03-12-2021, 03:27 PM
(03-11-2021, 12:46 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Quote:Absorption into an existing state doesn't resolve the issue entirely unless administration from Annapolis is the representation people of DC want, and the people of MD want to suddenly share power with, and responsibility for, a large new voting block.
They said they want representation, they'd get it that way.
If you say so. I don't see this as a problem that requires a lot of debate. D.C. wants representation, so give it to them. If they want two senators of their very own then their primary concern is not representation, it's outsized political power. All the debate in the world doesn't change that.
Limited? If by limited you mean the exact same as every other single city in the entire United States.
The "easy" here still eludes me. As does the "outsize" political power argument.
Every other city in the U.S. has two senators and at least one voting Representative. DC has none of that.
So they ALL have "outsized power" compared to DC--and without Congress directly interfering in their city administration.
"Let MD represent them, then--problem solved," you say.
There is rarely a lot of debate required on political representation--if the populations in question don't have a say.
As I mentioned earlier, I lived in DC for three years. Moved there in '93, the year the "Columbia Admission Act" failed in Congress.
Back in the '90s the majority of DC wanted statehood, or at least the representation of a state. For them, it's both a sovereignty issue and an issue of racial equality; their debate has been over for some time. As of a 2016 referendum, 86% want it. (Here is the losing side of that debate. https://wamu.org/story/16/11/07/why_some_dc_residents_are_voting_against_statehood/)
I'd be very surprised if any resident were ok being told--"Your representation is in Annapolis now. People you don't know. We'll dilute MD's representation to give you a little. because that's 'easiest'. For someone."
And would MD really think an extra representative was worth the headache? Why would the state GOP ever agree?
When retrocession was floated back in 1998, the Gov. of MD was dead set against it, along with many other MDers, especially GOP, who opposed taking over DC city debts. (And another "urban" problem population, like Baltimore.)
https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1998-03-24-1998083134-story.html
Some DC realtor is floating the idea again, but so far unable to pick up any backers.
(Where is Bpat, anyway? He needs to be heard here.)
You say DC doesn't get to decide by themselves; the nation has a say too.
But if the nation is a democracy, why dismiss debate among the unrepresented as to how they want to be represented,
just to safeguard a superminority with "outsize" power already?
In any case, the national debate is already under way.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/26/house-passes-bill-to-make-washington-dc-the-51st-state.html
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
