Current Events > It's time for the District of Columbia to become a state

(+) Yeah! (+)

I fucked up the format on mobile so this is out of order.

Heavy_D_Forever posted...

1.) The place where all federal decisions are made should be independent of any state policies. I don't trust either party very much and I can see them looking for loopholes to cause as much f***ery as possible.

I can understand a general aversion to conflict of interest, but as long as DC would be represented by in Congress by the same rules and proportions outlined for other states it is difficult for me to imagine what they would be. I don't fault your caution, but in this moment I weight the value of adding representation to the people of DC more than the fear of unintended consequences.

Heavy_D_Forever posted...

Specifically I want an amendment because the Justice Department under both Democratic and Republican administrations has consistently agreed that statehood for the District requires a constitutional amendment. It cannot be done by mere majority vote in Congress.

Personally I don't know what is specifically said about DC in the Constitution, so I'll trust your word. The change I referred to (popular vote of senators) was also an amendment, which was the reason I brought it up. I don't know if bypassing this part of the process was mentioned by somebody else, but I wouldn't agree with it. But I don't agree with resisting change by appealing to the Founding Fathers, which is how I interpreted that first post I replied to.

Heavy_D_Forever posted...

2.) If we let a 68 mile sized area easily become a state I can forsee some places where radicals from either side could want to succeed from their state and be granted their own statehood for whatever crazy reason they see fit. Again it goes back to pure f***ery because people are too insane to be trusted.

I personally don't believe this would lead to a scenario where politicians start dividing Puerto Rico to pieces to stuff senators if nothing else to avoid eroding their relative state power in the Senate. But I don't know of any way to substantiate that. I suppose there are many other things we thought people wouldn't do that we've worried about these past few days even.

Heavy_D_Forever posted...

I just think issues like this are extremely complicated and should be handled delicately and properly. Saying "Let's just create a new state!" like it's some easy peasy process sounds crazy/scary to me. Maybe that's not what other posters meant, but that's just how it came across to me.

If I'm honest with you, I don't care deeply about this issue. I just thought the discussion would was interesting, and I enjoyed reading your reply.

---

Imagine figuring out what would be the capital of Washington DC.

And then figure out what will be the new capital of the USA.

---

SrRd_RacinG posted...

Imagine figuring out what would be the capital of Washington DC.

And then figure out what will be the new capital of the USA.

Easy. Joe Biden's house and the largest city in Guam.

---

Heavy_D_Forever posted...

You don't need to create some micro-state that has the same voting power in the Senate as all the other 50 (much, much larger) states

by size sure. By population non

---

Heavy_D_Forever posted...

Have fun continuing to ignore everything you disagree with and keep hoping for them to throw out the constitution and redo everything exactly the way YOU want it lol

Who said anything about throwing out the constitution? This is about citizens getting representation they deserve. No taxation without representation was an idea we were founded on after all. You're arguing in circles.

You don't want DC to be a state because you think they'd be biased, yet you say put it into Maryland, thus ignoring your own argument. Then you say giving the citizens representation will foment secession in Texas or some fringe groupies in "Cascadia" who are already represented and will renounce it?

DC should have representation, it's unfair they do not.

---

Thanks for being reasonable @Jabodie

I agree with a lot of what you said and I definitely have a lot of trust issues when it comes to Government and rampant corruption from all sides which does effect my views.

If I wasn't such a pessimist I'd probably think exactly the way you do, and ultimately I do think taxation without representation is fucked up so they should be working to find a solution.

---

powerman1426 posted...

DC should have representation, it's unfair they do not.

This I agree with, but I just want to see them represented the right way. If they can amend the constitution and it passes then I'm all for it.

---

powerman1426 posted...

You don't want DC to be a state because you think they'd be biased, yet you say put it into Maryland, thus ignoring your own argument.

But they just have to do it the right way!

---

The seat of the federal government isn't in a state for a reason

---

We really need to consider what would happen if we made DC into a state and then that state made being a Republican illegal, guys!

I am a very serious poster whos bringing up very reasonable concerns that could definitely happen.

---

Heavy_D_Forever posted...

Thanks for being reasonable @Jabodie

I agree with a lot of what you said and I definitely have a lot of trust issues when it comes to Government and rampant corruption from all sides which does effect my views.

If I wasn't such a pessimist I'd probably think exactly the way you do, and ultimately I do think taxation without representation is fucked up so they should be working to find a solution.

The heart of the issue seems to be distrusting the motives, which is completely reasonable (meaning the support and opposition of DC statehood may be more motivated by political power shifts with representation being a justification after the fact). But good things can come out of bad motives. In some ways American society is built on that principle lol.

I also think people are a little angrier right now than they other wise might be thanks to recent events and probably other discussions. I know I have been.

