DC statehood Megathread (pg 33 - Manchin questioning constitutionality)

[jimrtex]

I would be open to the idea of PR statehood, but DC should in no scenario be admitted as a state. This is just a powergrab.

I would be open to the idea of MT statehood, but the Dakotas should in no scenario be admitted as separate states. This is just a powergrab.

This is a falsehood. South Dakota was one of the few states to be admitted to the Union with two representatives. It was a rapidly growing state, and always before states had rapidly grown as farmers poured in. Iowa was a Top 10 state at one time. The population of South Dakota was concentrated along the Missouri River, while that of North Dakota was along the Red River, where it still is. The population of South Dakota is concentrated in the southern corners around Sioux Falls and Rapid City.

Wyoming and Idaho did not merit statehood, but Utah did.

[jimrtex]

My deal with Republicans still stands: We can merge DC and MD if we can merge PR and FL.

This is actually a good idea. At the same time we should include the US VI. And merge Guam, Northern Marianas, and American Samoa into Hawaii.

[CookieDamage]

why was this thread locked?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I would be open to the idea of PR statehood, but DC should in no scenario be admitted as a state. This is just a powergrab.

What happened to your one year self-imposed ban?

You aren't supposed to return until after January 5, 2022.

I am saying it right now: If either Ossoff or Warnock wins, I'll leave the forum for 1 solid year.

___________________________________________

I am saying it right now: If either Ossoff or Warnock wins, I'll leave the forum for 1 solid year.

Promise?

Sure. Take a screencap right now.

To be fair, he only said, he'd leave for a year, not which year.  I think we can be reasonably sure he won't be posting in 2120.

[TheReckoning]

I’m opposed to both DC statehood and PR statehood at the moment, as for all other territories.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I’m opposed to both DC statehood and PR statehood at the moment, as for all other territories.

Of course you are, territories will give D's more Senators

[Former President tack50]

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.

[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

[MillennialModerate]

This should have been done the first week and I’m nervous it’s not even being discussed amongst Schumer and the swing votes.

Also, PR should be included with this as well.

DC statehood could take effect within weeks or months and seat Senators at that point.
PR statehood could take effect on July 4, 2024 - to give them time to get ducks in a row.

This is one of the few progressive wish lists that even moderate Dems want


DAMN IT.

[It’s so Joever]

This should have been done the first week and I’m nervous it’s not even being discussed amongst Schumer and the swing votes.

Also, PR should be included with this as well.

DC statehood could take effect within weeks or months and seat Senators at that point.
PR statehood could take effect on July 4, 2024 - to give them time to get ducks in a row.

This is one of the few progressive wish lists that even moderate Dems want


DAMN IT.

Calm down

[Not Me, Us]

I’m opposed to both DC statehood and PR statehood at the moment, as for all other territories.

For what reason?

[pppolitics]

I’m opposed to both DC statehood and PR statehood at the moment, as for all other territories.

For what reason?

...because he doesn't think colored people should get representation

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

I’m opposed to both DC statehood and PR statehood at the moment, as for all other territories.

For what reason?

...because he doesn't think colored people should get representation

Or because this person doesn't want Democrats to gain extra pwoer?

These people would take away Massachusetts's Senators if they could. You people need to learn Occam's Razor.

[It’s so Joever]

So...what is the chance DC get statehood? I say around 20%.

[pppolitics]

I’m opposed to both DC statehood and PR statehood at the moment, as for all other territories.

For what reason?

...because he doesn't think colored people should get representation

Or because this person doesn't want Democrats to gain extra pwoer?

These people would take away Massachusetts's Senators if they could. You people need to learn Occam's Razor.

Haven't you watched Burning Mississippi?

...whites who help darkies are just as hated as darkies themselves

[Person Man]

So...what is the chance DC get statehood? I say around 20%.

Unless there’s a major counter-offer, it’s going to happen.

[7,052,770]

So...what is the chance DC get statehood? I say around 20%.

