- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: John Oliver discusses DC Statehood -- Agree or Disagree?
Posted on 8/3/15 at 1:04 pm to Pilot Tiger
Posted on 8/3/15 at 1:04 pm to Pilot Tiger
quote:Well, there was a damn good reason for creating a federal district instead of leaving the center of the national government in one of the states - to avoid the prospect (apparent or real) of one state having undue power/authority over the federal government.
I reject any argument that equates to "just move!" or "you shouldn't be living there anyway"
Imagine the governor of Maryland using his police power to coerce federal officials with roadblocks, toll bridges, etc., a la Chris Christie, or using the state's taxing power to milk the federal government (albeit that's no longer really an issue in light of the growth of Constitutional interpretation, but was one of the reasons for creating a federal district).
Finally, the federal district is supposed to be a city for all Americans, not Columbians.
So, yes, it may seem harsh to say "you aren't supposed to live there," but that doesn't make it any less the truth.
0
Posted on 8/3/15 at 1:08 pm to Pilot Tiger
quote:As a compromise - and this is one I could support - how about a real Congressman (however many the population would be apportioned), but no Senator? That way, the "people" get representation but there's no recognition as a state, which it isn't.
DC wants to stay DC, but have voting representation in Congress.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 1:10 pm to HarryBalzack
quote:My opinion is actually to give DC a proportionate representation in Congress but not any Senators.
As a compromise - and this is one I could support - how about a real Congressman (however many the population would be apportioned), but no Senator? That way, the "people" get representation but there's no recognition as a state, which it isn't.
As well as giving DC full budget autonomy.
keeping DC a federal district and no statehood
This post was edited on 8/3/15 at 1:11 pm
Posted on 8/3/15 at 1:13 pm to Pilot Tiger
Works for me. That was easy. Who do we need to write?
Posted on 8/3/15 at 1:14 pm to HarryBalzack
I'll bring it up in our meeting tomorrow
Posted on 8/3/15 at 1:19 pm to Pilot Tiger
quote:
you're not supposed to live in a city that's basically a bowl, but plenty of people live there.
this is an incredibly stupid argument
You keep saying this, but you're wrong. The federal city was created to keep the federal government of limited powers from growing those powers. Giving the seat's population sway over the general government was seen as a bad idea because of bribery etc. No one is "disenfranchised," which I keep seeing mentioned in this thread. They can vote. They do not participate fully in the constitutional republic.
Since the dawn of the 17th Amendment, DC residents and States became worse off. The Congress used to have representatives of the people and representatives of the states. Now the states have been cut out. That further diluted the relative power of the residents of the federal city.
The best answer is that any action on DC being allowed votes in the house and the Senate is accompanied by a repeal of the 17th amendment to return balance to the system.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 1:21 pm to therick711
quote:I'm for this, too. Where do we sign up?
repeal of the 17th amendment
Posted on 8/3/15 at 1:21 pm to HarryBalzack
All you have to do is convene a constitutional convention. Either get cracking on all members of Congress or all the states.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 1:29 pm to therick711
quote:
repeal of the 17th amendment
Support.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 1:30 pm to MikeBRLA
quote:
Well odds are that they weren't born in the house the presently live in so they had a choice to move there. And they CHOSE to move and live in a place without representation. Again, that was their choice.
Upvote.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 2:47 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
I just don't understand what the big deal would be just to merge DC with Maryland
DC, is a separate entity altogether.
would you merge indiana and ohio?
only if eventually you were gonna usher in a regional government, then finally the one world government the idiots have been pushing for all along.
ANY/ALL talks of a merge are steps towards one world government and nothing more.
I thought all you guys knew about this...
This post was edited on 8/3/15 at 2:49 pm
Posted on 8/3/15 at 2:54 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
I just don't understand what the big deal would be just to merge DC with Maryland.
MD doesn't want that dead weight.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 3:53 pm to GetCocky11
quote:
Because over 650,000 have no real representation in the legislature?
Spread out over 68 Sq miles? Sounds like a frickin state to me!!!
Btw, this is definitely happening once we get a liberal USSC.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 4:30 pm to Lou Pai
Question to the board:
If D.C. were a city with a majority and history of voting Republican, would your opinion change? What if BR was the national capitol? Would you be happy with less representation?
Also, I'm reading that there would be 3 representatives for D.C. But if the population is truly 3 Million, wouldn't there be 7 congressmen and 2 senators? Isn't the current US House ratio set at: 1 rep/ 465,000 citizens?
I'm just saying, a US citizen no matter where they choose to live should be afforded the same representation regardless of their political leanings? Whether that is statehood or folding into an existing state is irrelevant to me.
Disallowing proper representation because we fear they won't vote the way we would like is flat out wrong. It smacks of the hyper-polarization our country suffered when adding free/slave states to the union 200 years ago.
If D.C. were a city with a majority and history of voting Republican, would your opinion change? What if BR was the national capitol? Would you be happy with less representation?
Also, I'm reading that there would be 3 representatives for D.C. But if the population is truly 3 Million, wouldn't there be 7 congressmen and 2 senators? Isn't the current US House ratio set at: 1 rep/ 465,000 citizens?
I'm just saying, a US citizen no matter where they choose to live should be afforded the same representation regardless of their political leanings? Whether that is statehood or folding into an existing state is irrelevant to me.
Disallowing proper representation because we fear they won't vote the way we would like is flat out wrong. It smacks of the hyper-polarization our country suffered when adding free/slave states to the union 200 years ago.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 4:36 pm to GetCocky11
I'm starting to dislike these talk show hosts more and more by the day after hearing all the stupid shite that comes out of their mouths.
This post was edited on 8/3/15 at 4:37 pm
Posted on 8/3/15 at 4:57 pm to Tigeralum2008
quote:
If D.C. were a city with a majority and history of voting Republican, would your opinion change?
Of course it would.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 5:28 pm to Tigeralum2008
quote:
But if the population is truly 3 Million, wouldn't there be 7 congressmen and 2 senators? Isn't the current US House ratio set at: 1 rep/ 465,000 citizens?
3M probably commute in and out every day. The resident population is closer to 600000. Most of us military, govies, contractors, lobbyists, lawyers, etc who work in the city live in SW Maryland and NORVA. But as pilot pointed out, the city's demos are changing pretty dramatically. Gentrification has taken hold there and many parts of DC proper don't look at all like they did when I was an intern 11 years ago. Whites were the majority in DC up until sometime in the late 1960s when an exodus pretty much happened in the span of a few years to coincide with moves to reorganize the city's government for greater home autonomy (elected mayor and council members, etc). And because white flight was just a thing at that point in time. The black share of the population peaked at about 72% in the 1970s. It's been steadily declining since. It was a little of 60% when I last lived here, but is estimated at 49.9% as of 2013 (with whites up to about 40%). So the perception of DC as a giant single-race ghetto is pretty dated. The median home selling price last year was about $540K.
This post was edited on 8/3/15 at 5:33 pm
Posted on 8/3/15 at 5:33 pm to Salmon
Precisely. However, if we're going to change or ignore the law so folks in DC have taxation w/representation, I suggest giving the District back to Virginia and Maryland instead of creating another state.
Posted on 8/3/15 at 5:41 pm to Tigeralum2008
quote:
I'm just saying, a US citizen no matter where they choose to live should be afforded the same representation
Did the situation in DC change after those people moved into the city or was it like that before they arrived?
Are people being forced to live in DC?
Posted on 8/3/15 at 5:44 pm to GetCocky11
Shouldn't they at least get an exemption from federal taxes?
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News