---

Statehood is preferred to ceding to Maryland for several reasons. From most important to least important:

1: The people of DC don't want DC to be ceded to Maryland
2: The people of Maryland don't want DC to be ceded to Maryland
3: It would be spitting in the face of the people and their votes the people have repeatedly cast for statehood
4: They've been separate for 200 years and have developed different laws
5: People in DC have significantly different needs and desires than people in Maryland (yes, significantly moreso than most other large cities compared to most other areas within those states)
6: It would be much more difficult to actually accomplish legally, making it more likely to fail, meaning these people will go even longer without proper representation
7: It would be significantly more expensive
8: There are already many models of how a transition to statehood would work (and those are up to date) that would make the actual transition much easier

Just a few of the reasons why the compromise is a terrible idea. In addition to the fact that it fails to provide any benefit over the statehood option.

---

Other countries also have states and a federal system, including my own (Germany). We not only have "city-states" such as Berlin and Hamburg (gasp!) but also federal buildings on state land (gasp!) , such as the Bundestag (think Parliament) being within the state of Berlin, or the Verfassungsgericht (constitutional court) being within the state of Baden Wrttemberg

No reason why the US can't do the same tbh
---

Crepes posted...

by size sure. By population non

gonna ignore this one huh?

---

is Heavy_D_Forever serious?

---

More like Heavy_D_FoREKTer
---

Heavy_D_Forever posted...

In fact, they carefully crafted the Constitution so the seat of our federal government would not be located in (and therefore possibly partial to) any one state.

the constitution does not specify the location of the seat of federal government

that was done in the permanent seat of government act in 1790

https://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1700s/The-Permanent-Seat-of-Government-Act/

you keep repeating this lie because nobody has made the effort to disprove it

but it's a fucking lie

---

teepan95 posted...

Other countries also have states and a federal system, including my own (Germany). We not only have "city-states" such as Berlin and Hamburg (gasp!) but also federal buildings on state land (gasp!) , such as the Bundestag (think Parliament) being within the state of Berlin, or the Verfassungsgericht (constitutional court) being within the state of Baden Wrttemberg

No reason why the US can't do the same tbh

And apparently having your government on purely federal land does not necessarily mean it is more safe from insurrection.
I always thought that was one of the dumber arguments. There are several reasons Washington D.C. has the status it does:
1) Our constitution was written at a time when the several states actually did have seriously divergent interests
2) The founders thought that was a great thing that should be encouraged
3)D.C. did not exist at the time
4) D.C. is full of black people and has been for a long time(this, in fact, led Congress to strip the city of its autonomy when it happened, and it took decades to even get back what they have now)

give them a senate seat for MAGA tears

---

DarkChozoGhost posted...

Just a few of the reasons why the compromise is a terrible idea.

the main reason the compromise is a terrible idea is democrats have 51 votes in the senate via VP tiebreaker, so there's no reason to compromise

if you have the votes you pass what you want. that's how the GOP appointed ACB, that's how the GOP passed their corporate tax cut, and that's how democrats will pass...biden's cabinet, probably.

---

KStateKing17 posted...

We can add Guam, Puerto Rico and Samoa too.

There's no real reason Caribbean and Pacific territories can't be rolled up into two states, unless Guam and Samoa just don't get along for some reason.

Questionmarktarius posted...

There's no real reason Caribbean and Pacific territories can't be rolled up into two states, unless Guam and Samoa just don't get along for some reason.

there's no reason the dakotas and carolinas can't be two states either

but here we are, majorities will do what's good for them not what's good for the other party

---

I don't think arbitrary things like size should determine whether people have federal representation. And a national guard that doesn't answer to the President.

---

Sackgurl posted...

there's no reason the dakotas and carolinas can't be two states either

Well, let's go fun with it.

Questionmarktarius posted...

Well, let's go fun with it.

sounds good to me

what do you think, 15 or 20 californias?

let's bring the average blue state population down to that of the average red state

---

Sackgurl posted...

what do you think, 15 or 20 californias?

Free Bakersfield!!

Questionmarktarius posted...

Free Bakersfield!!

sorry, the 51 seat majority says it gets rolled in with fresno

san diego finally can be the light red bastion that still probably votes blue nationally in disgust of nazis that it has always wanted to be, though

---

Dc will not be a state because then they wouldlose their hillbilly senate control

---

Sackgurl posted...

sorry, the 51 seat majority says it gets rolled in with fresno

san diego finally can be the light red bastion that still probably votes blue nationally in disgust of nazis that it has always wanted to be, though

Now I'm starting to wonder if a modern take on city-states is really that bad an idea.
The NYC metro area has about fifty times the population of Wyoming.

Germany managed it

Berlin and Hamburg are city states. Bremen is a two-city state
---

it's definitely not a bad idea at all

our conceptualization of house and senate districts/states is arbitrary; it made sense when the variation in national population density was two orders of magnitude less than it is today and the small-large state power discrepancy was a matter of achieving balance, and not establishing small-state supremacy

---

Antifar posted...

I don't think arbitrary things like size should determine whether people have federal representation. And a national guard that doesn't answer to the President.

Yeah. The national guard being deployed against the wishes of the people last year, and being withheld against the people's wishes this week (with the national guard of another state being required for their defense), proves that this original purpose of the District's creation is no longer valid. Also the pentagon is in Virginia.

---