DC statehood Megathread (pg 33 - Manchin questioning constitutionality)

[brucejoel99]

Any actual news on the progression of this bill?

Not since Carper introduced the Senate companion to Norton's House bill, & probably not for at least another ~2 months, given that the COVID relief reconciliation package will be taking up all of the oxygen & legislative focus in the meantime.

By the time it sees the floor we will have lost the majority.

Mark my words. We will not get either statehood this year.

I could reverse jinx it a million times, offer all the bets in the world - it’s clear this isn’t a priority for leadership. If only Dem leadership was a little more ruthless - they could take a thing or two from the con artists in GOP leadership

Can I get the $50 dollars this time?

Nah, I already called dibs again!

DC statehood vote when?

$100 to a member of this board if DC (or PR) statehood passes in 2021.

It’s all I want. It makes a Democratic agenda more likely for years to come.

Dibs, again.

[brucejoel99]

Any actual news on the progression of this bill?

Not since Carper introduced the Senate companion to Norton's House bill, & probably not for at least another ~2 months, given that the COVID relief reconciliation package will be taking up all of the oxygen & legislative focus in the meantime.

By the time it sees the floor we will have lost the majority.

Mark my words. We will not get either statehood this year.

I could reverse jinx it a million times, offer all the bets in the world - it’s clear this isn’t a priority for leadership. If only Dem leadership was a little more ruthless - they could take a thing or two from the con artists in GOP leadership

you are literally always wrong.

Not always.

As I’ve said a million times. I called JK3 loss before a single poll showed him down. Which wasn’t exactly a take I was glad to report but I call it how I see it

After you had initially said that JKIII would win. So, y'know, still "literally always wrong."

It's irrelevant if you were right once, because you've been "100% confident" every time you were wrong as well. Stop claiming certainty when you're just guessing and going with your feelings.

Well whether it happens or not might not be totally certain but how much of a priority it is clearly is.

They should be accepting with the urgency the GOP had with ACB in October

So you just completely ignored my pointing out to you the timing particulars of the reconciliation process required to implement the COVID stimulus package? It's cool that you did (I mean, it's not, but whatever), but just be honest about it instead of inevitably dredging up the same incorrect talking point over & over & over again.

Not to mention, whether you like it or not, the COVID stimulus package is everybody's highest priority right now. Even Mayor Bowser said a statehood bill only needs to be on Biden's desk within the first 100 days. Given that the reconciliation process will be complete by the end of March, that leaves literally the entire month of April to pass a statehood bill. But sure, nOt A pRiOrItY, even for the people whom are infinitely more dependent on the prospect of statehood than you.

[brucejoel99]

I do wonder if the VA/MD senators/congressmen demand that along with DC statehood passing a commuter tax is not allowed( and that would pretty clearly be interstate commerce and easily regulatable by congress)

Warner, Kaine, Cardin, & Van Hollen have all already thrown their support behind statehood without asking for such a guarantee, so backtracking in exchange for a commuter tax ban would be very unlikely to happen at this point.

[brucejoel99]

The Democrats are f**king clowns. I don’t get why this forum defends them so much.

All the winning probably has something to do with it. Y'know, the House; the presidency & the vice presidency; the Senate; the $1.9T stimulus package polling at +40 approval that wouldn't be possible without the Democratic trifecta; the incoming jobs, infrastructure, & climate change package that wouldn't be possible without the Democratic trifecta; etc.

[brucejoel99]

The Democrats are f**king clowns. I don’t get why this forum defends them so much.

All the winning probably has something to do with it. Y'know, the House; the presidency & the vice presidency; the Senate; the $1.9T stimulus package polling at +40 approval that wouldn't be possible without the Democratic trifecta; the incoming jobs, infrastructure, & climate change package that wouldn't be possible without the Democratic trifecta; etc.

You can’t be serious. It took a meltdown by the GOP to win the Senate. The House was a complete abortion. They should’ve won a majority large enough to last 4-6 years. Instead it’s small enough where there’s virtually no chance of saving it. And the Presidency - I mean the fact it was as close as it was when (IMO) Biden was a great canidate and Trump was literally the worst President of all-time. So Dems get no credit for “winning” except maybe Georgia.

