, the Capitol Building, or all of the National Monuments would still belong to the federal government.

The question is would Maryland want the responsibility?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frogger Donating Member (217 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. I don't know.
I wouldn't, if I were them. DC is basically dysfunctional as a city. However, that's not the point. The point is it would be a legal way for citizens to get representation that would pass constitutional muster with R senators and the Supreme Court.

Now whether therre is the political will or not, I don't know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #10
21. Heck, we'd be an upgrade from baltimore
Dc is in much better shape than ballmer. And there isn't a constitutional issue with the house, only the senate. The house determines its own eligibility rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frogger Donating Member (217 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #21
48. I think you're wrong.
Section 2 - The House

The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.


From the Constitution. It says, "states". Now whether or not this can be interpreted some other way, I don't know. But this would go to the SC, and given the current make-up, what are the odds that it would be anything other than as I have described.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #10
44. I think DC citizens opposed it in the past--also 2 questions
1) wonder what will happen when the Dems pick up a few more Senate seats and the Presidency in 2008? There'll be no Utah compromise in that bill, because it isn't justified; Utah has sufficient representation, and it was offered only as a compromise to attract Rethug votes, which it didn't succeed in doing (sufficiently). Then the Rethugs will long for the days when they could have had the offsetting vote.

2) wonder how this outcome will affect Tom Davis' chances in the VA Senate race? He was a champion for the measure, and maybe he will look ineffective.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frogger Donating Member (217 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #44
49. Well in my opinion,
the first thing is to make sure those things happen. It's far from a sure thing, and a long time from the election. Then it has to get past the SC. Also, far from a sure thing.

As for your second question, sorry my crystal ball broke some time ago> I don't know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brooklynite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 03:32 PM
Response to Original message
6. Vote tally
Edited on Tue Sep-18-07 03:34 PM by brooklynite
nb - this was a cloture vote (60 votes required to advance)

YEAs ---57
Akaka (D-HI)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs ---42
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lott (R-MS)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Warner (R-VA)

Not Voting - 1
Byrd (D-WV)


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. Can someone from Montana find out what Baucus was thinking,
I'd really like to know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #6
17. so so so close
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #6
18. i see Joe. L voted with the Dems on this one.---and some of the 'mod' Repugs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MaineDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
8. Damn!
Glad to see my two Senators voted the right way for a change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Benhurst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
9. Residents of D.C. may not have representation; but
at least they know they are free. Unless, of course, they want to speak out against The Leader, then they join the rest of us in a First Amendment Zone.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemKR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #9
23. Question
How would this passing be a good thing if it gave Utah an extra electoral vote?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #23
26. utah will get it in 2010 anyway
They were so close in 2000 and only census irregularities denied them. And while i might not like what Utah does with that vote, i would never deny it to them based on who they might vote for. Plus, look forward, adding one more electoral vote (which this would do) can only help dems in the long run, blue areas are growing faster than red ones,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #26
36. Red states are growing faster then blue ones
Red states gained 7 votes in the 2000 reapportionment:

http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-7.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. but look at those states
with the exception of Texas, they are getting more purple every year. Arizona has a Democratic governor, Florida, as we all know, should have been blue in 00, and is certainly up for grabs in 08, even though it trends GOP. North Carolina and Georgia are not nearly as Red as they were 15 years ago. Colorado is trending blue as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. All of the states you mentioned save one got redder from 2000 to 2004
Although the official tally for Florida in 2000 had Bush ahead by only a few hundred votes, he carried the state by over 300,000 in 2004.

Bush won Arizona by about 100,000 in 2000. His margin was over 200,000 in 2004.

In 2000 Bush won NC by about the same percentages in 2000 and 2004: 56%-43%.

