DC statehood Megathread (pg 33 - Manchin questioning constitutionality)

[WD]

Some people on this forum are gonna have reservations about DC unless the Filibuster is lifted, it's not called being a Doomer

Sorry King , but you’re wrong on this one.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Some people on this forum are gonna have reservations about DC unless the Filibuster is lifted, it's not called being a Doomer

Sorry King, but you’re wrong.

Let's wait and see it's not gonna happen for two months anyways

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

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.

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. Back in the bad old days, this cockamamie thing was the best Democrats were able to hope for though.

From time to time how much authority delegates have on committees has varied. A lot of the business of the House is conducted in the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union.

[GeneralMacArthur]

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

[7,052,770]

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

They are both deserving, but DC has a constitution already written and government actively pursuing it.

[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.

[TheReckoning]

King, Kelly, Manchin, Sinema, have all expressed reservation about statehood so I would celebrate yet

No they haven't. They've all said something along the lines of "i have to look more into it" which is nowhere near a reservation and especially nowhere near opposition.

“I’m going to look into it,” is a nice way of saying “No.”

[Former President tack50]

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)

[Inmate Trump]

Some people on this forum are gonna have reservations about DC unless the Filibuster is lifted, it's not called being a Doomer

Sorry King , but you’re wrong on this one.

I want to be wrong.  Does that still count as dooming?

I’m also still waiting on someone to explain how it’s gonna happen when we all know Republicans will do everything they possibly can to fight it, and Democrats won’t be able to get 60 votes.

But yea, go on with your forum circle jerk.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Why does everyone think they are always right, we can't predict the future, Biden came in on ERADICATING COVID JUST LIKE OBAMA PROMISED TO CURE CANCER AND WE ARE STUCK WITH COVID

Limits on what Big Govt can do on Covid
THATS WHY DS ARE RUSHING TO GET STATEHOOD, THEIR CHANCES OF A SUPERMAJORITY SENATE IS SLIPPING AWAY DUE TO COVID ITS STILL HERE.

THEY WOULD BE LUCKY TO GET A 51/49 Senate WI, PA and NH losing GA in a Runoff

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I think this is going to come down to how 1) the showdown over the legislation dealing with gerrymandering, campaign finance reform, voter rights, etc goes down and 2) how long it takes to pass various other pieces of legislation.  While obviously not a sure thing, I think HB 1 is more likely than not to pass the Senate in a slightly paired down form that still does like 80-90% of what the current version does (including all the important stuff) and that seems to be where the big filibuster showdown will ultimately occur.  It's a major, time-sensitive issue that neither party can afford to back down on and that is about as favorable turf (in terms of popularity with the public) as Democrats are going to get for such a fight.

Unlike the final outcome of the HB 1 filibuster fight, however, it is still far from clear what the state of the legislative filibuster will be after that.  I mean, the unanimous consent rule is probably going to be neutered away to irrelevance pretty quickly given Republican threats to try to break the Senate with it if the filibuster is weakened in any way, but beyond that there's a lot which remains unclear.  

Do the Democrats just eliminate the filibuster outright?  Do they make special carve outs and if so, what are those?  Only for voting rights bills?  Only for (insert category here).  Only as a random one-off where Schumer makes a deal with Manchin and Sinema not to nuke the filibuster to pass any other non-reconciliation legislation this session if they will nuke it to pass HB 1?  Does Schumer agree to only nuke it for an agreed upon set of bills or issue categories.  Is there a new rule dramatically limiting when the filibuster can be used?  Does it get modified to require a talking filibuster in which all forty members must remain on the floor the whole time and are no longer allowed to relieve each other during a filibuster so that it becomes impossible for the older Republican Senators to remain on the floor w/o seriously endangering their health.  Does the filibuster get changed to an extended period of debate capped at a certain number of days?  Is it something else entirely?  I could go on all day b/c the possibilities are really limitless here.  