• They’re blundering the Covid relief bill. By taking forever to pass it and bickering back & forth - to the point where voters are going to feel more “finally” instead of thankful and happy.

• It seems likely an infrastructure bill might on the horizon but who knows how watered down it’ll be

• Statehood which would have been HUGE to help even out the structural unfairness (at least a little)

• The voting rights bill isn’t going to be passed.

• No minimum wage hike is going to happen.

• A public option won’t happen.

So Id have to say they’ve been a MAJOR letdown so far

If you actually have any real information behind any of your opinions, feel free to post it.

Otherwise, your constant doomer fantasy troll posting is just tiresome.  Haven't you been proven wrong enough yet?

When it comes to masochism, there's no such thing as "enough."

[brucejoel99]

https://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/dc-statehood-gets-march-22-house-oversight-committee-hearing/I4RAYJUS6JF2RNEVJCM2KUBIHA/

Oversight Committee hearing on the Statehood bill to begin on 3/22

Can't wait to see Jordan or Gosar or whomever calls dibs start shouting "2 dEmOcRaTiC sEnAtOrS" & "tHeRe'Ve AlWaYs BeEn FiFtY sTaRs On ThE fLaG!"

[brucejoel99]

https://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/dc-statehood-gets-march-22-house-oversight-committee-hearing/I4RAYJUS6JF2RNEVJCM2KUBIHA/

Oversight Committee hearing on the Statehood bill to begin on 3/22

At least something, but I expect this to be DOA in the senate. Unfortunately I have to add.

Depends on when/how much they push filibuster reform/abolition.

"I raise a point of order that the vote on cloture under rule XXII for all Acts of Admission is by majority vote."

[brucejoel99]

I wish Sinemuh and Manchin would signal how they feel about this. I guess they're holding their cards to their chests

0% chance either of them derail it. It's happening.

Unless it’s filibustered...

"I raise a point of order that the vote on cloture under rule XXII for all Acts of Admission is by majority vote."

[brucejoel99]

I hope that once this passes they have a referendum to take “Washington” out of the official name.

Even if that were within the realm of possibility (it's not), it'd probably take another Act of Congress to codify such a referendum result.

[brucejoel99]

I hope that once this passes they have a referendum to take “Washington” out of the official name.

Even if that were within the realm of possibility (it's not), it'd probably take another Act of Congress to codify such a referendum result.

Wouldn't it? Didn't Rhode Island just have a referendum to ditch "and Providence Plantations" from its official name last year?

Rhode Island's a bit special, being one of the original states whose admission to the Union didn't necessitate an enabling act/act of admission. But the 1989 initiative in ND to change the state's name to "Dakota," for instance, would've required an Act of Congress codifying the name change had it passed, since ND's name - North Dakota - had been explicitly provided for in its 1889 enabling act; hence why the same would likely be the case were DC admitted as "Washington, D.C.," & the new state then wanted to remove Washington from its name.

[brucejoel99]

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

[brucejoel99]

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

You’re not seeing that cash. This isn’t happening.

Period.

Only way I could even see it is if the parliamentarian rules it could happen?

It’s not happening

Good, keep the reverse psychology up! It's worked wonders on everything we've previously sought!!

[brucejoel99]

Hey Democrats!

If you're so angry about DC not getting representation, why don't just let them merge to Maryland? Instead of giving 2 senators and a rep to a single city?

...Maybe because you deep down know it's a blatant powergrab?

The Dakotas have asked me to remind you of the following:

I am saying it right now: If either Ossoff or Warnock wins, I'll leave the forum for 1 solid year.

Promise?

Sure. Take a screencap right now.

[brucejoel99]

So there would be a governor and no longer be a mayor?

Correct, yeah!

[brucejoel99]

So there would be a governor and no longer be a mayor?

Correct, yeah!

