DC statehood Megathread (pg 33 - Manchin questioning constitutionality)

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Crossposting from the other thread:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/26/us/dc-statehood-voting-rights.html

Senate Democrats are getting pressured to add DC statehood into this bill.

And, like, duhhhh, right? Why the hell would you pass a law that provides "support" for DC statehood but doesn't actually enact it? If you're going to go to such lengths to pass voting rights protection, presumably killing or heavily nerfing the filibuster for this bill, why not put everything in there rather than having yet another huge fight? If Manchin, Sinema, and the rest are willing to do what it takes to pass HR1 (and I think they are), they'll also pass DC statehood.

In fact, they should go ahead and pre-admit Puerto Rico, Marianas, and the Virgin Islands as states as well. When Hawaii and Alaska were admitted by Congress, the admission was preconditioned on having a positive statewide referendum, a state constitution transmitted to the president, and a presidential proclamation to declare them to be a state. Thus, use this act to admit 54 states, effective when all of that happens. DC has already had their referendum and will transmit their constitution to Biden immediately. PR has had their referendum, and can transmit their constitution when the territorial government is ready. The other 2 aren't nearly as far along in the process, but this will allow them to become states immediately once they're ready.

Actually, no. While the 2020 Puerto Rican referendum was finally an unambiguous referendum in favor of Statehood in the abstract. There wasn't a referendum on the specific terms of Statehood.  In previous admissions, the order has been adoption of a State Constitution, followed by acceptance thereof by the Territory and the Congress under such terms as set by Congress.  There's no certainty that terms offered by Congress will be acceptable to the people of Puerto Rico. As I've mentioned before, it's uncertain how much of the recent increase in support there in Puerto Rico is based upon the hope it would prove a way out of the Puerto Rican debt crisis, but I see zero chance that a Puerto Rican statehood bill can pass this Congress without the new State assuming all current Commonwealth debt.

Terms or no terms - the people voted for statehood. They didn’t vote for “statehood if the terms are right”. They voted for statehood. And that’s what they should get. Period. Or at minimum have the state be pre-accepted dependent on once the statehood ratified a constitution or whatever they have to do. The point is to pass the congressional/presidential hurdle asap so it’s a done deal when ready.

As for DC. It should’ve been a state by now and the fact it isn’t is repulsive, color me skeptical that will happen but hey. At least it’s going to pass the house which could put the issue in the national spotlight.

I’m curious if PR statehood could be pushed through reconciliation - making PR a state would require residents to pay federal INCOME taxes which would have an impact on the budget... I know it’s a reach but just curious.

If only statehood didn’t require fillibuster proof votes. This and gerrymander prevention are critical but the Democrats seem content on letting the GOP con their way back into power so

LATINOS are already too many Entitlements, look at FL, IL, CA, TX and NY, Section 8 vouchers due to Dreamers are given out to Asian and Latinos over everyone else, and you want to make PR a State, Manchin already said he doesn't support PR Statehood but DC Statehood yes due to proximity to WVA

It's already a Commonwealth

If it takes just 50 to pass, I think Manchin would get on board.

But uh sweet racist thinking you got there about the Latinos taking too many entitlements....

Yes I live in LAX, you live in MA, the big three cities Chicago, LA and NY all have an Latino problem, they are in front of the line of Section 8 vouchers for Housing while Afro Americans with fewer kids are on the back of the line of Housing

There are 700 K Homeless come to skid row and they are Black not any other race, they gave up due to no affordable housing and they are the ones not getting Covid vaccines or Chest x-rays for TB, that's why all shelters are closed to publuc

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

All systems go

Is this happening, or?

No, Manchin supports DC Statehood not PR Statehood but Ds don't have the votes to lift the Filibuster, only in the H it's all systems go

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

All systems go

Is this happening, or?

It's happening. It would be such a huge humiliation for a Democratic trifecta to let it get this far and then fail. If the votes aren't going to be there in the Senate, Democrats would have quietly scuttled it before letting it come to a Committee vote, much less a full House vote.

