DC statehood Megathread (pg 33 - Manchin questioning constitutionality)

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

100% chance this will go to the Supreme Court.

Based on what exactly?

John Roberts may be a hack, but you have to give him a fig leaf.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

request changing the name of the thread to "DC Statehood Megathread".

That one already exists a couple pages back. This was supposed to be for frivolous posts about new states, but the mods started putting the serious DC stuff here instead of the real DC megathread for whatever reason.

Not sure if this is a popular or an unpopular take, but I think DC statehood and (possible) PR statehood should be 2 separate threads

1. Why isn’t PR just lumped in with this?
2. Why haven’t we heard reporting on how high on the priority list this is for leadership?
3. And Sinema/Manchin.....? Anything?

If the stimulus bill is going to take weeks of wrangling then this should be up on the priority list

The PR governor and representative are working on it, but this stuff takes a little more than a week:

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/535909-puerto-rico-officials-hopeful-of-progress-on-statehood

Pierluisi and Jennifer González are from the pro-statehood party in PR, so no surprises there. The people you should really be paying attention to is the PR legislature, which has anti-statehood majorities in both chambers.

If legislative leaders in PR do start supporting statehood (or even just letting it slide); then statehood will easily happen. If not, it is a lot tougher to say.

PR is a different and far more complicated issue.
DC is straightforward, they want statehood and the only arguement against is that Republicans would be sad

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Well the important thing is Mitch McConnell didn't get his feelings hurt

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

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

Hard to square this with your vocal love of politicians who make protecting procedural hurdles to doing anything their priority.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Awesome that partisan power grabs are being shot down!

Shot down like a Mayan Reagan's pals got there hands on.

Also change your avatar

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

The Americans living in DC not getting to have Congressional representation just because Republicans don't want them electing Democrats is the partisan power grab. And yes, it is nice that Jim Crow II will finally end for DC later this year.

Next up are the territories - their Jim Crow will come to an end soon too.

Maybe we're wrong that it's dead, but how are you so confident that it's a given?

Because it's been listed as a major priority by Biden, Pelosi, and Schumer and not a single Democrat has indicated they're opposed.

The process is currently working in the House, and even Merrick Garland was talking about it this week. There's no reason at all to think it's "dead." The numbers are there, it's just not getting all the media attention with the stimulus going on, and that's OK. It will be a state either way by this summer.

I mean, the issue that people are having is that one Senator has spent the last two weeks beating it into everyone's head how much she loves the filibuster.
It's hard to see her backing down after making it her brand.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Biden wouldn't be making this statement if it weren't a done deal.

Yes he would because he's trying to make it happen. You really think Manchin & Sinema have given Biden private assurances that they will vote to overrule the parliamentarian in the event she rules the filibuster applies to statehood?

I don't know what particular path they've settled on, but yes, I believe Manchin and Sinema have indicated to leadership that they will not derail this. This would be such an embarrassing disgrace to Biden and the rest of Democratic leadership to get this far and not get it done. If the votes weren't going to be there, they would have quietly dropped this months ago.

And how do we know they won't go back at the last second because attention whores?

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Unless the filibuster gets removed or modified, DC Statehood is unfortunately not going to pass the Senate.

Also, Manchin is non-committal/undecided on DC Statehood. Sinema has been silent on this as well.

There's a case that DC statehood doesn't require filibuster

What’s the case?

I want it to happen, I just don’t see it.

The Democrats can override the filibuster on grounds that admitting states to the union is not an act of legislation. That way they can get DC statehood with 51 voters while keeping the fillibuster to appease people Sinema and Manchin.

The problem is that that would likely require overriding the parliamentarian. Manchin has been mixed enough I think he wouldn't be the deciding vote against, but that other one?

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

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

I dunno.
The convention would be to call it Columbia.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

We've admitted 37 new states, but we've never told a territory looking to upgrade to statehood that they would just have to join an existing state if they want statehood.

It would be one thing to break that precedent if DC had 50,000 people in it or something, but when it's larger than 1 existing states, there's no non-partisan-hacky reason to expect DC to do something no one has ever had to do before.

I would respect Republicans a lot more if they would just admit their opposition to DC statehood is about the 2 senate seats and nothing more. They're not fooling anyone with the pathetic and racist nonsense they've put out there.

Two states actually. Wyoming and Vermont.

There's an off chance that by the end of next year it could overtake Alaska as well.

But how many cows does it have, huh smart guy?

