Opinion

[Print]  [Email]        

Read the Constitution: D.C. is not a state

Examiner Editorial
-
February 23, 2009

 

Which part of Article I, Section 2 do proponents of the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009 not comprehend? The Constitution of the United States clearly states that “the House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states.” The Constitution created D.C. as the federal “seat of government” – not as a state. Therefore, D.C. cannot have a voting Member of the U.S. House of Representatives. Proponents are correct that the Constitution gives Congress the right to make all laws for the District. But that clearly does not permit Congress to substitute its will for that of the whole people to rewrite the Constitution. So, until the Constitution is amended to make D.C. a state, creating a voting representative for it as if it were a state would be “the most premeditatedly unconstitutional act by Congress in decades," in the words of George Washington Law School professor Jonathan Turley.

The District of Columbia’s (Non-voting) Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton sponsors the bill in the House, while its major backers in the Senate are Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Sen. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn. Norton, of course, is playing the demagogue on this issue for the “folks back home,” but Hatch and Lieberman should know better. The latter has shown great courage in recent years by opposing efforts by liberal Democrats in Congress to undercut U.S. troops in Iraq. He should summon similar courage to fight efforts by many of the same liberal Democrats to undercut the Constitution by giving D.C. a voting representative.

Hatch really should know better. Utah is among the nation’s most consistently conservative states, and many of its residents pride themselves for their support of the Constitution. Their support is in great part due to the immense respect accorded the nation’s founding document by the Church of Latter-Day Saints or Mormons. There is even a Mormon tradition that the day will come when the Constitution hangs by a thread and a Mormon official bravely steps forward to rescue it. So it is doubly disturbing to see Hatch, a former Mormon bishop, pushing unconstitutional legislation that would otherwise go nowhere without his backing. Have even Utah Republicans come to so disrespect the Constitution that they would forsake its timeless words for a venal political deal that gives them another House seat? Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, has the honest solution: Either exempt District residents from federal taxation, or ask the people of the whole United States to amend the Constitution to declare the District a state. Otherwise, why have the Constitution in the first place?



beltway confidential

A cursory reading of this Las Vegas Sun report, "Prospects For Organized Labor's Legislative Agenda Rapidly Fading," suggests -- and not without evidence -- that Big Labor isn't...

The headline on Bloomberg's obituary for the recently deceased Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., is "Lawmaker Murtha, Supporter of Troops, Dies at Age 77." That's a bizarre headline for...

Republicans and business interests were already deeply suspect of Craig Becker, Obama's nominee to the National Labor Relations Board. Becker was formerly counsel to the AFL-CIO...

Just a few years after scandal nearly destroyed the Buckeye State's GOP, Rasmussen has the Ohio Republican candidates for governor and Senate leading their Democratic...






Most Popular Headlines





To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 8.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.


 


 



 

Reader Comments

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Examiner or its staff. Comment box is limited to 250 words.

Dropping By

Feb 24, 2009

Hatch is way past his due date -- folks in Utah, like me, are absolutely appalled at this bizarre and unconstitutional power play. But our complaints to Hatch's office have fallen on deaf ears. Hopefully, someone will figure out a way to assert "standing," and the courts will be able to overturn our (very) senior senator's latest nonsense adventure.

 

DC John

Feb 24, 2009

No one has said that DC is a State throughout this debate.(although that moniker has been forced upon us for every other federal mandate.) This argument is the lamest of reasons NOT to grant us representation in the House.

 

GOP Opposes Democratic Voters

Feb 24, 2009

The population of DC (which is larger than the population of Wyoming -- which as 2 Senators and Representative in Congress) deserves real representation in Congress. The bill discussed here, proposed by Republican Tom Davis when he was is office, is just common sense. If DC were full of Republicans, this bill would passed happened long ago. Believe me, the Constitution would NOT have been an obstacle. Don't make me laugh.

 

AD

Feb 24, 2009

For representational purposes, return the residents of DC to Maryland, where they may vote for Members of both the House and Senate. That is within the powers of Congress, the proposal contained in the Norton/Hatch-Lieberman bill is not. If this is such a neccessary issue, let the authors submit a Constitutional Amendment for consideration.

 

Feb 24, 2009

Taxation without representation was wrong then, and it is wrong now. if you do not want DC residents to have a voice and vote in Congress, then stop taking their tax dollars. The Constitution also said some people were 3/5 human and thus had no rights. Would you have objected to amending that too? The document was meant to be an evolving document. If we cannot improve it what is the point of having it?

 

JamesOtisGhost

Feb 24, 2009

There is a process for improving the Constitution - so use it. The "representatives" in Congress ceased to represent us quite some time ago. Our only hope to preserve our liberties is to make them play by the rules. We have 3 choices just here in this comment list: Put the DC folks in Maryland's jurisdiction, stop taxing them, or submit a Constitutional Amendment. This isn't that difficult, it's just hard.

