District of Columbia
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 29, 2024, 05:16:45 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Process (Moderator: muon2)
  District of Columbia
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: District of Columbia  (Read 5077 times)
UK.USfan
UK.USFan
Rookie
**
Posts: 56


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: September 07, 2004, 05:02:14 PM »

Please could someone explain the set up in DC regarding voting rights and representation of the City at National level.
I read that it has an EV of 3, but has no Senators, and one Delegate in Congress with no voting powers. Whats the point of having someone in the House with no voting powers...they can argue and listen but still have no influence voting wise on the outcome of issues.
Maybe its me not fully comprehending the way DC its set up, but I'd be obliged if anyone could explain further.

Thanks
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: September 07, 2004, 09:37:16 PM »

DC is not a state.  The non-voting delegates of the District and other territorries actually do get to vote, but only on the committes and sub-commitees they sit on, so they do they do wield some minor influence.  The district gets its special status of having electors because of a constitutional amendment.  While it is possible that another amendment could be passed to allow the district to elect a Representative, giving it Representation in the Senate without it becoming a State would require all fifty States to approve the amendment.  Another possibility would be for Columbia to become a State or to revert to being a part of Maryland.  The problem is tho, that Washington is dependent upon the subsidies it gets from the Federal government, so Maryland wouldn't accept it and Columbia couldn't survive as a State of its own, even assuming that Congress was willing to give up its control over the District.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: September 08, 2004, 03:26:08 AM »

Please could someone explain the set up in DC regarding voting rights and representation of the City at National level.
I read that it has an EV of 3, but has no Senators, and one Delegate in Congress with no voting powers. Whats the point of having someone in the House with no voting powers...they can argue and listen but still have no influence voting wise on the outcome of issues.
Maybe its me not fully comprehending the way DC its set up, but I'd be obliged if anyone could explain further.
The USA is a federal union, where sovereign states have conceded some of their powers to the central government.  Under the Articles of Confederation, it was know as 'United States of American in Congress Assembled', that is, they had come together to meet and act collectively on certain matters.  This wasn't always working out, which led to the Constitution being written, which gave more powers to the federal government and would result in some sort of permanent government establishment, rather than simply a meeting place for the Congress.  The authors of the Constitution were concerned that the federal government would be subject to the control or undue influence of whichever state the capital was located in.

So, the Constitution provided that a capital district could be formed from land granted to the federal government, in which the federal government would exercise control.  That is, it was more than simply giving property so that some buildings could be built.  Maryland and Virginia donated the land for the District of Columbia (if you look at a map of DC, you'll see it forms a square at a 45 degree angle, with the southwest edge lopped off.  Originally the part that is lopped off, southwest of the Potomac was part of the district.  It was retroceded to Virginia in 1846.

Congress has responsiblity for the District, and for a long time it did not have a local council or mayor.

Congress itself represents the interests of the States.  There are two Senators from each State (who were originally elected by the State legislature), and the House or Representatives, elected by the people of the States.   Since DC is not a State it is not represented in Congress (and until 1961 did not have electoral votes).

The residents of the District are mostly black, and during the civil rights movement and de-colonialization movements of the 1950s and 1960s it became an issue that the people in the capital of the republic could not participate in their own local government, nor the government of their country.  This led to passage of 22nd Amendment in 1961 which granted the District the right to choose appoint 3 presidential electors (note that the Congress itself acts in the role of a State legislature for this purpose, and could appoint the 3 electors, rather than let the people vote).  In addition, more local government authority has been given to the residents of the district who elect a city council and mayor.  In 1978 an Amendment to the Constitution was proposed that would let DC be treated as a State for purposes of representation in Congress, election of the President, and Amending the Constitution.  It failed to achieve the required number of ratifications in the alloted 7 years.

In part as a result of not having Congressional representation, Congress has granted delegate status to representatives of the District and of the other territories (Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, Guam, Northern Marianas, and American Samoa).  Congress can't give them full voting authority (the Constitution dictates the composition of the Congress, and if their vote resulted in the Congress exercising its authority in a particular way, it could call into question the Congress's action).  But the Congress can write its own rules of procedure, and have written in a role for Delegates.  At one time they could vote, but not on final passage of legislation.  It was sort of a case that they could vote as long as it didn't count.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: September 08, 2004, 11:19:50 AM »

Small  correction:  The Northern Marianas do NOT have a non-voting delegate.  They have a quasi-independent status of free association. which gives them more control over their internal affairs than orsinary territories or even Puerto Rico.  (A similar free association status has been proposed as something to add the next time Puerto Rico has a remain as we are/statehood/independence referendum.)  As a side effect their "resident representive" gets treated more like a ambassador than anuthing else.
Logged
UK.USfan
UK.USFan
Rookie
**
Posts: 56


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: September 08, 2004, 02:47:22 PM »

Hey guys!..thanks a lot for your explanation to my DC query. Jeez I can't believe I've found this Forum, its going to be so easy for me now to find answers for my inquisitive mind regarding the US Elections and US Electoral set up!.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: September 09, 2004, 03:04:52 PM »

Small  correction:  The Northern Marianas do NOT have a non-voting delegate.  They have a quasi-independent status of free association. which gives them more control over their internal affairs than orsinary territories or even Puerto Rico.  (A similar free association status has been proposed as something to add the next time Puerto Rico has a remain as we are/statehood/independence referendum.)  As a side effect their "resident representive" gets treated more like a ambassador than anuthing else.
I wasn't aware that they did not have representation.  But I also found the record of House Resources Committee hearing this February where the issue was discussed.  The Governor of CNMI and the resident representative were favorable towards having delegate status, as was the administration.  In addition there has been legislation in several recent sessions, though only once did it get out of committee, and had no floor action.

It doesn't appear to be a legal issue.  The legislation describing the role of the resident representative, is very similar to that describing the role of Puerto Rico's Resident Commissioner.  And the link is somewhat closer than that of American Samoa (persons born in AS are US nationals rather than US citizens - when legislation was first approved for the AS delegate, it provided that he be a US citizen, but was changed when it was realized that few people qualfied).

It appears that the issues are (1) recent end of the UN Trusteeship; and (2) small population - much of the testimony concerned the population of other territories when they got delegate representation.  But CNMI now has more people than American Samoa.

What wasn't brought up at the hearing was the garment factories.  And there may be a concern that a large share of the population of CNMI are not US citizens.
Logged
Light Touch
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 342


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: September 10, 2004, 10:27:04 AM »

Fascinating conversation, guys -- thanks.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.037 seconds with 11 queries.