Washington, D.C., Deserves Vote in Congress Now

Reader Comments
Back to article

The 600,000 plus people who reside in D.C. deserve representation. The ONLY reason they don't is because Republican Members of Congress fear additional Democratic representation. But who knows, it's possible that in the future D.C. would vote Republican. Possible I said.

ed of VA 3:28PM March 30, 2009

Those who choose to reside in DC do so under no duress. There are advantages and disadvantages of selecting where to live. One of the disadvantages of choosing to live in DC is having no Congressional representation. Similarly one of the disadvantages of living in Minnesota is colder winters, and one of the disadvantages of living in San Diego is proximity to the Mexican border. Anyone who values Congressional representation highly should choose to live where it is available.

James Gilbert of VA 10:32AM March 21, 2009

It's amazing how so many people are either completely ignorant of the Constitution or simply to choose to completely ignore it. It is an imperfect document, that is why the framers gave us a mechanism to change it to suit future needs of the people. If you don't like what's in it then change it legally, don't pass unconstitutional laws. The problem with the Congress is that they too see that the Supreme Court ignores the Constitution so why can't they too. The ruling several years ago to allow the confiscation of land in CT for private use (not public use) is a perfect example. It seems all too many people skip the 9th and 10th Amendments if they ever do choose to read it.

Glenn of NY 9:07PM March 19, 2009

Read the 23rd amendment in the constitution. In it there is a description of the "District of Columbia" that clearly points out "if it were a state" would have representation of which would be no more than the least populous state.
Is this group of residents better than the rest of the nation that it does not have to abide by the law of the land? You would think that if you had someone in the family who was a historian you as the the author of this story wouldn't right such misinformation intentionally. I guess there is no accounting for Mr Schlesinger's lack of "smarts".
Maybe that is why I think he is dumber than a box of rocks

Jeff of WI 10:11PM March 09, 2009

DC was intended by our Founding Fathers to be a center of Government. It is not a state or a commonwealth. If residents get the representative then what is to stop with another, and Senators. Then the territories will think they should have the same. Quit trampling upon the constitution. If DC residents want that vote then they should move to Virginia or Maryland and let the city convert to what it was intended: a government center.

Eve of VA 8:01PM March 08, 2009

I was thinking that too -- that DC could be a Congressional district within Maryland without ceasing to be the D of C and the nation's capital.
OTOH, DC deserves its own two senators at least as much as Alaska, say.
The language in the Constitution is problematic, and it would be ideal to answer that question before the book is closed on this -- ie, should DC get Senators, too?
It's a fair question to ask. The national government CREATED the D of C, and it is required to provide for the rights of the residents there, as James Madison so optimistically suggested.
Historically, DC was under the thumb of racist Southern Democrats. It WAS the "last plantation". An ancient guy named Smith, from Virginia, IIRC, was the "massa" for over 20 years.
How? Because the US Congress controlled the purse strings of the D of C. Totally.
This WAS a scandal, as was the subsequent Republican rule of the Plantation since 1994.
There is the question here of providing representation, and also the related question of redressing historical injustices.
When in doubt, I hope the present bill gets to President Obama's desk ASAP. I don't mind the compromise -- the out-of-state Mormon missionaries from Utah being counted as Utah residents, but I am APPALLED that the Republicans opposed even that compromise -- the present compromise -- two years ago.
Pride goeth before the fall, Republicans. And you have just begun to fall. Now go play with Sarah Palin.

Ralph in Memphis of TN 9:13PM March 06, 2009

Rather than make Washington D. C. a atate or to amend the Constitution, simply legislate it to be a county in Maryland from which it was carved The people living there would be represented by the Maryland members of Congress. That county in Maryland, Washington D. C. would still be the national center of government.

Al. L. Askew of GA 7:58PM March 05, 2009

The U.S. Constitution:
Article. I.
Section. 2.
The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.
Please not that the Constitution states “Of the several States…” Territories were not included.
Section. 3.
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.
Two Senators form each STATE. Once, territories were excluded.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
In order to grant the District of Columbia representation either the Constitution must be amended or D.C. must be granted statehood.
This is the supreme law of the land, and it must be enforced.

Willbill of TN 4:35PM March 05, 2009

The only thing disenfranchising residents of the District of Columbia is the US Constitution.But its a big thing and it has been around for 222 years so there has been plenty of time to learn its provisions.I knew when i moved here that I would not be voting in Congressional elections, but chose to do so anyway and if I ever decide that Congressional representation is more important than living here I'll move.The whiners who want to ignore the Constitution because it suits them should get a real life.

Tom Powers of DC 2:57PM March 05, 2009

Article One of the United States Constitution provides for a federal district, DISTINCT from the states, to serve as the permanent national capital. The centers of all three branches of the federal government of the United States are located in the District
If you don't like the arragnement then move, but don't change the Constitution to fit YOUR needs.

Larry of CA 12:46PM March 05, 2009