DC statehood Megathread (pg 33 - Manchin questioning constitutionality)

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

If DC becomes a state, will the US House size be increased to 436? And will it stay that way after the 2020 reapportionment?

Also when would elections be held for DC's two hypothetical senators and its representative in Congress?

By the way, the idea somebody mentioned earlier about adding Arlington County, Virginia into DC to make it bigger sounds based. Is there popular support for it?

It would temporarily increase to 436, and then go back down to 435 after the next round of apportionment.  Though I’m not sure exactly when the next round of apportionment “triggers”, so it’s possible that if statehood passes in 2022, it could stay at 436 for the whole decade.

[CookieDamage]

If DC becomes a state, will the US House size be increased to 436? And will it stay that way after the 2020 reapportionment?

Also when would elections be held for DC's two hypothetical senators and its representative in Congress?

By the way, the idea somebody mentioned earlier about adding Arlington County, Virginia into DC to make it bigger sounds based. Is there popular support for it?

In a word: no.

[ibagli]

If DC becomes a state, will the US House size be increased to 436? And will it stay that way after the 2020 reapportionment?

Yes.

(1) PERMANENT INCREASE IN NUMBER OF MEMBERS.—Effective with respect to the Congress during which the State is admitted into the Union and each succeeding Congress, the House of Representatives shall be composed of 436 Members, including any Members representing the State.

[MillennialModerate]

On one hand I find it hard to believe the administration would put out a statement endorsing the position without knowing it’ll pass. However I just can’t see how that happens. I think the right is going to put the fear of god and the praise from Republicans is a drug Manchin just can’t stop
(let’s be honest it’s Manchin, Sinema would fold like a tent if it was just her).

Yes, but it’s not Manchin, it’s Sinema.

You’re joking right.

If Manchin was on board. You think Sinema would hold it up?

[It’s so Joever]

On one hand I find it hard to believe the administration would put out a statement endorsing the position without knowing it’ll pass. However I just can’t see how that happens. I think the right is going to put the fear of god and the praise from Republicans is a drug Manchin just can’t stop
(let’s be honest it’s Manchin, Sinema would fold like a tent if it was just her).

Yes, but it’s not Manchin, it’s Sinema.

You’re joking right.

If Manchin was on board. You think Sinema would hold it up?

I think I trust the Senator with obvious political reasons to virtue signal to Republicans who hasn’t actually held anything back over the Senator who has no reason to act as she does and has a smaller record.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

If DC becomes a state, will the US House size be increased to 436? And will it stay that way after the 2020 reapportionment?

Yes.

(1) PERMANENT INCREASE IN NUMBER OF MEMBERS.—Effective with respect to the Congress during which the State is admitted into the Union and each succeeding Congress, the House of Representatives shall be composed of 436 Members, including any Members representing the State.

Is this really in the bill?  I had no idea.  When AK and HI were added, they temporarily expanded to 437, but went back to 435 after the 1960 reapportionment.

This seems like a pretty bad idea.  If you are going to introduce a bill to expand the House, expand it in a meaningful way, but leave it at an odd number.  I suppose they just didn’t want to risk losing votes from the states that might lose the seat?

[ibagli]

If DC becomes a state, will the US House size be increased to 436? And will it stay that way after the 2020 reapportionment?

Yes.

(1) PERMANENT INCREASE IN NUMBER OF MEMBERS.—Effective with respect to the Congress during which the State is admitted into the Union and each succeeding Congress, the House of Representatives shall be composed of 436 Members, including any Members representing the State.

Is this really in the bill?  I had no idea.  When AK and HI were added, they temporarily expanded to 437, but went back to 435 after the 1960 reapportionment.

This seems like a pretty bad idea.  If you are going to introduce a bill to expand the House, expand it in a meaningful way, but leave it at an odd number.  I suppose they just didn’t want to risk losing votes from the states that might lose the seat?

Either that or they were trying to keep the number of presidential electors the same? The current DC electors come from a notional 436th representative and 101st and 102nd senator. The pre-2019 versions of the bill clawed it back to 435 but I've never seen an explanation for why it was changed.

[MillennialModerate]

I wish we would just get an update on it. Schumer should make a deal with Manchin and Sinema. Make DC (and PR) a reality and they’ll get major concessions on bills. Including enormous pork for WV and AZ.

Either tell us this is happening or it isn’t and be done with it.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I wish we would just get an update on it. Schumer should make a deal with Manchin and Sinema. Make DC (and PR) a reality and they’ll get major concessions on bills. Including enormous pork for WV and AZ.