100%. The only way it wouldn't happen is if Manchin, sinema, or King decide to betray basic American values and human decency.

If all 50 Democrats are on board, there is no way Republicans can stop it.

[Del Tachi]

In a 50/50 Senate, each individual senator has a unique motivation to not add new members to the body.  That's not going to be lost on Sinema, Manchin, Collins or Murkowski, especially.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

In a 50/50 Senate, each individual senator has a unique motivation to not add new members to the body.  That's not going to be lost on Sinema, Manchin, Collins or Murkowski, especially.

I don’t doubt that Manchin and Sinema are aware that Democrats are
more likely to lose seats than not in the next midterm. This would likely give them even more power during the rest of Biden’s term.

[MillennialModerate]

In a 50/50 Senate, each individual senator has a unique motivation to not add new members to the body.  That's not going to be lost on Sinema, Manchin, Collins or Murkowski, especially.

OR...

Murkowski - Grew up in a territory fighting for statehood. Also, without statehood for DC the GOP taking the majority is a sure thing. So making it NOT a sure thing makes her position a lot stronger

Collins - She’s a hack, she won’t vote for anything important

Sinema and Manchin can leverage their vote for a lot of different benefits to their state. Manchin for instance stays as chair of energy committee which is huge in WV.

[MillennialModerate]

So...what is the chance DC get statehood? I say around 20%.

Unless there’s a major counter-offer, it’s going to happen.

HIGHLY doubt it happens.

Just two weeks ago I was thinking maybe 80%

Now it’s clear it’s not a high priority and between health scares and all the flimsy nature of the majority.. I’d say 10%. This issue is dead for another decade

[GALeftist]

In a 50/50 Senate, each individual senator has a unique motivation to not add new members to the body.  That's not going to be lost on Sinema, Manchin, Collins or Murkowski, especially.

Greater chance of being in majority > greater chance of being deciding vote

[Badger]

In a 50/50 Senate, each individual senator has a unique motivation to not add new members to the body.  That's not going to be lost on Sinema, Manchin, Collins or Murkowski, especially.

Greater chance of being in majority > greater chance of being deciding vote

No.  In a 50/50 split, every Democratic senator is the deciding vote. 

Very true, but in Practical terms barring some measure that somehow specifically and negatively some other Democratic senators home state, Joe manchin will be the de facto deciding vote 99% of the time oh, and both he and Chuck Schumer know it.

Heck, with two new Democratic senators from DC, depending on exactly how the midterms shake out, he has a much better chance of still being the deciding vote after the 22 midterms than if DC is not admitted as a state. Regardless he knows he'll otherwise almost surely be in the Senate minority and lose his energy committee chairmanship at that point without said DC senators. Yes, there's certainly a chance the midterms could go bad enough for Democrats that he's in the minority even with those DC Senators added, but without them it's almost guaranteed.

[CookieDamage]

Noah fence but there's not gonna be a Dem senator who's like "hmm i want the slimmest possible majority so I can be a deciding vote." Dem senators want to be in the majority and a healthy majority at that. Manchin ain't gonna shy away from getting more Dem senators, especially since he can have more wiggle room to vote against Dem policies that his constituents hate cuz he knows they'll pass anyways with the extra Demmies.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Noah fence but there's not gonna be a Dem senator who's like "hmm i want the slimmest possible majority so I can be a deciding vote." Dem senators want to be in the majority and a healthy majority at that. Manchin ain't gonna shy away from getting more Dem senators, especially since he can have more wiggle room to vote against Dem policies that his constituents hate cuz he knows they'll pass anyways with the extra Demmies.

I agree. I think if anything Sinema is the most likely defection as she has been the most likely to buck the party when her vote actually matters.

Still no Shaheen, Hassan, or Tester co-sponsor on the DC bill yet which is a tad concerning, but who knows maybe they just didn't care to co-sponsor for whatever reason, I fully expect all 3 to end up voting for it.