DC Statehood

[liberalpragmatist]

What do you guys think about this? I think DC definitely needs statehood or at least much greater self-rule and Congressional Representation. There seem to be three credible options:

1) Greater home rule plus ONE full-voting representative in the House; Have Maryland's two senators represent DC as well and style them as "Senator from Maryland and DC." Probably the easiest option. It would attract very little opposition in Congress and would not require a constitutional amendment. However, it is not clear that DC'ers are happy with this idea. Most would like statehood or at the very least, Congressional Representation of their own, given that they've been a distinct entity for quite some time.

2) Self-rule and Full Congressional Representation (Two senators and a representative) BUT NO Statehood. This would require a constitutional amendment. The chief reason why statehood may not be as good an idea is because there are issues that will arise no matter what DC's status as to the relation between the Federal Govt. and DC. With most federal buildings, embassies, the Capitol, the WH, and the SC all in DC, problems may arise over authority if full statehood were given. Under this case, Congress would still have some oversight, but DC would get mostly self-rule. However, Congress would still have control over the District's budget and this could cause problems in the future, depending on who's controlling Congress.

3) Full Statehood. This would require redefining the Federal District to a narrow strip of land running in an L-shape from the WH to the Capitol and the SC (and including the Washington Monument and the Mall). The rest of the land could be admitted as a state, possibly called New Columbia. Personally, I think even if admitted as a state it should keep the name District of Columbia - it's been known as Washington, DC for so long, it seems silly to change the name (plus NC is already a state abbreviation). HOWEVER, a constitutional amendment would still be required to repeal the 23rd amendment (or else that narrow strip of land with very few or no people constituting the rump "Federal Zone" will have 3 electoral votes) and a legal arrangment would have to worked out over the status of federal buildings and areas.

Some also point to retrocession to Maryland, but neither DC nor Maryland wants such an arrangement.

For a much fuller, more informed overview, view this link:
http://www.senate.gov/~gov_affairs/052302kurland.htm

None of the options, clearly, are easy. But they all are superior to the current situation. What do you favor?

[terrya]

1. I want full statehood, but this won't happen as long as the Republicans..

have anything to say on it. DC is three sure Democratic votes in Congress.

[ronnykmarshall]

2. Free DC!!

I'll happy to sew another star on the flag!

[Fenris]

3. No Taxation Without Representation! Full Statehood for DC!

If it isn't part of Maryland, it's its own goddamn state!

[Baltimoreboy]

5. No offense, but we don't want it

Nor do we want to have to have a commuter tax.

DC is unique because of its government nature. That means lots of businesses are virtually forced to have offices downtown for status. Make DC a state and a commuter tax would follow the next day.

[Darranar]

4. I support full statehood for DC...

at the current time, someone living in DC has less voting rights than someone living in any other state, an unfair situation that runs contrary to the precepts of equality that this nation claims to back.