Make DC a state?

[Allenstadt]

I'm not an american, but I read some interesting articles about how american citizens in Washington DC have some barriers to voting.

Population-wise, DC is more populous than two current state (Vermont and Wyoming)

While the 23rd amendment, passed in 1960, gave the District of Columbia 3 electors, but its delegate to the House is nonvoting, and it has no senators.

The elected mayor also has some power, but the laws in DC are ultimately federal laws, and any changes made by the mayor can be overridden by Congress.

If DC were to become a state, it would be the fastest growing state (17.3%), and would be the most Democrat-leaning state, surpassing Hawaii (Trump received just 5% of the vote to Clinton's 90% in DC in 2020). As a result, it is currently unlikely to become a state with a republican-controlled Senate and Presidency.

Another option is to cede most of DC back to Maryland, giving Maryland more Representatives and electoral votes to account for it. There would only be a small federal area encompassing the White house and Congress not ceded. In 1946, some land was ceded back to Virginia.

A bill to make it a state passed in the House, but Senate leader Mconell said he will encourage Republicans to vote against it.

So, what do YOU think? should DC become a state?

Here is an helpful link to read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statehood ... f_Columbia

[Nobel Hobos 2]

I'm OK with it. Not a high priority.

American citizens in Puerto Rico have "some barriers to voting" also!

[Eukaryotic Cells]

I'm not an american, but I read some interesting articles about how american citizens in Washington DC have some barriers to voting.

Population-wise, DC is more populous than two current state (Vermont and Wyoming)

While the 23rd amendment, passed in 1960, gave the District of Columbia 3 electors, but its delegate to the House is nonvoting, and it has no senators.

The elected mayor also has some power, but the laws in DC are ultimately federal laws, and any changes made by the mayor can be overridden by Congress.

If DC were to become a state, it would be the fastest growing state (17.3%), and would be the most Democrat-leaning state, surpassing Hawaii (Trump received just 5% of the vote to Clinton's 90% in DC in 2020). As a result, it is currently unlikely to become a state with a republican-controlled Senate and Presidency.

Another option is to cede most of DC back to Maryland, giving Maryland more Representatives and electoral votes to account for it. There would only be a small federal area encompassing the White house and Congress not ceded. In 1946, some land was ceded back to Virginia.

A bill to make it a state passed in the House, but Senate leader Mconell said he will encourage Republicans to vote against it.

So, what do YOU think? should DC become a state?

Here is an helpful link to read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statehood ... f_Columbia

I'd favor cession of most of the territory to Maryland. This would solve the problem of political representation and Congressional interference in the city's affairs, while also not upsetting the current political balance within the US Senate.

Retrocession should be approved by the population of Washington DC and by the state of Maryland.

[Kowani]

Here we go again

[Chan Island]

Yes. No taxation without representation. Simple as.

[Heloin]

I'd favor cession of most of the territory to Maryland. This would solve the problem of political representation and Congressional interference in the city's affairs, while also not upsetting the current political balance within the US Senate.

Retrocession should be approved by the population of Washington DC and by the state of Maryland.

Every time retrocession is brought up as an answer it's just openly saying that the wishes of the people of DC don't matter. It's not something DC or Maryland wants so why desperately try and force it upon them?

[Eukaryotic Cells]

I'd favor cession of most of the territory to Maryland. This would solve the problem of political representation and Congressional interference in the city's affairs, while also not upsetting the current political balance within the US Senate.

Retrocession should be approved by the population of Washington DC and by the state of Maryland.

Every time retrocession is brought up as an answer it's just openly saying that the wishes of the people of DC don't matter. It's not something DC or Maryland wants so why desperately try and force it upon them?

Hence the proviso I added at the end.

I don't see statehood happening unless the Democrats get a filibuster proof majority in the Senate (or do away with the filibuster). Republicans do not want to award the Democrats two new safe seats in the Senate. The whole thing reminds me of the consternation that would occur whenever new states were admitted to the union in the run-up to the Civil War.

Another compromise might be to pass a law strengthening DC home rule.

[Heloin]

Every time retrocession is brought up as an answer it's just openly saying that the wishes of the people of DC don't matter. It's not something DC or Maryland wants so why desperately try and force it upon them?

Hence the proviso I added at the end.