They have to get rid of the Fillibuster and they don't yet don't have the votes to lift it yet due to Sinema and Manchin

Manchin isn't buying OR Statehood because is against Amnesty for Latinos as I said previously due to Mexico wants Entitlements and we have a 26T deficits

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Toomey already said on MTP he isn't lifting Filibuster in any scenario except for Manchin and Toomey gun control bill

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

We're quickly approaching "big f**king deal" territory.

Manchin already said he isn't lifting Filibuster, the only big deal is the infrastructure

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

https://news.yahoo.com/gops-most-important-votes-2-033020050.html

Mcconnell says nice things about Manchin and Sinema, this is not the big deal territory that D's hope, Sinema and Manchin are still Against the Filibuster Reform

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

DC statehood isn't that big of a deal, the Ds want to press thru it, because they goofed up in 2009 when Obama and Biden refused to get rid of Filibuster and Harry Reid could have eliminated the Filibuster too in 2013

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

naysayers are still utterly convinced this needs the filibuster to be approved. All that needs to happen is that manchin and sinema decide it doesnt need the filibuster pursuant to the fact that state admission isn't a legislative issue. The parliamentarian could rule similarly and even if she doesn't, the Dems can just lift the filibuster for admitting states. Manchin and Sinema wont oppose that no matter what theatrical schtick they pull.

If this was the case they would have passed the DC Statehood in 2009 when they had 59 votes, Rs blocked it then and it wasn't passed

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

naysayers are still utterly convinced this needs the filibuster to be approved. All that needs to happen is that manchin and sinema decide it doesnt need the filibuster pursuant to the fact that state admission isn't a legislative issue. The parliamentarian could rule similarly and even if she doesn't, the Dems can just lift the filibuster for admitting states. Manchin and Sinema wont oppose that no matter what theatrical schtick they pull.

If this was the case they would have passed the DC Statehood in 2009 when they had 59 votes, Rs blocked it then and it wasn't passed

There was way less Dem appetite in 2009 than there is today and thats almost all that matters. Also I'm pretty sure there wasn't a direct statehood bill in 2009, so your point is kinda moot.

It remains to be seen if there are the votes there, but Rs are still gonna block it. It was a DC bill passed by the H and S, and Jon Kyle blocked it

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Keep thinking that it doesn't require the lifting of the Fillibuster I am honestly waiting to know

You don't know everything, otherwise you would be on TV not on Atlas making comments

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Even if DC Statehood passed no new Senators are gonna be seated, SCOTUS HAS JUDICIARY REVIEW OVER LAWS UNLESS CONGRESS LIMITS OR EXPAND ITS APPELLATE JURISDICTION

ACB AND KAVANAUGH ARE GONNA HAVE THE FINAL DAY OVER DC Statehood and they might strike it down until 2023 should Ds get 53 Seats and Expand Crt to 11 not 13 judges, no way PR becomes a state in a polarized environment, and it's already a Commonwealth

So all this celebration is premature

2009 the Ds had the votes to expand Crt and DC Statehood but Biden was Veep and Against Filibuster reform

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

If DC Statehood is made a state, SCOTUS will put in injunction in and not allow no seating of Senators until the case is heard, and Kavanaugh will veto DC Statehood setting up the stage for Crt packing if the Ds get Trifecta and 53 Seats for an 11 judge SCOTUS., After 2022 Elections


SCOTUS will do this on any Progressive legislation except Toomey Manchin gun control bill, HR1 and George Floyd choke holds as well

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Still of the belief that if Manchin, Sinema, and other Senate Dem tries to kill this bill on the basis of "muh senate rules" their political careers will be dashed, dead, and destroyed.

Manchin is very likely retiring in 2024 anyway and Sinema still thinks playing the "independent Democrat" by upholding out of time senate rules is doing her a favor at home in Arizona.

