DC statehood Megathread (pg 33 - Manchin questioning constitutionality)

[Virginiá]

no but DC shouldn't get statehood until we can guarantee the remaining parts of DC gets 0 electoral votes

Make it a state, give the remaining rump district's votes to the national popular vote winner, while telling Republicans that Democrats will support amending the constitution to remove those EVs.

It's a pretty simple and fair solution for a problem that can easily be fixed by a little bit of cooperation. Saying it shouldn't happen until the amendment is repealed is basically a backdoor way of denying DC statehood, since Republicans will never agree to that unless DC is already a state. This is because it is pretty clear from reading arguments from conservatives that the amendment is being used as some sort of argument that statehood by shrinking the district is unconstitutional.

[Virginiá]

Arguments against DC statehood are so utterly terrible. Either it's just straight up partisanship, or that a state should have a minimum geographical size, or that DC must be federally controlled because something something protecting the government. Seriously, why does anyone care how small the state is? Who on EARTH is worried about some state leveraging power over the federal government? Really? This is borderline nitpicking and one of the reasons I find it hard to believe that it's really just not wanting more competition for a Senate majority.

If DC already had representation in Congress and this was basically just a debate about who has the final say over affairs in DC, then I'd probably be less inclined to support statehood as home rule can be further entrenched via federal statute anyway, but DC doesn't have representation in Congress. So all these arguments pale in comparison to what those Americans are being deprived of. If conservatives have such a problem with the idea of statehood, then support amending the constitution to give them equivalent representation in Congress. It's really that simple. If you don't want that either, then go get bent. We'll ram this through eventually without you, and you can go whine about it on Fox News.

[Virginiá]

Does anyone else think Douglass Commonwealth sounds forced?  I'm fine with Douglass or even Commonwealth of Douglass but the current thing just doesn't sound great to my ears.  Of course, I'd support DC statehood no matter what they decided to call it.

idk, to be honest I was always partial to "New Columbia"

[Virginiá]

Yeah, I find it very pig-headed when people say Democrats only want to ban gerrymandering, expand voting and admit new states for partisan gain. Democrats themselves are the ones who tanked a naked effort to enshrine partisan gerrymandering into the NJ constitution, and they willingly passed a redistricting commission amendment (albeit a flawed one) in Virginia. Note that in NJ the pressure came from actual Democratic activists. And Democrats do push for expanded voting options even in states where it doesn't really benefit them (West Virginia).

The fact is, Democratic activist/voter base has a large "good government" faction that genuinely cares about free and fair elections, even when it doesn't benefit them. This sometimes clashes with the endless ambition of politicians who would rather win at any cost, but it's still there. You can't really say the same for the Republican Party, who have people who care about fairness but not nearly as many nor influential as the faction(s) that just want to win no matter what they have to do. It's the reason why every 2 years when they either lose power in a state they control or gain control for the first time, they immediately start changing the rules post-election to try and abolish whatever voting service benefited Democrats the most. The 2021 legislative sessions are flush with these kinds of brazen power plays.

[Virginiá]

Congress could pass legislation allowing D.C. to have voting representation in the House and Senate without revoking Congressional control over the District. 

I’m pretty sure that’s not true and that you’d need a Constitutional amendment. But either way,  no GOP member of congress has actually proposed any such thing. So it seems pretty disingenuous to say, “why are democrats ramming through statehood instead of this great compromise we’re not actually offering?” when the GOP position is, in fact, that DC residents should have NO representation.

A resolution to amend the Constitution is a piece of legislation before Congress.

And there is at least one Republican in the Senate who supports giving D.C. voting representation in the House.

So are Republicans going to support this amendment?

Because if they aren't, what is the point? The primary reason statehood via shrinking the district is being pushed is because no alternatives have enough support to pass. Republicans in Congress have brought this up on numerous occasions:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/mcconnell-seems-to-call-the-prospect-of-dc-statehood-f...