I don't see statehood happening unless the Democrats get a filibuster proof majority in the Senate (or do away with the filibuster). Republicans do not want to award the Democrats two new safe seats in the Senate. The whole thing reminds me of the consternation that would occur whenever new states were admitted to the union in the run-up to the Civil War.

Another compromise might be to pass a law strengthening DC home rule.

No, everything your saying is just insisting that the people of DC don't matter. That's what every argument against DC statehood boils down to.

[Eukaryotic Cells]

Hence the proviso I added at the end.

I don't see statehood happening unless the Democrats get a filibuster proof majority in the Senate (or do away with the filibuster). Republicans do not want to award the Democrats two new safe seats in the Senate. The whole thing reminds me of the consternation that would occur whenever new states were admitted to the union in the run-up to the Civil War.

Another compromise might be to pass a law strengthening DC home rule.

No, everything your saying is just insisting that the people of DC don't matter. That's what every argument against DC statehood boils down to.

That's the reality of today's political climate unfortunately.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

I'd favor cession of most of the territory to Maryland. This would solve the problem of political representation and Congressional interference in the city's affairs, while also not upsetting the current political balance within the US Senate.

Retrocession should be approved by the population of Washington DC and by the state of Maryland.

Every time retrocession is brought up as an answer it's just openly saying that the wishes of the people of DC don't matter. It's not something DC or Maryland wants so why desperately try and force it upon them?

Seems to be one of those 3-option things that are notoriously hard to decide by referendum.

Stay the same
Become a state
Retrocede

What's worse, is that "stay the same" will always be the second choice for people who really hate one of the other options. So if public opinion starts to move towards "retrocede" some of the "state" proponents will make a tactical move to "stay the same".

Australia's referendum on becoming a Republic went that way. There was a convention to decide on what kind of republic should be put on the referendum ballot, and the longer the different factions of Republicers argued about it, the less and less voters thought any kind of Republic is a good idea. The more public the manufacture of the sausage is, the fewer people want to eat it. All the worst features of each option have been pointed out and ... well "No" to the proposed Republic system was the decisive result.

Weirdly enough, I'm for an Australian Republic but I'm glad the referendum failed. The model proposed was weak, and if it had been adopted that would be it for ever. This way, Republicers can try again in a few years.

Never mind Australia. A better example of how a three-way choice can drag on for ages is Puerto Rico.

[Heloin]

Every time retrocession is brought up as an answer it's just openly saying that the wishes of the people of DC don't matter. It's not something DC or Maryland wants so why desperately try and force it upon them?

Seems to be one of those 3-option things that are notoriously hard to decide by referendum.

Stay the same
Become a state
Retrocede

What's worse, is that "stay the same" will always be the second choice for people who really hate one of the other options. So if public opinion starts to move towards "retrocede" some of the "state" proponents will make a tactical move to "stay the same".

Australia's referendum on becoming a Republic went that way. There was a convention to decide on what kind of republic should be put on the referendum ballot, and the longer the different factions of Republicers argued about it, the less and less voters thought any kind of Republic is a good idea. The more public the manufacture of the sausage is, the fewer people want to eat it. All the worst features of each option have been pointed out and ... well "No" to the proposed Republic system was the decisive result.

Weirdly enough, I'm for an Australian Republic but I'm glad the referendum failed. The model proposed was weak, and if it had been adopted that would be it for ever. This way, Republicers can try again in a few years.

Never mind Australia. A better example of how a three-way choice can drag on for ages is Puerto Rico.

That'd make sense for DC and Puerto Rico if both elections where the choice of statehood was brought up was only barely won. But the isn't the case in either https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Puer ... referendum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Wash ... referendum

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Hence the proviso I added at the end.

I don't see statehood happening unless the Democrats get a filibuster proof majority in the Senate (or do away with the filibuster). Republicans do not want to award the Democrats two new safe seats in the Senate. The whole thing reminds me of the consternation that would occur whenever new states were admitted to the union in the run-up to the Civil War.

Another compromise might be to pass a law strengthening DC home rule.

No, everything your saying is just insisting that the people of DC don't matter. That's what every argument against DC statehood boils down to.

Imo, you can't honestly poll the opinions of DC people without giving them the three options. The first time you do that, retrocession will probably come a long third because so many people have never considered it (and it's a bad-looking word too, repelling people who know only a little about it). But the next time, it will probably do better. Polling can move the Overton Window: ideas stop being Fringe when they get into double figures, and people are actively interesting in learning about that option when it gets into the 20's.