Actually maybe not. They could rename the post to governor, and no where does it say a state has to have a governor or a bicameral legislature and an elected executive, theoretically a state him could have any form of government so long as the constitution is approved by congress.

Yes but theoretically hypothetical situations aren't the topic of discussion here - H.R. 51 is - & it provides for the Mayor becoming the Governor.

[brucejoel99]

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

that feels very unconstitutional.

That's because it would be, as career OLC officials unsuccessfully tried to explain to Eric Holder 12 years ago:

I agree 100%, it violates the plain text of Article I, but the idea has been floating around for a while. There was a bill that almost passed in the Bush(?) administration that a bunch of bipartisan legal experts endorsed.

It was introduced during W.'s administration, but it obviously went nowhere fast at that time, & then it was brought back in Obama's 1st term & passed through the Senate with filibuster-proof support, but with a Republican poison-pill attached that would've stripped the D.C. government of its authority over local gun control laws, so it died in the House. Career OLC officials in both the W. & Obama DOJs determined that it was very likely that the bill would be ruled unconstitutional, but the Solicitor General's office told Holder that they'd still defend if in court had it been passed & then presumably summarily challenged, which was good enough for him & the administration to publicly come out in support of its passage.

[brucejoel99]

What moron decided to call it "State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth"?

I dunno.
The convention would be to call it Columbi

Columbus is a hugely controversial figure, who is especially unpopular among the very liberal population of DC, so it makes sense they wouldn't want to call it that. Plus, calling it Douglass Commonwealth lets them keep the DC abbreviation. I just don't understand why it couldn't just be called Douglass Commonwealth, rather than the very stupid Washington, Douglass Commonwealth.

Presumably to also let them keep using "Washington" for the presumable litany of purposes which they currently use it for that would perhaps be too administratively &/or logistically disruptive to change.

[brucejoel99]

So far the GOP rhetoric against it has been so ignorant like rising crime despite crime rising everywhere else, population requirements despite already passing two states in population, or the idea that there is no car dealership in which there is one. It clear they have no messaging strategy for the public sphere or in the courts other than "if DC is made a state it will elect Democrats". Right now the only thing Republicans have to hang on to is Manchin. The fact that he hasn't definitely come out against statehood other than joking that he supports adding DC to WV suggests his position is not enough to secure Republicans' nervousness.

No car dealership? What? We would all be much better off if we eliminated the dealership model and just bought directly from the manufacturer and cut out all the scammers and artificial price increases they come with.

Not like having or not having car dealerships should matter, but it took me literally 1 minute to find multiple car dealerships within DC city limits (admittedly I don't know anything about them but they do exist)

https://i.snipboard.io/zpR6Uc.jpg

DC has 2 airports as well, Reagan in the city limits, and Dulles in the DC metro area. It's just a excuse for Republicans to stick it to the blacks in DC.

Reagan National is in Arlington.

[brucejoel99]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E0P4ijfVkAEcfmJ?format=jpg&name=small

Y'all get taken for a ride every time he does his triangulation to preserve his image. Of course voting with the D's isn't good enough when it comes to statehood.

Say it again louder for the people in the back.

Seriously, though, if after everything which we've already been through, one somehow still can't bring themselves to admit that the Manchin Cycle is literally just *a thing that exists*, Idk what to tell you anymore.

[brucejoel99]

Also:

Is there a way DC gets 2 senators without becoming a state?

It would take a constitutional amendment and might even need to get over the entrenched clause. Practically impossible.

I never considered the potential equal suffrage implications, but now that I think about it, yeah, I'm sure some butthurt right-winger would've made a court case about it had the D.C. Voting Rights Amendment ever been ratified.

Each State would still have the same number of Senators, and the provision was clearly intended to prevent the Senate being switched to some other form of apportionment.  I think it would survive any court challenge and if not, Statehood would remain an option.  However, politically, there's zero chance of the Amendment being revived by Congress, let alone ratified by the States. (At most, I could see perhaps Manchin insisting a revival be tried first, with him supporting DC Statehood if not enough Republicans agreed to resend it to the States.)