And even then, DC statehood's problem (probably) isn't going to be getting to 50 votes so much as it is it's just not a high priority for Senate Democrats right now (although it's not necessarily a low one either).  They clearly want to do it, but only if they get around to it.  Its support within the Senate Caucus seems to be a mile wide and an inch deep, especially with folks like Tester (whose recent comments on DC statehood probably sum up most of the Caucus' views on the issue pretty well).  

As a result, and unlike HB 1, this is the sort of thing that I could very easily see getting squeezed out later on in favor of other issues or even falling off the radar entirely this session.  Don't get me wrong, it could definitely happen, but only if a number of other things have already gotten passed first and the filibuster showdown also gets resolved in a favorable way (then again, state admission seems to lend itself to a carve out to a greater degree than most issues, so who knows ).  

[Badger]

King, Kelly, Manchin, Sinema, have all expressed reservation about statehood so I would celebrate yet

No they haven't. They've all said something along the lines of "i have to look more into it" which is nowhere near a reservation and especially nowhere near opposition.

“I’m going to look into it,” is a nice way of saying “No.”

It's a nice way of saying either yes or no. In this case I think you are Miss reading the tea leaves.

[ultraviolet]

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.

But the city is called Washington. If the state was called simply Douglass Commonwealth, then you could say Washington, DC like we do now.

[Brittain33]

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.

But the city is called Washington. If the state was called simply Douglass Commonwealth, then you could say Washington, DC like we do now.

You could, but the official usage would still be used in, well, official settings and cause confusion. The new senators would be the senators from Douglas Commonwealth.

[Inmate Trump]

The filibuster is the only thing standing in the way here.  Republicans would abolish it in a heartbeat if it meant passing their agenda.  Democrats need to start playing by the GOP's take-no-prisoners approach to passing legislation.

If DC and PR were Republican strongholds they would've been states long ago.  McConnell would've seen to it and he would have knocked down whatever barrier he needed to accomplish it.  I wish we had a liberal with the guts of a turtle.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The filibuster is the only thing standing in the way here.  Republicans would abolish it in a heartbeat if it meant passing their agenda.  Democrats need to start playing by the GOP's take-no-prisoners approach to passing legislation.

If DC and PR were Republican strongholds they would've been states long ago.  McConnell would've seen to it and he would have knocked down whatever barrier he needed to accomplish it.  I wish we had a liberal with the guts of a turtle.

The Ds used the Filibuster to block Rs 1.9T dollar Stimulus package in the the last session of Congress TBH, to instead wanted their 2=2T PACKAGE passed

Reid should of gotten rid of the Fillibuster in 2013 when he got rid of the Judiciary Filibuster, but it was Biden until now whom said that he was for the Filibuster and said he wasn't gonna allow Harris to overturn the Parliamentary on Minimum wage

[Oregon Eagle Politics]

The filibuster is the only thing standing in the way here.  Republicans would abolish it in a heartbeat if it meant passing their agenda.  Democrats need to start playing by the GOP's take-no-prisoners approach to passing legislation.

If DC and PR were Republican strongholds they would've been states long ago.  McConnell would've seen to it and he would have knocked down whatever barrier he needed to accomplish it.  I wish we had a liberal with the guts of a turtle.

The Ds used the Filibuster to block Rs 1.9T dollar Stimulus package in the the last session of Congress TBH, to instead wanted their 2=2T PACKAGE passed

Reid should of gotten rid of the Fillibuster in 2013 when he got rid of the Judiciary Filibuster, but it was Biden until now whom said that he was for the Filibuster and said he wasn't gonna allow Harris to overturn the Parliamentary on Minimum wage

What the heck are you talking about

[Agonized-Statism]

Hot take: if this goes through, the US should just permanently switch to the Betsy Ross flag. This thing where we have to change the flag every time to represent every state with a star is a waste of time and resources. And to anyone who gets upset that their state isn't represented with a little star in a very crowded canton, why don't you complain about the 13 red and white bars too? This country isn't a confederation anymore, no matter how much you love your administrative subdivision. No one's taking away your beloved lines on a map by deciding not to wave around some microscopic dots.

