DC statehood Megathread (pg 33 - Manchin questioning constitutionality)

[IceAgeComing]

I believe that the rule normally is that every new state gets one congressman when they are first admitted regardless of population and they expand Congress by that amount: and then when the next census happens the calculation is based on 435 again and so one state would lose a Congressman if DC was admitted: and more would lose out if Puerto Rico was added since they would get a fair few because of their population.  Don't quote me on the first bit of that though: they might give them the number they'd get if they were included in that Census and then expand Congress temporarily.

This would never happen but ideally part of dealing with this would be an expansion of the House to a number that would allow better representation - would cost slightly more but you'd get better representation plus its been found that gerrymandering gets harder the more representatives a state has.

[It’s so Joever]

Peak Harry/Brucejoel/Badger: We must pass DC statehood, it’s a matter of equal representation! We would tooootally want to admit a GOP territory if they were underrepresented! This is certainly not about the Democratic senators we have said we wanted, no sireee!”

Don't project your hackery onto others.

Right...you are being driven primarily by morality and not partisan desires.

[brucejoel99]

Peak Harry/Brucejoel/Badger: We must pass DC statehood, it’s a matter of equal representation! We would tooootally want to admit a GOP territory if they were underrepresented! This is certainly not about the Democratic senators we have said we wanted, no sireee!”

Don't project your hackery onto others.

Right...you are being driven primarily by morality and not partisan desires.

...

Yes. It's really not that hard of a concept to understand for people who aren't hacks, but you're practically the king of hacks, so it's obvious why you just can't get that through your head.

[Brittain33]

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.

It’s super awkward but no one’s ever going to say it out loud, only DC.

[brucejoel99]

I believe that the rule normally is that every new state gets one congressman when they are first admitted regardless of population and they expand Congress by that amount: and then when the next census happens the calculation is based on 435 again and so one state would lose a Congressman if DC was admitted: and more would lose out if Puerto Rico was added since they would get a fair few because of their population.  Don't quote me on the first bit of that though: they might give them the number they'd get if they were included in that Census and then expand Congress temporarily.

Yeah, that's how it worked for AK & HI, but it's a bit more complicated this time around than it was with them. The D.C. statehood bill is relatively straightforward, as it'd permanently increase the House to 436, so it'd get 1 representative upon admission, & then during the next redistricting, it'd receive whatever it's proportionally entitled to out of 436: so, still 1.

However, the most recent P.R. statehood bill is where it gets complicated. Upon admission, the whole state would temporarily have just 1 representative, then at the next regularly-scheduled House elections, it'd get the same amount that the state closest to it in population currently has (CT's 5), before getting whatever it's proportionally entitled to out of the permanent size at the next redistricting (so, 435 for now, or 436 if DC has been admitted by then).

So, if DC & PR were both simultaneously admitted tomorrow, there'd be a temporary increase to 437 & then at the 2022 elections (which just so happen to be the 1st post-redistricting elections), the permanent size would reset to 436, 1 of which would be D.C.'s & ~5 or so of which would go to P.R. (so some states would lose out). But if DC was admitted tomorrow while PR wasn't admitted 'til 2023 (say, because of a delay to allow for a binding referendum), then it'd temporarily get 1 for 2 years (temporarily increasing the size of the House to 437 for 2 years), then it'd get ~5 for 8 years (increasing the size of the House to ~441 for 8 years), before getting whatever it's proportionally entitled to out of 436 starting in 2033.

[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"

[brucejoel99]

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.

It’s super awkward but no one’s ever going to say it out loud, only DC.

Yeah, the only reason it's "Douglass Commonwealth" is so that the area can retain the state code of DC & otherwise minimize administrative stress so that nothing has to change geographically.

[lfromnj]

I love how forumlurker pissed of everyone, GL FL.

[Rep Jessica]

Dc statehood is unconstitutional.

Focus on Puerto rico.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I love how forumlurker pissed of everyone, GL FL.

Not me,  I'm just laughing.

[brucejoel99]

Dc statehood is unconstitutional.

Not liking something doesn't make it unconstitutional.

[It’s so Joever]

Dc statehood is unconstitutional.

Focus on Puerto rico.

I’m pretty sure it’s not with the plan that Democrats have?
I obviously support PR statehood, although there isn’t a clear mandate for it among the locals like with DC where even their license plates make clear the stance of the community.

[Badger]

I’ve heard talk that passing the stimulous even with just Dem votes might not happen until as late as MARCH?!? The fact things are moving so slow on something like that... tells me that it’s clearly evident neither statehood is happening. It just isn’t.

The Lahey health scare should have been a giant wake up call. But clearly everything is moving at a snails pace. And before someone tells me that’s how legislating works: they rammed through a Supreme Court justice in about two seconds. So they could do it if they wanted too.