Ernest is Nostradamus confirmed.

[brucejoel99]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E0P4ijfVkAEcfmJ?format=jpg&name=small

Y'all get taken for a ride every time he does his triangulation to preserve his image. Of course voting with the D's isn't good enough when it comes to statehood.

Say it again louder for the people in the back.

Seriously, though, if after everything which we've already been through, one somehow still can't bring themselves to admit that the Manchin Cycle is literally just *a thing that exists*, Idk what to tell you anymore.

My god. Give it up. He caves at times but this is not performative. Period. If it was it would’ve been passed by now. It’s not happening. Cant wait for Republicans to take congress back and statehood is dead only to hear “This is all part of Manchin plan. You wait and see!”

"fOoLs GoLd"-propagator says what?

Anyway, I'm looking forward to when your extremely deep reverse psychology inevitably pays out to the tune of $100:

DC statehood vote when?

$100 to a member of this board if DC (or PR) statehood passes in 2021.

It’s all I want. It makes a Democratic agenda more likely for years to come.

Dibs, again.

[brucejoel99]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E0P4ijfVkAEcfmJ?format=jpg&name=small

Y'all get taken for a ride every time he does his triangulation to preserve his image. Of course voting with the D's isn't good enough when it comes to statehood.

Say it again louder for the people in the back.

Seriously, though, if after everything which we've already been through, one somehow still can't bring themselves to admit that the Manchin Cycle is literally just *a thing that exists*, Idk what to tell you anymore.

My god. Give it up. He caves at times but this is not performative. Period. If it was it would’ve been passed by now. It’s not happening. Cant wait for Republicans to take congress back and statehood is dead only to hear “This is all part of Manchin plan. You wait and see!”

"fOoLs GoLd"-propagator says what?

Anyway, I'm looking forward to when your extremely deep reverse psychology inevitably pays out to the tune of $100:

DC statehood vote when?

$100 to a member of this board if DC (or PR) statehood passes in 2021.

It’s all I want. It makes a Democratic agenda more likely for years to come.

Dibs, again.

We get it. I was (barely) off about Georgia. I’ve also been right about some things.

I wish I was just doing voodoo reverse psychology but that’s not it - statehood is not happening and this pathetic “Manchin just playing games!” BS is tiredsome.

For the record - Manchin better be running for re-election otherwise all this stuff is even more unforgivable. My favorite Senator no more. Now it’s the duchess of crossfit

Cope harder.

[brucejoel99]

I think an amendment would be needed if the entirety DC became a state, but if you carve out a small area for the federal district like this does I don't think an amendment is needed. An amendment should be passed after it becomes a state though to remove the 3 EV from the then depopulated federal district.

Honestly, an amendment probably wouldn't even be needed for that either. The Constitution didn't actually provide for a requirement that the Capital be its own thing, only that Congress could provide for such a district to serve as the seat of government if it so chose, which it did, but not 'til 1800. Remember: NYC was the 1st capital, & then it was Philly from 1790-1800.

[brucejoel99]

Would changing how DC's EVs are allocated require a constitutional amendment or can they do it through legislation alone?

Legislation.

How is that so when they were awarded via a constitutional amendment?

The amendment itself gives Congress the power to determine how they’re allocated.

So why wasn’t that included in the first version?

IMO screwing with EV in any way that gives Dems an unseemly advantage is a bad look and one I don’t approve of. Make the EV abstain until its repealed

It literally was: Section 223 of H.R./S. 51 repeals the 1961 act providing for the federal district's participation in presidential elections, so this whole White House/Manchin controversy makes no sense.

[brucejoel99]

A thought I just had ... would there be any constitutional issues for Congress to direct the US Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands to hold presidential elections, and to  allocate those 3 extra electoral votes to the winners of each of those 3 territories?

It's still not full equality for them, but it allows those Americans to have some say in the presidential election process, better than nothing.

No, since the 23rd Amendment permits Congress to direct the appointment of the 3 district electors however they see fit.