 

TopCat

Feb 24, 2009

Since I don't have federal representation and I'm not a state why have my grandparents, parents, aunts, uncles, cousins & siblings been paying Federal taxes, serving in the U.S. military, fighting wars and the such still being taxed without representation? I'd sure like to stop paying federal taxes since I don't have any say in what goes on in this country and my City Government is at the whim of 535 other peoples representatives, will you write your congressperson and help me to stop this illegal act?

 

TopCat

Feb 24, 2009

I got it now!!! Let us vote in every state!!!!!......since they all come to this area to live temporarily I should be able to vote in every state of the Union!!!.....

 

Tom

Feb 24, 2009

Why would you have to make DC a state?? Your lack of understanding of the constitution diminishes your editorial. The constitution can be ammended to include DC, without making it a state.

 

MD for DC Congress Vote

Feb 24, 2009

I support a Constitutional Referendum for DC Congressional Representation, and I dare you to vote against it. As soon as the Amendment is proposed, your editorials will fight it, citing the "original intent" of the Founding Fathers. They have been corrected before, on suffrage for women and blacks. What makes them so right on this issue? How is DC significantly different from any other state with federal land, including Maryland?

 

Grampa Bill

Feb 24, 2009

The solution is simple. Physically shrink the District to those few square miles which actually house the Federal Government. All residential areas go to either Virginia or Maryland and the residents thereof gain the rights and responsibilities of the rest of us.

 

Jim

Feb 24, 2009

The reason Hatch is sponsoring it is because it finally gets Utah the extra seat it deserves in the House. What's unconstitutional is the way that Congress has manipulated and continues to manipulate the census to suit it's out ends in terms of 'balance' of power (aka, struggle for power).

 

studakota

Feb 24, 2009

Anyone adhering to belief in a religion whose founder professed to "FINDING" and then,somehow,"LOSING" a number of "GOLDEN" plates, in the 1830's, no less,should not be taken seriously.

 

areyoukiddingme

Feb 24, 2009

The constitution also states "direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States". . . So DC either pays no taxes or gets voting rights. Yes, this is an imperfect solution. DC should become a State (the arguments for statehood are compelling), but that process requires HUGE time, HUGE money, and HUGE education of ignorant people who don't understand that Washington DC is a REAL CITY, with REAL PEOPLE who live here, not just a collection of monuments! Basic logic should prevail. The Washington Times should be renamed The Right-wing Times and get the hell out of my city!

 

Sandra

Feb 24, 2009

Last time I checked, DC residents vote for a shadow delegation with one purpose: to lobby for DC Statehood. When did DC residents vote to settle for taxation with 1/3 representation?

 

jrp

Feb 24, 2009

The media is the main group that will not give equal time or attention to anything said about STATEHOOD for DC. Then you cry like cowards when you think the Constitution is violated. What about the violation on 660,000 residents of DC. I bet the majority of your editorial staff live in Maryland or Virginia where you are represented in the House and Senate.

 

John S.

Feb 24, 2009

Editor - The name of the Church is not the Church of Latter-day Saints. It is the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints.

 

Anti Examiner

Feb 24, 2009

Once again, the cowards hiding behind the Constitution. I thought the U.S. Constitution is a 'living document'. Or does that only apply to American citizens who reside in a 'state' not the 600,000 AMERICAN CITIZENS living in DC???? I'm sure the cowards in Congress can amend the Constitution so DC will have a vote in the Senate and House.

 

Pete

Mar 1, 2009

RE: "The document was meant to be an evolving document.If we cannot improve it what is the point of having it?" The process by which the Constitution may 'evolve' is by Amendment. Other than that the Constitution is as written. Period.

 

Mar 1, 2009

alright look at it this way. all crosby has to do is score ten more goals and our lifes go back to normal

 

p.i.m.p.

Mar 1, 2009

alright peps you guys have no lifes and yes im talking to you Mr. Dc john and you jim

 

Former Congressional Staff

Mar 19, 2009

When I worked in Washington, I lived in DC and still have friends who do. Yes, DC taxes are absurd but that is less due to their "statehood status" than it is due to their local taxes - just like the rest of us who are taxed by federal, state, county, city, sales tax etc. When I worked in Congress, even the Conservatives took on DC as a pet project, proposing money, pilot projects for school vouchers allowing residents to pick their own school. DC is not taxed with out representation any more than any other big city - in fact, they may just be OVER represented.

 


Post a comment


Email:
(This will not be displayed or shared. Privacy Policy)

Your Name:

Comment:




Local

Another snowball fight planned for Dupont Circle

The Official Dupont Circle Snowball Fight facebook fanpage has over 6,000 fans now, and it looks as if snowed in DC'ers will return for another battle. Full story

Politics

GOP winning war over Miranda rights for terrorists

Even as the administration defends its decision to grant accused Detroit bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab the right to remain silent, the president himself is hinting that things might be done differently in the future. Full story

Local

D.C. region braces for up to 20 more inches of snow

The National Weather Service has the entire D.C. metro area, from Prince William County north, under a winter storm warning for 10 to 20 inches of snow. Forecasters have had their eyes on this storm for days, but the projected snow totals were bumped up late Monday. Full story