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Everyone's talking about DC but in all honesty, Puerto Rico is much more deserving to be the 51st state.

Puerto Rican statehood is still contentious among Puerto Rican’s, DC statehood is massively favored by the affected residents.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Literally the same day the check clears on his wife's bullsh**t appointment, he starts stabbing everyone in the back.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

So now we all think Manchin is going to play a bit a 4D chess?

People who don’t pay attention or are in denial actually believe the Manchin cycle meme.

The reality is that he barely plays checkers. Just like with the filibuster, when he goes to the papers, it’s to defend his strongly held position that Joe Manchin’s personal privileges are the key to democracy (far more important than voting), and he doesn’t move.

He ‘caves’ when he makes a nonsensical objection at the last minute to extort a bribe. eg, holding up the Senate for hours on the Covid relief for no reason before relenting and magically his wife gets appointed to a no-show federal board job weeks later or pulling the same trick as a state senator in WV on a budget to fix his uncle’s Physical Therapist lisensing issue.
I don’t doubt he’s convinced himself of his bs about the wise men of the Senate and the rules of such being sacrosanct, because people don’t like to picture themselves as villains. But the reality is that the man is a crabber Boss Hog.

But, because nothing that won’t pass won’t come up for a vote anyway, people will be insisting I’m just being a doomer until the end of time, even as we watch nothing non-reconciliation happen this term.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

So now we all think Manchin is going to play a bit a 4D chess?

No, he's just performing. He notably isn't opposed to DC statehood conceptually, just can't support the bill as it's currently written because he's not convinced it's constitutional.

The man a) has a law degree and b) isn’t a moron

There is no way he actually believes this.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

It would be good if people read the article instead of just the headline.

Manchin's reason for opposing it is that he doesn't think legislation is a constitutional solution, not because he wants to vote no, unless I missed it. That leaves the door open to Schumer and others making the case that it is, likely with hearings. This is potentially laying the path for him to change his mind later. 

No one actually believes that DC statehood is unconstitutional. Claims that it is are exclusively of the ‘I don’t want to do it, but can’t say why in public’ variety.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

The Manchin Cycle looks to be verging on a cult at this point.

But don’t you know that Joe Manchin saying he won’t do a thing means he’s sold on it.

I know because I keep reposting a picture.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

If you actually read King Joseph’s drivel, he’s not giving himself an out. He’s not even saying he necessarily thinks it’s unconstitutional, he;a saying it will go to the Supreme Court so it’s not worth doing without an amendment.

Also, he doesn’t appear to know how federal amendments work, because he’s apparently under the impression it’s a referendum. Or more likely just lying, because the one through-line in his career is that Joe Manchin will never ever allow Joe Manchin to become even marginally less important for any reason.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

How about we secede DC to Wyoming?

It more than doubles the WY population.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

What rights are those? Electing senators isn’t a right.

Be honest with yourself. Democrats couldn’t care less about giving people voting rights. If they did, they would’ve made DC a state in 2009, when they had full Control of Congress. So why are they doing it now? 3 words.

Power, power, power.

They did try, and it was crafted to appease Republicans but died due to an unrelated amendment concerning gun control in DC. Nothing about what happened screams "power, power, power":

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-house-finally-voted-to-support-dc-statehood-its-a-needed-step/2019/03/12/f171771c-4434-11e9-8aab-95b8d80a1e4f_story.html

A promising and pragmatic bipartisan effort to give the District a voting member in the House, balanced against an additional seat for the traditionally Republican state of Utah, was sabotaged in 2009 by inclusion of a poisonous amendment that would have overturned the city’s gun-control laws.

As is true with many policy proposals, the idea of shrinking the district and creating a state from the rest needed time to make the rounds and gain support from lawmakers, activists and other proponents.

This whole situation would be downright amusing if it weren't sad for the people in DC. To the GOP, any Democrat proposing statehood is just after power. Ironically, as explicitly stated by numerous Republican lawmakers, it's also clear that the reason for intense resistance to this idea among Republicans is because of two new Democratic Senators (or power).

How is DC ever supposed to get representation in Congress in this case? This is how you end up with Democrats just saying saying to ram statehood through. Republicans are never going to support it because they don't want to empower their opposition. Meanwhile, there isn't exactly an avalanche of Democratic Senators kicking down Manchin's door to beat him into submission on statehood, even knowing it would make their ability to pass their agenda easier. In fact, HR1 and DC statehood are beginning to fall to the wayside, priority-wise.