Georgia went for Bush by a margin of about 300,000 in 2000. In 2004 the margin was over 500,000.

source: http://www.uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #40
51. 2004 was an abberation
if you don't think Florida, Ohio and North Carolina are in play in 2008, we might as well give up now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
11. How is this even possible?
How is it possible that this could fail in the US in 2007? I am disgusted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
qdemn7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
13. The ultimate goal is Statehood for DC....
Fuck that, no city deserves Statehood, especially that corrupt cesspit. Give all of the city back to Virginia except for a few Federal Buildings. People in DC don't like that, then they can remain without the vote, period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #13
24. Two things wrong here
Edited on Tue Sep-18-07 05:22 PM by northzax
First, VA already has their part of the District back, it's called Alexandria. The current District was taken (given, actually) from/by Maryland.

second off, i will thank you not to call my hometown, and that of 500,000 other Americans, a cesspit, when you obviously are relying on well-outdated information. DC has come a long way in the past 15 years, we are booming, for all our flaws, despite congressional meddling in our affairs, we have a AAA bond rating, run surpluses, we are the most culturally, racially and ethnically diverse city of our size in the world. How's your city doing? oh, and we are a majority black city, the only one of our size and wealth in the US. You think maybe having a majority black, overwhelmingly blue city attracts attention from certain media elements on issues that make the city look bad?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike Daniels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #24
45. Amazing how DC really turned around once they got Barry out of the mayor's office
Edited on Wed Sep-19-07 08:16 AM by Mike Daniels
Sometimes that all it takes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #45
50. just as Cleveland really turned around
when Kucinich left the mayor's office. Don't forget that under Barry, the District had no financial authority at all. Barry wasn't really the problem, he couldn't take a piss without getting permission from congress.

of course, under Barry, DC passed the first civil unions bill (banned by Congress) medicinal marijuana (banned by Congress) commuter tax (banned by Congress) it just keeps going.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #13
25. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. Thank you
Nice to see someone gets it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. Every citizen deserves representation...
I may not be a big D Democrat, by I am, without reservations, a little d democrat, and I believe in democracy, period. Let's not fucking compromise on that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tiberius Donating Member (798 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #25
33. LOL
Why don't you tell everyone how you really feel?

Seriously, though, it reminds me of a certain meme in the rethuglican world after Katrina... "well, look at them, they're a corrupt city/state anyway, so it's useless to even try to help them!!!"

All the while, Bear Sterns-Halliburton-Morgan Stanley types plunder the economy every day.... unnoticed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. Shit, I was holding back!
Didn't want to get my post deleted, after all, actually, I'm surprised it last this long. But on a more serious note, the poster I responded to is a big part of the problem, period. Being a citizen, to me, means that we all should have one person, one vote, and allowed representation in the Government, without that, NONE of us are equal and we are NOT a democracy yet. The most evil thing I can think of is trying to justify why some citizens should be afforded more rights than others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
High Plains Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #13
46. What an ass. I was a disenfranchised DC resident for years.
If "people in DC don't like" your prescription "they can remain without the vote period."

Fuck off, Jethro.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-21-07 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #13
56. Perhaps you should look at a map before you post again? (NT)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
14. 'died in the Senate"-like the Medicare Part D bill and and and and and......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 04:23 PM
Response to Original message
16. Craig (R-ID) said NO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. I had heard that CRAIG was back in DC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Olney Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #19
35. Maybe he will change his vote, now that he cast it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brooklynite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #16
37. He was going to vote YES but he had a wide stance and...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DRoseDARs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
20. What I don't understand is the bill didn't also call for two DC senators.
How can you have a voting seat in the House, but no voting seats in the Senate? To me, that seems to make the bill plainly unconstitutional in the first place. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. Constitutional issues
The House is allowed to determine its own membership eligibility and distribution, the senate specifically says Two per state.

of course, one can make the arguement that the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that DC is a state on matters of taxation, interstate commerce and inter-state legal disputes, so why not in Representation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
armodem08 Donating Member (186 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 05:42 PM
Response to Original message
30. Yet another filibuster by the repukes!
Edited on Tue Sep-18-07 05:43 PM by armodem08
and AP conveniently says 60 votes are required for passage. Where are the Dems pointing out this filibuster like the repukes used to do every time we filibustered? We need to get stronger on this. THIS IS A FILIBUSTER! It is a obstruction tactic. As the article notes, 57 senators are in favor of this bill, a clear majority. It makes me sick. :wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. Exactly. The whole nation has gone insane like an Orwell novel
I no longer ask why, especially why the Democrats allow this double-standard without screaming bloody murder.