Either tell us this is happening or it isn’t and be done with it.

The R have unanimous consent and could try to block the Cabinet officials that's why he is waiting til the Summer to try to use his authority on getting rid of the Fillibuster on weed as well that's why he is waiting

But, this probably won't happen until 2023 if D's keep the H and get 53 Senators OH, PA, WI, NH, GA

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

https://news.yahoo.com/swing-state-dems-come-against-122820450.html


Here is an important development, swing state D's come out against Crt packing Bennett, CCM and KELLY, even if New states are added keep it at 9 even if DC Statehood is added

D's are stick with 9, I think some would argue against Crt packing due to Federalize LGBT rights

[Inmate Trump]

https://news.yahoo.com/swing-state-dems-come-against-122820450.html


Here is an important development, swing state D's come out against Crt packing Bennett, CCM and KELLY, even if New states are added keep it at 9 even if DC Statehood is added

D's are stick with 9, I think some would argue against Crt packing due to Federalize LGBT rights

Not to derail the thread, since this is supposed to be about DC, but this is exactly why Democrats are pussies once they're in power.  Republicans would've already packed the court by now, if the situation were reversed.

Say what you will about McConnell, but he knows how to work the system.  He does it better than any Democrat I've ever seen, because every single Democrat caves in the end.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The Rs already packed the Crts, but Solid, whose new User name is pack the Crts this is news to him, but he doesn't post that much in these threads that much. He was always Against Kavanaugh

I posted this in DC thread it's related to DC and PR Statehood, D's want to add justices per new Statehood

[MillennialModerate]

I’m reluctantly against court packing. Politically it would be suicide I feel and I’d play it as wait and see. If statehood was passed and it was overruled by the court. Then I’d pack it. Period. But I’m against it even though the Republicans deserve it as a consequence of what they’ve pulled

I think statehood is a more urgent matter. Making the system of government more fair and more relative to the electorate is the major issue here

[Roronoa D. Law]

https://news.yahoo.com/swing-state-dems-come-against-122820450.html


Here is an important development, swing state D's come out against Crt packing Bennett, CCM and KELLY, even if New states are added keep it at 9 even if DC Statehood is added

D's are stick with 9, I think some would argue against Crt packing due to Federalize LGBT rights

Not to derail the thread, since this is supposed to be about DC, but this is exactly why Democrats are pussies once they're in power.  Republicans would've already packed the court by now, if the situation were reversed.

Say what you will about McConnell, but he knows how to work the system.  He does it better than any Democrat I've ever seen, because every single Democrat caves in the end.

The Democrats have a problem with fixing a problem until it's has become a major problem. Democrats right now don't think they have a Senate problem because they control the Senate right now.

Democrats also have a problem of wanting to virtue signal to a crowd of voters that don't exist. They overplay the size of the Republican base and they constantly find themselves romanticizing with the New Deal Coalition. When New Deal was passed nearly a century ago. Most of them are dead, voting Republicans, or traditional liberals. But Democrats especially Biden have a problem with trying to pander to the good ol boys. 

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

If D's pack the Crts, they would be Vulnerable to LGBT issues, notice all the swing state D's came out against it.  That was one of the reasons why Hillary lost, if Merrick Garland was the 5th judge, he would Federalize SSM. Trump repeatly said he was against SSM and Obama let LGBT in military and Hillary said she was for it

That's why Kerry lost too, John Roberts was the 5th Justice and he was up and if Kerry replaced him SSM

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

On one hand I find it hard to believe the administration would put out a statement endorsing the position without knowing it’ll pass. However I just can’t see how that happens. I think the right is going to put the fear of god and the praise from Republicans is a drug Manchin just can’t stop
(let’s be honest it’s Manchin, Sinema would fold like a tent if it was just her).

Yes, but it’s not Manchin, it’s Sinema.

Your Bennett is Against Crt packing

[It’s so Joever]

On one hand I find it hard to believe the administration would put out a statement endorsing the position without knowing it’ll pass. However I just can’t see how that happens. I think the right is going to put the fear of god and the praise from Republicans is a drug Manchin just can’t stop
(let’s be honest it’s Manchin, Sinema would fold like a tent if it was just her).

Yes, but it’s not Manchin, it’s Sinema.

Your Bennett is Against Crt packing

Did I just get destroyed by OC?