Betsy Ross, one star, or no stars. That's what we'll eventually have to come to. Can't be a total redesign, because that's apparently too scary.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The filibuster is the only thing standing in the way here.  Republicans would abolish it in a heartbeat if it meant passing their agenda.  Democrats need to start playing by the GOP's take-no-prisoners approach to passing legislation.

If DC and PR were Republican strongholds they would've been states long ago.  McConnell would've seen to it and he would have knocked down whatever barrier he needed to accomplish it.  I wish we had a liberal with the guts of a turtle.

The Ds used the Filibuster to block Rs 1.9T dollar Stimulus package in the the last session of Congress TBH, to instead wanted their 2=2T PACKAGE passed

Reid should of gotten rid of the Fillibuster in 2013 when he got rid of the Judiciary Filibuster, but it was Biden until now whom said that he was for the Filibuster and said he wasn't gonna allow Harris to overturn the Parliamentary on Minimum wage

What the heck are you talking about

THE PT I WAS MAKING, D's have used the Filibuster before even on Judges, so it served both parties interest to use the Filibuster just like Reconciliation

[Former Crackhead Mike Lindell]

Hot take: if this goes through, the US should just permanently switch to the Betsy Ross flag. This thing where we have to change the flag every time to represent every state with a star is a waste of time and resources. And to anyone who gets upset that their state isn't represented with a little star in a very crowded canton, why don't you complain about the 13 red and white bars too? This country isn't a confederation anymore, no matter how much you love your administrative subdivision. No one's taking away your beloved lines on a map by deciding not to wave around some microscopic dots.

Betsy Ross, one star, or no stars. That's what we'll eventually have to come to. Can't be a total redesign, because that's apparently too scary.

The fifty star flag was born in 1960. Therefore it's an extremely fragile boomer. Any attempt to change it will be met with rage.

[South Dakota Democrat]

King, Kelly, Manchin, Sinema, have all expressed reservation about statehood so I would celebrate yet

No they haven't. They've all said something along the lines of "i have to look more into it" which is nowhere near a reservation and especially nowhere near opposition.

“I’m going to look into it,” is a nice way of saying “No.”

In this context, not really.  It's more like, I'll support it once it has the requisite support to pass, but I won't stick my neck out if it won't pass anyway.

[Inmate Trump]

King, Kelly, Manchin, Sinema, have all expressed reservation about statehood so I would celebrate yet

No they haven't. They've all said something along the lines of "i have to look more into it" which is nowhere near a reservation and especially nowhere near opposition.

“I’m going to look into it,” is a nice way of saying “No.”

In this context, not really.  It's more like, I'll support it once it has the requisite support to pass, but I won't stick my neck out if it won't pass anyway.

And that would require 60 votes, which won’t happen.

[7,052,770]

King, Kelly, Manchin, Sinema, have all expressed reservation about statehood so I would celebrate yet

No they haven't. They've all said something along the lines of "i have to look more into it" which is nowhere near a reservation and especially nowhere near opposition.

“I’m going to look into it,” is a nice way of saying “No.”

In this context, not really.  It's more like, I'll support it once it has the requisite support to pass, but I won't stick my neck out if it won't pass anyway.

And that would require 60 votes, which won’t happen.

Except that, as has been posted so many times on this forum over the last few months, there are many avenues to DC statehood that do not require 60 votes.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

King, Kelly, Manchin, Sinema, have all expressed reservation about statehood so I would celebrate yet

No they haven't. They've all said something along the lines of "i have to look more into it" which is nowhere near a reservation and especially nowhere near opposition.

“I’m going to look into it,” is a nice way of saying “No.”

In this context, not really.  It's more like, I'll support it once it has the requisite support to pass, but I won't stick my neck out if it won't pass anyway.

And that would require 60 votes, which won’t happen.

Except that, as has been posted so many times on this forum over the last few months, there are many avenues to DC statehood that do not require 60 votes.

All it would require (in the Senate, anyway) is Manchin and Sinema agreeing that 50 votes is enough to admit new states.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

All it would require (in the Senate, anyway) is Manchin and Sinema agreeing that 50 votes is enough to admit new states.

Yeah but so far they have said that they are against that. Also, both of them are silent/undecided on whether they support DC statehood.