“They plan to make the District of Columbia a state — that would give them two new Democratic senators — Puerto Rico a state, that would give them two more new Democratic senators

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/03/22/dumbing-down-dc-statehood-debate/

Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) suggestively asked D.C. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) where she would place “the ideological makeup of D.C. relative to other cities in the country. Is it slightly Democratic, very Democratic, very Republican?” Foxx, as with virtually anyone with even a passing knowledge of our country’s politics, knows the answer.

They are criticizing it because Democrats will win those seats. Few, if any, Republicans are going out of their way to sympathize with the situation DC residents find themselves, representation-wise.

Simply put, Republicans are not willing to do anything that will give Democrats extra Senators, regardless if the broader issue is the right thing to do. That is how you end up with actual statehood, because it's the only option left.

[Virginiá]

[...]

No, they are making the point that Democrats' sudden interest in D.C. statehood is a naked partisan power play.  Democrats cared not about "taxation without representation" when they had trifectas in 1993-95 or 2009-11, and there is little doubt Democrats' interest in this stems from the difficult math they perceive in keeping a working Senate majority long term.

Issues take time to win over support. And for DC, there was an attempt made in 2009-2010 but it was not given the attention it deserved then, like dozens of other issues important to rank and file Democrats. There was also an attempt to amend the constitution back in the 1970s, and it passed Congress and was ratified by 16 states.

Democrats aren't going to win this "debate" with contemporary Republicans because your party has made it abundantly clear that it only cares about who fills those new Senate seats. Personally, I'm not really interested in a debate anymore. When it comes to voting rights in general, I already know where the Republican Party stands. They make their position clear every 2 years after a federal election, where they get to work changing the rules to try and mitigate losses. Today's GOP is singularly obsessed with maximizing their electoral potential via any means necessary, so the idea that there is any sort of "debate" to be had is laughable. This is why Democrats should just do it anyway. If Republicans are can't get over it, go dissolve Texas into 5 states or something. Either way, let us please not pretend there is any kind of "debate" to be had.

[Virginiá]

Manchin's position is a bit ironic, considering West Virginia's legal admission as a state is somewhat debatable.

In fact, Justice Barrett doesn't even believe it's a legitimate state.

Now there is a new Democratic Party priority: get a lawsuit in front of the USSC challenging West Virginia's statehood. Unpack the union, as they say.

Hopefully those brilliant and fair conservative justices only adhere to the text of the constitution and not engage in vicious librul-style judicial activism.

[Virginiá]

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."

[Virginiá]

Tbf everyone knew that the electoral votes of the district part was going to need to be handled eventually, the simplest thing to do is to just make the district the federal buildings and add 3 EVs to whoever won the Electoral College, if there's a 269-269 tie, then they could be left blank or go to the winner of the popular vote.

Another option: Give the 3 electoral votes to Doug Lamborn's son, who will vote absentee out of his Capitol basement storage room abode.

[Virginiá]

They still vote on presidential elections, it's immoral for them to have senators and reps by any means. WTF was the point of a capital city if they're just going to end up a state. And if you live there and care so much about it, nobody is stopping you from moving somewhere else, it's your choice ultimately.

Yeah, definitely not everybody can do that:

Overall, median household income in the District rose last year, continuing a 10-year trend. The median household income is now $82,400, which means that half of all DC households have incomes above this level and half have incomes below it. The increase in median household income is a sign that many DC families are doing better as the city creates more jobs and wages rise.

But a closer look shows that DC’s growing prosperity is not evenly shared: while the median income for white households has increased significantly over the last decade, the median income for Black households hasn’t budged. Black median household income in DC– now around $42,000—is less than a third of the white median household income of $134,000

Very meaningful considering African Americans constitute 46% (2019 estimates) of the district's population.

Also while we're at it, wouldn't DC have a huge advantage politically against the rest of the states since it hosts all the Chambers of Congress and the rest of the institutions?

Oh, like the advantage it has now, with limited home rule and Congress periodically stepping on their ability to do things whenever it is a little bit controversial? DC residents voted to legalization marijuana years ago and Congress (re: Republicans) just couldn't live with that, so they used their federal power to block DC's ability to start a market for cannabis as the people wanted.