No, I'm very much gonna tell you that that's how legislating works, because it is, given that reconciliation isn't exactly a process which can just be rammed through in "2 seconds" (which was actually 39 days, for scale): first a budget resolution has to be written-up (which is what's happening as we speak) & then pass in both chambers, then the reconciliation bill itself has to be written-up & passed in both chambers, but before the Senate can do their part in passing it, they're obligated to hold a time-consuming amendment vote-a-rama, during which literally hundreds of amendments have to be voted on. Getting the COVID stimulus passed through the reconciliation process was always gonna be a time-consuming process. It took 6 months for the GOP to try & use the reconciliation process to repeal Obamacare (which failed), & then another 6 months to successfully use it to get their tax cuts. The fact that the Democrats will get it done this time in just ~70 days (as compared to ACB having been confirmed in 39, which you equate to "2 seconds") is a testament to how fast things are moving. If ACB was confirmed in "2 seconds," then this stimulus is being passed in 3.5.

Didn’t realize they had to go through a ridiculous amount of votes such as that. Just seems that time moves slow on things that matter and on GOP wish lists it just breezes through

Um what things on the GOP list broze through:


- they failed at healthcare reform

- they took almost a whole year to get tax reform passed even though they had begun working on it in Jan of 2016

Kindly don't refer to the attempt at repealing Obamacare as " Healthcare reform".

[7,052,770]

Peak Harry/Brucejoel/Badger: We must pass DC statehood, it’s a matter of equal representation! We would tooootally want to admit a GOP territory if they were underrepresented! This is certainly not about the Democratic senators we have said we wanted, no sireee!”

Don't project your hackery onto others.

Right...you are being driven primarily by morality and not partisan desires.

Yes?

Jim Crow is morally wrong and antithetical to American values, period. And make no mistake, not letting certain citizens have any say in the government, despite being subject to what that government decides, is Jim Crow all over again.

[brucejoel99]

Dc statehood is unconstitutional.

Focus on Puerto rico.

I’m pretty sure it’s not with the plan that Democrats have?
I obviously support PR statehood, although there isn’t a clear mandate for it among the locals like with DC where even their license plates make clear the stance of the community.

Pleasantly surprised that you support PR statehood. Given your hackery & their relative conservatism & the resultant propensity to elect Republicans at the federal level, I would've figured that you'd balk at the idea.

[Badger]

This thread in a nutshell:

Peak Harry/Brucejoel/Badger: We must pass DC statehood, it’s a matter of equal representation! We would tooootally want to admit a GOP territory if they were underrepresented! This is certainly not about the Democratic senators we have said we wanted, no sireee!”

OSR: “The right thing to do is 100% to leave hundreds of thousands of tax paying Americans unrepresented because I want to keep the Reagan/Trump-cultists in power. Also can we find a way to keep those scary brown people in Georgia from voting, that would be great...

MillenialModerate: “Oh my god it’s been two days and DC isn’t a state yet with two senators. This is proof Schumer sucks and I am so ANGRY! The Democrats should have passed DC statehood five milliseconds after they took the majority, screw you Schumer and Markey! Kennedy would have passed it by now.”

OC: “Hahahaha Progmod told me Schumer pass DC statehood, but he was wrong just like about Georgia. Schumer doesn’t have votes to break filibuster and reconciliation, DC statehood won’t happen until 2023 when Democrats will win in a landslide because of recovering economy and get a filibuster proof MAJORITY 😎😎😎”

Yes, except that first position espoused by me Harry and Bruce Joel isn't ironic. Kindly stick a cork in your unnecessarily smug attitude, because you really missed the boat on this.

I don't think any of us would deny appreciating the political advantage of the two additional Democratic senators, and that we would probably be more grudging about it if it was an overwhelmingly Republican territory. But I daresay over 90% of us would still back it because it's the right thing to do.

You see, belief in equality and fairness is a fundamental Hallmark of progressive liberal thought. Belief in those things makes us progressives, and in turn and that's what makes us Democrats, which in turn makes us want to extend the franchise to  the near three quarter of a million  unrepresented DC residents. Trying to project Republican obsession with self-dealing and power hording over basic principles of fairness onto the rest of us is just 2 + 2 = 5 factually incorrect.

[politicallefty]

Prediction: They put DC statehood into the COVID relief reconciliation bill. A few Republicans vote for it (Murkowski, Romney, maybe Collins), giving Democrats cover when Republicans claim the admission of DC was "partisan." Also, a whole bunch of Republicans vote no, making terrible optics for voting against COVID relief.

Are you high?

For one you can’t put DC Statehood into a reconciliation vote.

For two, no way in HELL are they getting 3 Republican votes on a $1.9T bill OR Statehood (You might get Murkowski on Statehood by itself but not this way; and Romney already said you wouldn’t see a single Republican vote on $1.9T)

From what I understand, they can actually do 2 large reconciliation bills this year because they didn't do one for the previous year. As for what can be passed in reconciliation, it's under something called the Byrd Rule. The person who determines whether or not something is within its confines is the Senate Parliamentarian. That's where things can get messy. In 2001, Trent Lott fired the Parliamentarian because he didn't like his rulings. Schumer can do the same if he feels necessary. The Vice President can also overrule the Parliamentarian, something that hasn't happened since 1975.

