Would you be open to this proposal?

[The Undefeatable Debbie Stabenow]

No? It doesn't make any sense to begin with. Why does it get 1 senator instead of 2?

Because the Capitol district should not as much leveraging power as any other state.

Why

Because they may use it to benefit the federal government at the expense of the states.

How

Through legislating in a way that slants benefit to D.C.

Whaaaat I can’t believe that DC’s congressmen would try to get the best for DC! So unfair, if only other states could do the same

The difference is that the federal government may use this in an attempt to strengthen their hold over the states.

But how? Can you explain any of your thoughts?

Isn’t the whole point of DC statehood to give DC the power to influence national affairs?

It's to give DC the power the same influence over national affairs that other states do.

Which is a bad decision for reasons I’ve already stated.

You haven't given any reasons, just a bunch of buzzwords with no explanation as to what they'd actually mean in practice or what aspect of DC statehood would make them true

It gives the Federal government more power over our legislative bodies, directly contradicting the separation of powers between the Executive and legislative branch.

this makes zero sense unless you think the president and federal politicians are the only ones who live in DC?

Those involved with the executive branch in one way or another make up far too high % of those in DC for me to involved with its Statehood.

So you think that working for the federal government should be grounds for your disenfranchisement?

Also, the idea that 2 senators from DC (in a body of 102 senators) could unilaterally enact some sort of anti-state government or pro-executive branch agenda is absurd for obvious reasons.

[The Undefeatable Debbie Stabenow]

No? It doesn't make any sense to begin with. Why does it get 1 senator instead of 2?

Because the Capitol district should not as much leveraging power as any other state.

Why

Because they may use it to benefit the federal government at the expense of the states.

How

Through legislating in a way that slants benefit to D.C.

Whaaaat I can’t believe that DC’s congressmen would try to get the best for DC! So unfair, if only other states could do the same

The difference is that the federal government may use this in an attempt to strengthen their hold over the states.

But how? Can you explain any of your thoughts?

Isn’t the whole point of DC statehood to give DC the power to influence national affairs?

It's to give DC the power the same influence over national affairs that other states do.

Which is a bad decision for reasons I’ve already stated.

You haven't given any reasons, just a bunch of buzzwords with no explanation as to what they'd actually mean in practice or what aspect of DC statehood would make them true

It gives the Federal government more power over our legislative bodies, directly contradicting the separation of powers between the Executive and legislative branch.

this makes zero sense unless you think the president and federal politicians are the only ones who live in DC?

Those involved with the executive branch in one way or another make up far too high % of those in DC for me to involved with its Statehood.

So you think that working for the federal government should be grounds for your disenfranchisement?

Also, the idea that 2 senators from DC (in a body of 102 senators) could unilaterally enact some sort of anti-state government or pro-executive branch agenda is absurd for obvious reasons.

Wrong.

Until you explain to the rest of us how that could possibly work, I'm gonna stick with my original assertion.

Not gonna lie, it really can't help but feel like you're trying really hard to work backwards from the conclusion you want and are grasping at straws to justify it.