"60 votes are required for passage" yeh...a far cry from FILIBUSTER! FILIBUSTER! FILIBUSTER! when the Democrats dared even THINK about doing what the Busheis do as a matter of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xithras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 06:25 PM
Response to Original message
32. There is a much simpler solution to this. Abolish DC.
Seriously. DC was originally deprived of voting rights partially because it was never meant to have a permanent population in the first place. It was supposed to be a separate capital, independent of the states and beholden to none of them, which was intended only to house the functions of government. It was never supposed to have a permanent population, was never supposed to have ANY kind of municipal government, and wasn't intended to deprive anyone of their rights.

The simplest solution to the issue is to simply adjust the borders of DC itself. Create borders for a "federal zone" within DC that is under the exclusive control of the U.S. government, a zone which includes NO residents, and cede the rest of the city to Maryland. You will end up with a much smaller federal "District of Columbia", and a large new city called "Washington, Maryland".

This change would add about 600,000 Democratic leaning citizens to the state, tipping it further to our own party. In fact, with this change and natural growth, Maryland would be eligible for an additional Representative in a few years anyway, without congressional action.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 02:27 AM
Response to Reply #32
42. Politically it would be smarter to give it to Virginia
Half a million Democratic votes would help turn the state blue at a much faster pace than it is already going.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xithras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #42
54. I don't know if that's even possible.
The original DC territory was ceded willingly by both Virginia and Maryland in the 1700's, but the entire Virginia portion was handed back in 1847. All of modern day DC sits on land ceded by Maryland. According to Article IV of the Constitution, land cannot be transferred from one state to another without the approval of BOTH state legislatures and Congress. Since a ceding of DC to Virginia would essentially mean that the federal government took land from one state, held it for a while, and gave it to another, I'm fairly sure it would qualify as a transfer under Article IV.

I rechecked, and it actually looks like retroceding the land to Maryland would mean an automatic seat pickup in the House for the party. There are already enough "overs" in the state to make up the population difference. The population difference in Virginia may not be enough to pick up any additional seats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoddessOfGuinness Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-18-07 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
39. Warner from VA voted nay...
Some neighbor. Asshole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laughing Mirror Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #39
52. He's more than a neighbor
Most of his professional life has been spent in DC. And does he still have that house in Georgetown?

But why should he bother if DC has a vote in Congress, when he can cast his vote in Virginia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoddessOfGuinness Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #52
55. I would imagine he still has a house in the District...
He's just another good ol' boy who wants to deny blacks a vote any way he can. Funny how some folks in the "upper class" can have so little class.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mr moosers Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 12:13 AM
Response to Original message
41. Deligates
Im all for giving D.C. State hood. But this bill doesn't really do this. It give D.C. a seat in the house AND they get to keep their delegate. Explain why D.C. needs a member in the house AND a Delegate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ToeBot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 03:31 AM
Response to Original message
43. Hatch and Bennett couldn't persuade any of their Senator buddies to vote for this?
Pathetic losers both of them. Not that the country needs any more low caliber representation from Utah. With 4 divisions, the Republican controlled legislature will finally be able to gerrymander Salt Lake City and whats left of the Labor vote, doing away with the faux Democrat from 2nd district. It's a pity the Democratically controlled congress couldn't figure out a way to bring democracy to the District of Columbia without ceding anything to the Republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
47. Not surprising, really.. I don't think that DC was ever intended
to be what it has become.. Think of how it was when the constitution was written..

DC was intended to be a "neutral zone", and most of the landed gentry who did their business there had homes elsewhere.. The only people who lived there day in and day out..24/7/365 were the servants, and we all know what color most of them were. "those people" did not have the vote.. hell ...women didn't even have the vote, so why would the constitution see DC as anything but "the office"?

the fact that DC is as big as it is now, was probably unforeseen, and of course it will take an amendment to change things, since the constitution specifically names "states"..not districts or cities..

the original idea was that the people who went to DC and worked there a SHORT time (that WAS their original plan y'know?), had residences in their home districts/states, so they did not need any additional representation at the "office"..

The founders did not anticipate LIFETIME careers.. they did not expect legislators to live there full time..FOREVER..

It's too bad they cannot just section off the housing areas and cede them over to a neighboring state..but we all know that won't happen.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mz Pip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
53. Lieberman voted Yes
I guess he occasionally comes to his senses. :eyes:

Mz Pip
:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 03:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC