In case you missed this bit of news, the District of Columbia Democratic State Committee passed a resolution last Thursday requesting that President Barack Obama place the “Taxation Without Representation” license plate on the presidential limousine.
“Whereas,” it begins, “substantive and symbolic demonstrations of support for voting rights for the District of Columbia in our national legislature are critical to bring attention to the disenfranchisement of the residents of our nation’s capital:”
The committee follows with a trio of “whereases.”
» It says the committee and the D.C. Council have already asked the president to put the plate on the limo, “which to date has not been done.”
» And Bill Clinton put the plate on his stretch, where it remained until it was “immediately removed” by George W. Bush.
» And candidate Obama pledged his support for D.C. voting rights, and D.C. voters produced “a 92.46 percent electoral avalanche” in the general election.
The Democratic State Committee “again respectfully requests” that Obama put the Taxation Without Representation plate on his ride.
We rarely hear from the Democratic State Committee. Established about 40 years ago at the dawn of local elective politics, it has become known for internecine personal squabbles. Currently, veteran activist and Ward 8 Committeeman Phil Pannell is claiming money collected for the Denver convention became a “slush fund.”
Which leads to my recommendation for the D.C. voting rights movement: Disband and change course. Abandon the high-minded, justice-and-democracy argument and go for the dough. Rather than ask the president to tack on the “Taxation Without Representation” plate, advocate a new one that reads: “Free D.C. — From Taxes.”
Loyal readers of my column know that I have advocated that D.C. become a tax-free zone. Residents of the District would not be responsible for paying federal taxes. We would still vote in presidential elections, as allowed in the Constitution; we would still receive federal funds for roads and schools and such; we would still send our men and women off to war.
But rather than get full voting rights in Congress, which we have never had, we get a pass on federal taxes. Dearly departed Republican standard-bearer Jack Kemp mentioned a tax-free D.C. as part of his flat-tax plan.
There would be complications, of course. We would have to create laws to make sure the capital did not become a tax haven for the absentee rich; and the city would need laws to hold down local taxes.
Consider the upsides. We could quit whining about the need for a commuter tax. Our roads and schools would be funded to the max. If Alaskans get checks from the state’s oil wealth, why not let Washingtonians cash in from our perch as home of the federal government?
As for true political clout, I ask: Are we more likely to get our way in Congress if we have one member with full voting rights; or would we have more raw power if we were wealthy enough to contribute to 435 congressional campaigns and 100 senators?
License plates speak jargon. Money talks.