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I think D's are cautious this time, they thought they were gonna get a Supermajority Senate and H last time and they kept talking about Crt packing

In addition, Gorsuch, ACB, Roberts and Kavanaugh voted with 3 liberal justices to give Biden the Election, so they can overturn the Crt that gave Biden the victory

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

So much for Peak Harry and Bricejoel Crt packing plan

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

So much for Peak Harry and Bricejoel Crt packing plan

I like this spicy OC we’ve been getting lately.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Senators aren't the H, they don't want to break bipartisanship due to Covid, that's why they are rejecting Statehood, Filibuster reform and Crt packing. That's why Manchin and Sinema aren't reforming Filibuster

Now, once Covid is over, we can return to normalcy that's was the point I was making, even Ossoff, said no way to Crt packing and Durbin, this is the same Crt that gave Biden the Prez

Rs can retaliate and use unanimous consent and won't approve Cabinet and judges, but the tide can change after Covid is over

Manchin said he is open to an 800B not 2.3T infrastructure either

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I watch CSPAN and the Senate, they are still approving Cabinet members in the spirit of bipartisanship, the Ds aren't gonna break the Filibuster in a Covid Environment, once we return to normalcy, whenever that is, then there will be a push to be more partisan and in 2023/ not before then, the Ds are assuming they would have 52 or more seats

Portman said if they move to break the power sharing agreement, Rs are gonna use tools to block judges and confirmation of all nominees thru unanimous consent

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

DC statehood is actually really good for Sinema and Manchin's schtick. Two more Dem Senators means one of them could actually break and vote with Republicans while still allowing the bill to pass. It gives them cover to actually vote like moderate heroes without actually jeopardizing the Democratic agenda. It's a win for everyone except Republicans, as all things should be.

99% politicians become politicians to advance the policies *they* like. And here you have Joe Manchin, a 73-year-old pretty conservative pro-life Democrat. Why would one assume that he needs a "cover", wants to be a "moderate Hero" or cares about some "schticks". Or about Democratic agenda.

People do change, though. Joe Biden once was one of Senate's most hawkish members on Foreign Policies and "catch the violent thugs"-bill - now he builds on Trump's "End the forever wars", and who knows, perhaps he will build on Trump's The First Step Act. But it was a gradual change.

Manchin is, on other hand, awfully categorical in his Op-Ed about keeping Filibuster. An Op-Ed he wrote a 3 weeks ago.

In my opinion, it will take a lot to change that. I don't know, why Democrats think that pushing reforms, that Manchin is at best lukewarm about, will make him more willing to kill the Filibuster.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Manchin is keeping the Filibuster because he knows D's want PR Statehood and Expand the Crt

Kelly, Feinstein, Bennett, Hassan, SHAHEEN, Durbin, Manchin and Sinema, and CCM knows how detrimental Crt expanding is, LGBT rights would be Federalize at natl level and Hillary and Kerry, in part lost based on that issue due to if they appointed a 5th and deciding Judge, SSM and transgender rights would not be at state level but Federalized like California, D's passed transgender rights in H. Trump and Bush W consistently said nay to SSM

This Crt is Conservative on SSM and guns and Citizens United, we all know

The Ds lost seats in Congress, last term due to they were so insisted on Expanding the Crt and hurt CUNNINGHAM chances as well

Manchin wants to work with Rs to get get DC not PR Statehood, due to amnesty issue on Latinos, he's Against amnesty

[Spectator]

DC statehood is actually really good for Sinema and Manchin's schtick. Two more Dem Senators means one of them could actually break and vote with Republicans while still allowing the bill to pass. It gives them cover to actually vote like moderate heroes without actually jeopardizing the Democratic agenda. It's a win for everyone except Republicans, as all things should be.

99% politicians become politicians to advance the policies *they* like. And here you have Joe Manchin, a 73-year-old pretty conservative pro-life Democrat. Why would one assume that he needs a "cover", wants to be a "moderate Hero" or cares about some "schticks". Or about Democratic agenda.

People do change, though. Joe Biden once was one of Senate's most hawkish members on Foreign Policies and "catch the violent thugs"-bill - now he builds on Trump's "End the forever wars", and who knows, perhaps he will build on Trump's The First Step Act. But it was a gradual change.

Manchin is, on other hand, awfully categorical in his Op-Ed about keeping Filibuster. An Op-Ed he wrote a 3 weeks ago.

In my opinion, it will take a lot to change that. I don't know, why Democrats think that pushing reforms, that Manchin is at best lukewarm about, will make him more willing to kill the Filibuster.

I’m amazed at how many people even on supposedly well-informed sites like this actually think Manchin and Sinema are conservatives, and nothing more than attention whores who will toe the party line when needed. Sure, they might make a stink about it, but they haven’t killed anything yet.