 [WashingtonExaminer] The House of Representatives on Thursday passed legislation that would grant the District of Columbia statehood, though it’s a long shot to become law.
Advocates of statehood for the district, a position advanced mostly by Democrats, often point out that the population in Washington, approximately 700,000 people, is larger than that of both Wyoming and Vermont. It's also within striking distance of Alaska and North Dakota.
The district has limited representation in Congress. Eleanor Holmes Norton represents Washington as a nonvoting delegate in Congress, while statehood would grant residents two senators and a voting representative in the House. And following the adoption of the 23rd Amendment to the Constitution in 1961, residents of the nation's capital can vote in presidential elections. The district has three electoral votes out of 538.
Opponents of statehood, mainly Republicans, argue that Democrats want to grant the district statehood so they can benefit from changes that would occur as a result, like the additional members of Congress. Moreover, Republicans contend the move is unconstitutional because the nation's founders envisioned the capital as a federal district. The founders would oppose shrinking the federal district to a two-mile square enclave comprising the White House, Capitol, Supreme Court, and the Mall, Republicans say.
"This unconstitutional bill is a façade to give President Biden, Speaker Pelosi, and Leader Schumer the power to further intrude into Americans’ daily lives and push their radical policies through Congress," House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said in a statement on Thursday.
The legislation passed in the House on Thursday, H.R. 51, would lead to the creation of the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, which is named after Frederick Douglass.
The House most recently passed a statehood bill last year in a 232-180 vote, but the legislation stalled when the Republican-controlled Senate opted not to vote on it.
Though Democrats now control the evenly split Senate, it’s unlikely the bill will pass, given it will need 60 votes. The only alternative is for the Democrats to eliminate the filibuster, though a handful have refused to do so thus far, holding up a number of Democratic proposals.
| To summarize, kabuki for the rubes, or how a bill does not become a law. |
|
