DC statehood Megathread (pg 33 - Manchin questioning constitutionality)

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I will wipe my ass with a jumbo slice and eat it if DC ever achieves statehood.  

lulz.  It will never happen.  

Which is why--watching with amusement from across the Potomac--I've never paid much attention to DC statehood news and pretty much tune it out.  

Tester said he is open to DC Statehood if D's get the Trifecta and win 218/217 H and 52/48 Senate seats there will be Statehood

Which is possible
We know the Sen but we don't know H maps

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

So you’re saying it’s immoral for people you don’t like to vote? Also you are literally ignore the hundreds of thousands of poor black Washingtonians that make the majority of permanent resident whose jobs have little to do with the federal government…

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.

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?

By the way, DC is not majority black anymore, it's a plurality now by 2-5%, DC is on track to become majority white in the 2020s with people constantly settling in there, almost all of them are exclusively white with good paying jobs provided by the government, so the oppressed card doesn't work.

1. Yea that’s ridiculous thank god London, Paris, Brasília, ACT don’t have elected members of their national legislative…

2. You literally are walking face first into the point and still miss it…

[The Undefeatable Debbie Stabenow]

So you’re saying it’s immoral for people you don’t like to vote? Also you are literally ignore the hundreds of thousands of poor black Washingtonians that make the majority of permanent resident whose jobs have little to do with the federal government…

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.

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?

By the way, DC is not majority black anymore, it's a plurality now by 2-5%, DC is on track to become majority white in the 2020s with people constantly settling in there, almost all of them are exclusively white with good paying jobs provided by the government, so the oppressed card doesn't work.

This is an absurdly arbitrary distinction.

[UncleSam]

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.

[7,052,770]

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.

We don't have any other "random cities" that aren't part of states.

Carving up existing states is a whole other Rubicon that has nothing to do with letting already existing entities have equality with the current states.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

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.

MD already pernamently ceded DC and all of it's territory, Eleanor Norton already exclaimed this

You can't get back what you pernamently ceded

[Big Abraham]

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.

MD already pernamently ceded DC and all of it's territory, Eleanor Norton already exclaimed this

You can't get back what you pernamently ceded

Virginia got her half back, and the random opines of a congressional delegate aren't legally binding.

Besides, nothing in law or politics is ever "permanent." Hence why we are now discussing statehood, when it was intended D.C. would "permanently" be a federal district.

[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.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

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.

MD already pernamently ceded DC and all of it's territory, Eleanor Norton already exclaimed this

You can't get back what you pernamently ceded

Virginia got her half back, and the random opines of a congressional delegate aren't legally binding.

Besides, nothing in law or politics is ever "permanent." Hence why we are now discussing statehood, when it was intended D.C. would "permanently" be a federal district.

Because All the states except for 13 colonies were terrorities based on slave or free, none of the other states aside from 13 colonies were original states which you can admit DC as a State

But, we have to have 218/217 Reps and 52/48 Senators before we can even talk about this after 2022

Manchin and Sinema aren't breaking the Filibuster and Tester knows that we need wave insurence going into 2024 as he is up for Reelection

[UncleSam]

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.

[7,052,770]

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.

"We can never have a state disconnected from US territory and sooo much bigger than any other state! We've never done that before!"
"We can never have a state that's nothing but islands thousands of miles away, and not even majority white! We've never done that before!"
"We can never have a state that's smaller in area (though not smaller in population) than an existing state! We've never done that before!"

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

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.

Conservatives never remember that non states were never states, they were divided into free and slave territory except for the 13 colonies, they were admitted thru an act of Congress, which DC is free to do as well as PR

Conservatives are just mad because all the remaining territory is Black and Brown not slave territory, the Southern states benefitted with slavery and the smaller states have had more power that's why Rs have dominated Congress after Reagan Revolution

[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.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

There’s literally no reason to do that rather than add it to an existing state outside of partisan concerns.

One reason is that what you are suggesting is NOT constitutional. 
The federal government can’t just add territory to a state without their consent.  And the states in question have good reason not to want DC added to their boundaries, as it would dilute their power in the Senate.

On the other hand, DC statehood as passed in the House is clearly constitutional, and adding new states has been done many times.  In fact, adding new states for purely partisan reasons has been done many times, so even if partisan concerns were the only concerns, DC statehood would land squarely within the American political tradition.

[emailking]

And the states in question have good reason not to want DC added to their boundaries, as it would dilute their power in the Senate.

Wait, how does it do that?

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

And the states in question have good reason not to want DC added to their boundaries, as it would dilute their power in the Senate.

Wait, how does it do that?

The relative voting power of any citizen in the Senate is more diluted the larger the state is.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It won't become a state unless we have the Trifecta and then if we get 218/217 and 52/48 Senate, Tester has to sign off, those are big ifs, because, we know he s with Sinema and Manchin on the Filibuster now, he said bipartisanship on MTP, but what happens if he, alone has the power to decide the fate of DC STATEHOOD in a 52/48 Senate

Fate of 2024 Senate if we keep H will ride on DC Statehood only because Manchin says now it must be an Amendment