[It’s so Joever]

Dc statehood is unconstitutional.

Focus on Puerto rico.

I’m pretty sure it’s not with the plan that Democrats have?
I obviously support PR statehood, although there isn’t a clear mandate for it among the locals like with DC where even their license plates make clear the stance of the community.

Pleasantly surprised that you support PR statehood. Given your hackery & their relative conservatism & the resultant propensity to elect Republicans at the federal level, I would've figured that you'd balk at the idea.

I mean, I say I support it now, but obviously if we get more data which shows a decent chance of them voting in a bunch of GOPers, my mind can change.

[brucejoel99]

Dc statehood is unconstitutional.

Focus on Puerto rico.

I’m pretty sure it’s not with the plan that Democrats have?
I obviously support PR statehood, although there isn’t a clear mandate for it among the locals like with DC where even their license plates make clear the stance of the community.

Pleasantly surprised that you support PR statehood. Given your hackery & their relative conservatism & the resultant propensity to elect Republicans at the federal level, I would've figured that you'd balk at the idea.

I mean, I say I support it now, but obviously if we get more data which shows a decent chance of them voting in a bunch of GOPers, my mind can change.

Hack gonna hack.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

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.

Douglass Commonwealth is great. “Washington, Douglass Commonwealth” sucks. My boyfriend mocked me for being concerned about that and I hope he’s right but as of now I believe that’s the name in the bill.

[GeneralMacArthur]

Columbia isn't even a reference to Columbus.  Columbia is a woman, she was used in "goddess of the new land" type imagery before the Statue of Liberty came along and became our new favorite gal.

The name originally came from Columbus, because the land was originally named after Columbus.  As is the entire country of Colombia.  But DC is not named after Columbus.

This is Columbia:

[7,052,770]

This thread in a nutshell:

Peak Harry/Brucejoel/Badger: We must pass DC statehood, it’s a matter of equal representation! We would tooootally want to admit a GOP territory if they were underrepresented! This is certainly not about the Democratic senators we have said we wanted, no sireee!”

OSR: “The right thing to do is 100% to leave hundreds of thousands of tax paying Americans unrepresented because I want to keep the Reagan/Trump-cultists in power. Also can we find a way to keep those scary brown people in Georgia from voting, that would be great...

MillenialModerate: “Oh my god it’s been two days and DC isn’t a state yet with two senators. This is proof Schumer sucks and I am so ANGRY! The Democrats should have passed DC statehood five milliseconds after they took the majority, screw you Schumer and Markey! Kennedy would have passed it by now.”

OC: “Hahahaha Progmod told me Schumer pass DC statehood, but he was wrong just like about Georgia. Schumer doesn’t have votes to break filibuster and reconciliation, DC statehood won’t happen until 2023 when Democrats will win in a landslide because of recovering economy and get a filibuster proof MAJORITY 😎😎😎”

Yes, except that first position espoused by me Harry and Bruce Joel isn't ironic. Kindly stick a cork in your unnecessarily smug attitude, because you really missed the boat on this.

I don't think any of us would deny appreciating the political advantage of the two additional Democratic senators, and that we would probably be more grudging about it if it was an overwhelmingly Republican territory. But I daresay over 90% of us would still back it because it's the right thing to do.

You see, belief in equality and fairness is a fundamental Hallmark of progressive liberal thought. Belief in those things makes us progressives, and in turn and that's what makes us Democrats, which in turn makes us want to extend the franchise to  the near three quarter of a million  unrepresented DC residents. Trying to project Republican obsession with self-dealing and power hording over basic principles of fairness onto the rest of us is just 2 + 2 = 5 factually incorrect.

Exactly. I hate how Wyoming sends Republicans to Congress, but I still think they have the right to representation. I would vehemently oppose a bill that reverted Wyoming to a territory against their will.

[Sestak]

OSR is just blue avatar S019 confirmed.

bruh this comparison has been made since S019 first started posting. OSR is the original, don't disrespect him by reversing the order like that.

[brucejoel99]

Columbia isn't even a reference to Columbus.  Columbia is a woman, she was used in "goddess of the new land" type imagery before the Statue of Liberty came along and became our new favorite gal.

The name originally came from Columbus, because the land was originally named after Columbus.  As is the entire country of Colombia.  But DC is not named after Columbus.

This is Columbia:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fd/American_Progress_%28John_Gast_painting%29.jpg

Tbf, DC technically being named after something which is itself named after Columbus is still something that, for a lot of people, would definitely "feel" like it's at least transitively named after Columbus.

[Non Swing Voter]

If Democrats don't use their raw power to push this through while in the majority then they've learned nothing over the last 2 decades and don't have their own constituents backs.