Doesn't sound like Democrats are all about "power, power, power."

I never said it wasn’t equally a power grab among Republicans as well. Of course it is. But when both moves are power grabs, I just feel like keeping things the same is better than changing 240 years of precedent.

Muh BOTHsidz!1!

So now you back slid from it being unconstitutional to mere precedent? Jim Crow had precedent, why not keep it? Poll taxes, fraudulently applied literacy tests, etc etc etc. Bad ideas have precedent and such precedent should have zero precedential value in being broken.

The difference was, getting rid of Jim Crow wasn’t a power grab, and also, Jim Crow wasn’t anywhere near as much established as the fact that the Capital should not be able to use its power to prioritize itself.

What is this even supposed to mean?

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

the simplest thing to do is to just make the district the federal buildings and add 3 EVs to whoever won the Electoral College

What does that mean? The electoral college votes in December and all of the electors who are voting have to be selected before that.

Yes, but usually we know the winner way before? If there are mass faithless electors then we have bigger issues than how DC's 3 district votes were allocated.

I'm pretty sure you need a constitutional amendment for what I think you're talking about (project how we expect the non-DC electors to vote and give them to whomever we expect to win a majority of the non-DC electors). There's no winner of the electoral college until Jan 6. Everything until that point is unofficial.

DC’s electors are selected however congress may decide.

The obvious solution would be to have the rump electors be appointed by congress and directed to abstain.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

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.

Joe Manchin wanted a reason to be a dick because being a dick is his brand, so he made one up.
It’s really as simple as that.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

https://twitter.com/ThePlumLineGS/status/1396814787510689793

*Yawn*

Until Joe Manchin out of his own mouth says "I support DC statehood", then I won't get excited.

This

The idea that Joe Manchin has good faith legal concerns and isn't just looking for some very serious moderate cred is risable

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

I’m opposed to DC statehood (NOT representation, that’s different) on the grounds that if we start letting random cities and tracts of land join as a state there will be no end to the lunacy of just adding new states to eliminate political opposition.

DC should join either Maryland or Virginia. The people there deserve representation like any other US citizen but the capital city of the country is not a state in and of itself. There’s no remotely comparable example of a tiny municipality just deciding that it was a full fledged state, and breaking precedent sets up a massive can of worms for blatantly partisan reasons.

My personal preference is to add it to Virginia since it’ll do Dems more good there than as part of Maryland, but I don’t think it’ll matter much in 10-15 years anyway.

It’s not a random city or tract of land, it’s an organized federal territory. It’s not like DC is succeeding
Any you know, there are more people than Wyoming and DC has a larger GDP than 16 other states, the only measure by which it’s tiny is number of trees and lawns.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

I’m opposed to DC statehood (NOT representation, that’s different) on the grounds that if we start letting random cities and tracts of land join as a state there will be no end to the lunacy of just adding new states to eliminate political opposition.

DC should join either Maryland or Virginia. The people there deserve representation like any other US citizen but the capital city of the country is not a state in and of itself. There’s no remotely comparable example of a tiny municipality just deciding that it was a full fledged state, and breaking precedent sets up a massive can of worms for blatantly partisan reasons.

My personal preference is to add it to Virginia since it’ll do Dems more good there than as part of Maryland, but I don’t think it’ll matter much in 10-15 years anyway.

It’s not a random city or tract of land, it’s an organized federal territory. It’s not like DC is succeeding
Any you know, there are more people than Wyoming and DC has a larger GDP than 16 other states, the only measure by which it’s tiny is number of trees and lawns.

None of that addresses why we should break precedent and make a literal city-state, something we’ve never done before. There’s literally no reason to do that rather than add it to an existing state outside of partisan concerns.

Similarly, there’s no reason to disenfranchise it outside of partisan concerns.

DC is basically just a partisan brute force battle. One day Dems will have a large enough majority and they’ll just force it through, and in response the next time the GOP has a large majority they’ll split Idaho or something. It’ll be the dumbest partisan food fight yet that helps nobody and it’d be infinitely better for the people of the United States to just circumvent that and enfranchise DC in a way that doesn’t break from the central meaning of a state since the inception of this country - as a territory that is governed by a centrally located state government, meant to be able to function as a separate independent body but also as one part of a whole nation.

Please don’t take it the wrong way when I say, what are you even talking about?
It’s a federal territory with a population comparable to existing states that has asked for statehood. We’ve done this 36 times.