Utah and DC to get a new seat in Congress?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Come on, Arch. I started this thread (remember) with a note that I didn't know if this could pass constitutional muster. It isn't as if I am a huge cheerleader of this measure. I think it is worth examining on the merits, and I think there are lots of reasons (exceptional ones) that DC SHOULD have a voting member of Congress (or more than one). I simply think the Constitution needs to be followed first and foremost, and if the debate tilts towards DC getting a representative, and if this method isn't constitutional, a constitutional method for attaining that goal should be followed (i.e., amending the Constitution).

You are criticizing the proponents of the bill for the very thing you are supporting- making a decision on the DC representative based on your opinion of the political views of those living in DC. You are no better than the people you point your finger at.

No my view is that it wasn't constructed to have voting representation, just like the territories. So until it contributes economically in the positive fashion, I don't believe it deserves representation. Nevada joined the union because it added minerals to the war effort. If you are part of an organization which is a burden then you should not be granted representation. And it's not as if the people couldn't move a few miles and garner representation in Maryland and Virginia. It's as simple as that. But they want to change things just because they're too lazy to go move where they can have representation.

I criticize proponents because it's nothing but political hatchery. It really is not a valid issue, other than political pandering.

[Tex]

Speaking of folks who don't understand the Constitution ...

The patently unconstitutional bill to give the District of Columbia a voting representative in the House of Representatives was pulled off the House calendar because -- according to one House Republican leadership source -- they feared that the so-called Blue Dog Democrats would not support it.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.p...t=yes&id=30931

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Tex

Speaking of folks who don't understand the Constitution ...



http://www.humanevents.com/article.p...t=yes&id=30931

I don't know why Republicans ought be complaining that the bill was pulled.

DC getting a vote and DC having gun rights are two different issues. They need not be tied together.

Of course, the GOP is going to argue that they used the gun amendment to kill the bill.