You actually think Manchin is gonna retire and D's will have DC Statehood and WI and PA under their belt for a 53/47 Senate after 2022, NOT

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

https://news.yahoo.com/democrats-ambitions-narrow-political-reality-185504886.html



SORRY TO SPOIL YOUR FUN ON DC STATEHOOD KING IS UNDECIDED ON DC STATEHOOD SO STATEHOOD ISNT INEVITABLE

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

https://news.yahoo.com/democrats-ambitions-narrow-political-reality-185504886.html



SORRY TO SPOIL YOUR FUN ON DC STATEHOOD KING IS UNDECIDED ON DC STATEHOOD SO STATEHOOD ISNT INEVITABLE

Will you shut up man?

No

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

https://news.yahoo.com/democrats-ambitions-narrow-political-reality-185504886.html



SORRY TO SPOIL YOUR FUN ON DC STATEHOOD KING IS UNDECIDED ON DC STATEHOOD SO STATEHOOD ISNT INEVITABLE

Will you shut up man?

He’s literally correct lmao

If yall think King is gonna kill this you are not serious thinkers

King is a moderate he isn't a lefty and he voted against the Minimum wage, he said he will take his time and evaluate the Statehood

King isn't Sara Gideon but if votes against Statehood, it's gonna be his head, D's want him to retire in 2022 not 2024 so that Mills can appoint Sara Gideon for 2024

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Even if this bill passed which it won't due to the Filibuster, SCOTUS can strike it down ACB or Kavanaugh or Alito or Gorsuch or Thomas aren't for this and they will put an injunction on sitting new Senators being sword in, pending Crt challenge

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Even if this bill passed which it won't due to the Filibuster, SCOTUS can strike it down ACB or Kavanaugh or Alito or Gorsuch or Thomas aren't for this and they will put an injunction on sitting new Senators being sword in, pending Crt challenge

Incorrect.

What, SCOTUS HAS FINAL SAY OVER LAWS, OBAMACARE WAS CRT CHALLENGED, THEY CAN PUT AN INJUNCTION ON SORTING OF NEW SENATOR, ITS CALLED JUDICIAL REVIEW, BUT THE SENATE HASN'T PASSED IT

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

If it get thru Filibuster, Murkowski proposes a law that will make Elenor Holmes Norton a Rep without the Senators with voting power, that would be a compromise

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

There is a far bigger chance of the Supreme Court picking a nuclear-level fight over court-packing than there is over DC statehood.

Never underestimate Rs on Constitutional challenges and you have a 6/3 Crt, but HR1 and concealed weapons ban, Thomas already said he is ready to jump in on those cases, due to Citizen United and he wants to affirm Gun rights

If Rs weren't gonna overturn any Progressive legislation why would Crt packing be brought up

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

MD already permanently gave it's rights up on DC anyways.

Murkowski said she would introduce an Amendment on giving Norton pernament voting power that is a compromise, it's not unconstitutional if you add an Amendment

I would go for that, if it can get 67 votes, just like I was for term limits, but Ds, not Rs blocked it, which was a scam, that's why they lost seats in every Election after 1994 in the H, voters wanted term limits and it requires an Amendment

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

As I said before, why did D's vote against term limits, the Amendment giving DC a Rep should pass unanimously

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

What happens when this is denied again when the Fillibuster, the Constitution can be changed with Amendments and what Ds fall short of a Supermajority in Senate or lose the H next term

I just read Unions are behind pushing all these bills to get rid of Legislative Filibuster just like they did with Obamacare

That's why Murkowski option should be supportive of D's unless they have the votes now to pass it, Make Norton a pernament vote

As I said before, D's lost every Election after 1994 since they didn't get behind term limits and that was the reason why Rs held onto 12 and 8 ye terms in H

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

King, Kelly, Manchin, Sinema, have all expressed reservation about statehood so I would celebrate yet

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I a 50/50 if D's push this thru, but Ds are in deep pocket to Unions and they won't stop so they can ram all Progressive legislation thru the Senate with lifting of the Filibuster.

But in 2023, there could very well be a 51/49 Senate and D's still have to win over Sinema or Manchin if they keep the Trifecta, WI, PA and NH

D's did the samething with term limits and they were in the wilderness for 12 and 8 yrs

Tim Scott police Reform makes perfect sense it bans choke holds