You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Politix
DC to get full House seat?
2009-02-25
WASHINGTON — The District of Columbia took a significant step toward winning a full vote in the House on Tuesday as the Senate cleared the way for legislation that would permanently expand House membership for the first time in almost a century.

The Senate voted 62 to 34 to begin debating a measure that would also grant an additional House seat to Utah, enlarging the House to 437 seats. In 2007 supporters of the bill fell three votes short of overcoming a Senate filibuster against it.

Sponsors of the voting bill were optimistic they could win Senate approval by the end of the week after consideration of changes proposed by Republican opponents. The Senate would then begin to work out differences with the House in hopes of quickly sending a bill to President Obama, who has indicated he would sign it. A court challenge is considered a certainty.

Its backers said the fact that about 600,000 residents of the district do not have a voting representative in the House was a continuing injustice similar to civil rights violations of the past. “The district has a population roughly equal to or in fact greater than the states of Alaska, North Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming,” said Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, a chief sponsor of the legislation. “But, sadly, its residents have not been allowed to be full participants in our democracy.”
Never were allowed. That's why it's a district and a not a state.
Even if the legislation is enacted soon, the two new representatives of the House would not be seated until the beginning of the next Congress in January 2011. The premise of the bill is that the new seat for the heavily Democratic district would be offset by one of solidly Republican Utah.

Anticipating a court challenge, the measure seeks to speed a final decision on whether the new seat for the district is legal.

Critics of the measure, pointing to the Constitution’s requirement that House members be chosen “by the people of the several states,” say that it is blatantly unconstitutional and that the District of Columbia can win a voting seat in the House only through a Constitutional amendment — a route that has been tried unsuccessfully in the past. “Only states may be represented in the House of Representatives,” said Senator Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona. “Not territories, not districts or other federal possessions.”

The current number of seats in the House was set in 1911 with 433 members, with a provision for two more when Arizona and New Mexico gained statehood. Currently, the delegate from the District of Columbia can vote in committee but not on final passage of bills. The district would not be entitled to a Senate seat under the bill.
The other solution is, of course, to give the District back to Maryland. That's what happened to Arlington and parts of Alexandria on the Virginia side of the Potomac. Carve out a small central core with the federal buildings and give the rest back. The residents would then have a House seat in the Maryland delegation and could vote for two senators.
Posted by:Steve White

#9  Frank, strictly speaking it takes a Constitutional amendment to give them a voting representative in the House, too. The constitution specifically says that the representatives come from the states. The District of Columbia is not a state.
Of course, with the Dems in control of both houses and the White House, it will be a slam dunk to pass. I wonder if the Supreme Court will have the balls to overturn it.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia   2009-02-25 22:05  

#8  requires a constitutional amendment IIUC, otherwise they'd a done it before now. They know the states won't vote to dilute their own power
Posted by: Frank G   2009-02-25 20:26  

#7  So DC will become the 58th state.
Posted by: DMFD   2009-02-25 20:20  

#6  Jim, especially if they decide that just a representative isn't enough and give them two Senators as well.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia   2009-02-25 17:40  

#5  I'm looking but not seeing, is this an attempt to increase the democrat's majority?
Posted by: Rednek Jim   2009-02-25 14:02  

#4  "Only states may be represented in the House of Representatives," said Senator Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona. "Not territories, not districts or other federal possessions."

Oh, foo, SCOTUS Justice Kennedy says its a living constitution and anything he says it says. L’État c’est Moi. /sarcasm off
Posted by: Procopius2k   2009-02-25 09:56  

#3  .....this is just a power grab in the guise of "equality".

This phrase is a pretty accurate definition of the word Democrat.
Posted by: Besoeker   2009-02-25 08:55  

#2  Â“Only states may be represented in the House of Representatives,” said Senator Jon Kyl
Correct.
The other solution is, of course, to give the District back to Maryland.
Also correct.
I've suggested that for a long time. (The idiots in the Clown College can't see it though.)
Posted by: Spot   2009-02-25 08:31  

#1  But they don't want that - this is just a power grab in the guise of "equality".
Posted by: gromky   2009-02-25 06:51  

00:00