But then you have the "trilemma" problem I spoke about above. If I was strongly for one of the other options, I'd be trying to keep Retrocession out of polling or any kind of referendum.

[Heloin]

No, everything your saying is just insisting that the people of DC don't matter. That's what every argument against DC statehood boils down to.

That's the reality of today's political climate unfortunately.

Political realities of why it isn't happening isn't an excuse to throw people under the bus. Anyone knows that DC won't be getting statehood this year, you have to play the stupid game of politics. That doesn't mean the option should be to throw the people of DC under the bus with the alternate "answers" to the problem when they have a solution that they want.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Seems to be one of those 3-option things that are notoriously hard to decide by referendum.

Stay the same
Become a state
Retrocede

What's worse, is that "stay the same" will always be the second choice for people who really hate one of the other options. So if public opinion starts to move towards "retrocede" some of the "state" proponents will make a tactical move to "stay the same".

Australia's referendum on becoming a Republic went that way. There was a convention to decide on what kind of republic should be put on the referendum ballot, and the longer the different factions of Republicers argued about it, the less and less voters thought any kind of Republic is a good idea. The more public the manufacture of the sausage is, the fewer people want to eat it. All the worst features of each option have been pointed out and ... well "No" to the proposed Republic system was the decisive result.

Weirdly enough, I'm for an Australian Republic but I'm glad the referendum failed. The model proposed was weak, and if it had been adopted that would be it for ever. This way, Republicers can try again in a few years.

Never mind Australia. A better example of how a three-way choice can drag on for ages is Puerto Rico.

That'd make sense for DC and Puerto Rico if both elections where the choice of statehood was brought up was only barely won. But the isn't the case in either https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Puer ... referendum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Wash ... referendum

2012, Puerto Rico. I remember. It's bogus, no option (provably) won. Maybe >50% chance Statehood won.
2016, DC. Huge win. Sorry DC, that must suck for you. Who wouldn't want to be a State?

[Heloin]

No, everything your saying is just insisting that the people of DC don't matter. That's what every argument against DC statehood boils down to.

Imo, you can't honestly poll the opinions of DC people without giving them the three options. The first time you do that, retrocession will probably come a long third because so many people have never considered it (and it's a bad-looking word too, repelling people who know only a little about it). But the next time, it will probably do better. Polling can move the Overton Window: ideas stop being Fringe when they get into double figures, and people are actively interesting in learning about that option when it gets into the 20's.

But then you have the "trilemma" problem I spoke about above. If I was strongly for one of the other options, I'd be trying to keep Retrocession out of polling or any kind of referendum.

Once you get past that super majority point of an options popularity with the voters then it's no longer possible to try and say that there are other options that people want. DC's vote goes well beyond that to the point that a third option of retrocession would be a joke.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Imo, you can't honestly poll the opinions of DC people without giving them the three options. The first time you do that, retrocession will probably come a long third because so many people have never considered it (and it's a bad-looking word too, repelling people who know only a little about it). But the next time, it will probably do better. Polling can move the Overton Window: ideas stop being Fringe when they get into double figures, and people are actively interesting in learning about that option when it gets into the 20's.

But then you have the "trilemma" problem I spoke about above. If I was strongly for one of the other options, I'd be trying to keep Retrocession out of polling or any kind of referendum.

Once you get past that super majority point of an options popularity with the voters then it's no longer possible to try and say that there are other options that people want. DC's vote goes well beyond that to the point that a third option of retrocession would be a joke.

It might take a while to persuade them (a) Statehood ain't gonna happen baby, and (b) being part of Maryland is better than what they have now.

It might take a long while. Statehood is great prize. But starting the retrocession movement anyway does no harm, though it might feel a bit futile. I'm really quite sure some people know Statehood isn't on, but would settle for anything arguably better than the status quo. No movement ever gets started looking at opinion polls where the biggest result is Don't Know.

[Exxosia]

DC should be depopulated and residential zones demolished.

All government workers holding offices related to state associated functions such as senators and congressdemons should have residences and offices within their representative states and districts with a remote system in place. Any government workers whose jobs are wholly DC based will live in the adjacent states and commute in. The remnant of DC will be split into a public zone and government zone.

DC has no place existing in 2020 aside from being a national government hub, presidential palace, and national museum/monument location. We have the technology to move every politician to within their states and districts and not have a massive population essentially being either a support caste or a ghetto for DC. It would also mean these Senators and congressdemons would be easily reached by their constituents instead of living thousands of miles away and burning off tax dollars galavanting around.

[Eukaryotic Cells]

That's the reality of today's political climate unfortunately.

Political realities of why it isn't happening isn't an excuse to throw people under the bus. Anyone knows that DC won't be getting statehood this year, you have to play the stupid game of politics. That doesn't mean the option should be to throw the people of DC under the bus with the alternate "answers" to the problem when they have a solution that they want.

I don't view it as an excuse, really. I view these intermediate solutions as being preferable to the current situation. With retrocession, you do kill any chance of statehood in the long run, so perhaps a strengthening of home rule is preferable from that point of view.

What the people of DC want is all well and good, but what the people in the US Congress want is of greater importance (not from a moral point of view, but as a matter of fact). Republicans are not going along for this ride, they're going to need to be swept out of government if you want DC to be a state. There's also going to an immediate legal battle if you do try to grant DC statehood.

[Of Zigarozia]

DC should be depopulated and residential zones demolished.

All government workers holding offices related to state associated functions such as senators and congressdemons should have residences and offices within their representative states and districts with a remote system in place. Any government workers whose jobs are wholly DC based will live in the adjacent states and commute in. The remnant of DC will be split into a public zone and government zone.

DC has no place existing in 2020 aside from being a national government hub, presidential palace, and national museum/monument location. We have the technology to move every politician to within their states and districts and not have a massive population essentially being either a support caste or a ghetto for DC. It would also mean these Senators and congressdemons would be easily reached by their constituents instead of living thousands of miles away and burning off tax dollars galavanting around.

How... how would that work? billions of dollars required to move people, rehouse people, reimburse people, demolish buildings, and anyway, 30% of jobs in DC are provided by the US govt.

[Of Zigarozia]

also... 'congressdemons?'?

[Allenstadt]

I really doubt that anyone will make DC a state soon, but it will probably soon get home government (or should)
I doubt the republicans would be as angry if they were trying to make Wyomning a state.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

DC should be depopulated and residential zones demolished.

All government workers holding offices related to state associated functions such as senators and congressdemons should have residences and offices within their representative states and districts with a remote system in place. Any government workers whose jobs are wholly DC based will live in the adjacent states and commute in. The remnant of DC will be split into a public zone and government zone.

DC has no place existing in 2020 aside from being a national government hub, presidential palace, and national museum/monument location. We have the technology to move every politician to within their states and districts and not have a massive population essentially being either a support caste or a ghetto for DC. It would also mean these Senators and congressdemons would be easily reached by their constituents instead of living thousands of miles away and burning off tax dollars galavanting around.

A bit drastic but not too far out-there.
DC seems to have a lot of space for the use you propose (residence for government officials), so either that's for future expansion of government staff, or it's going to be a big manicured park at taxpayer expense. Kicking out half a million people for that doesn't sit right with me.
Why are staff even required? If Congress is now virtual, can't their staff work from their home state too?

If you're not going to use the land for something, don't kick the people out, just make the borders much smaller around the historic government buildings and monuments. Leaving all the people there, but now as citizens of Maryland.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

also... 'congressdemons?'?

I suggest Congressmonks ... with the perhaps idealistic assumption they never have sex in the actual Congress.

Anyone wishing to be disrespectful can call them Congressmonkies.

[Greed and Death]

Yes. No taxation without representation. Simple as.

Remove the personal income tax in DC the lobbyist in DC will support it.

[Greed and Death]

I really doubt that anyone will make DC a state soon, but it will probably soon get home government (or should)
I doubt the republicans would be as angry if they were trying to make Wyomning a state.

It already has home rule subject to congressional override.

Wyoming was made a state in 1890 after its population had tripled in a 10 year period and when farming made up some 80% of the US population. DC's population has declined form its peak in the 1950s and has only slightly began to rebound since the late 2000's a trend most likely reversed due to the pandemic and civil unrest.

In summation Wyoming was made a state when farming and ranching was the focus of the US economy and envisioned to continue as such, currently the focus of the US economy is the suburbs which DC lacks (because they are in neighboring states states) so population projections will most likely have DC stagnating or shirking again.