« Ginger Gilbert's Message to the Media | Main | Motion Denied »

Whew! No new House seats

The House will stay at 435 as legislation to add seats falls short in the Senate, the Associated Press reports:

A bill that would have given District of Columbia residents their first-ever member of Congress died in the Senate on Tuesday, dashing hopes of finally gaining full voting rights after a 206-year wait.

Senators voted 57-42, just three votes short of the 60 needed to move the measure forward. The bill would have created two new House seats: One for the city of about 600,000 people and one for Utah, which narrowly missed out on a fourth seat after the last census.

Read the rest at the link above. The Utah seat was poisoned bait, offering a presumably safe Republican seat in exchange for an absolutely guaranteed Democratic one in DC. Utah missed an extra district by a fraction in the 2002 reapportionment, but they will likely gain it anyway after the 2010 census - at the expense of one of the other 435, in all probability continuing the long-term trend towards the Sun Belt.

The crumbs from the King's table will have to suffice to feed the parasitic District a little longer. Given the size of the subsidies those "crumbs" represent, poor DC won't be losing any weight.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Whew! No new House seats:

» Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator linked with DC and Utah lose bids for House seats

Comments (18)

I understand the reason, at... (Below threshold)

I understand the reason, at least I think I do, that DC is not part of any State.

But a person does have to wonder if it's been good for the people who live there.

If DC, which falls below th... (Below threshold)
The Exposer:

If DC, which falls below the minimum number for a House seat were it in any other two-member+ state, wants to have a full-fledged voting member, let it be adjoined to Maryland. Granting DC a full member is just a prelude to granting it 2 U.S. Senators, and DC has yet to demonstrate political maturity that it is worthy of having such an added responsibility.

This whole situation strike... (Below threshold)

This whole situation strikes me as odd and un-American. I can't imagine being a United States citizen without having any representation in congress. What are they paying their taxes for? Isn't that one of the main reasons America went from a British colony to a sovereign nation? If I was a D.C. resident, my next step would be to demand a refund of all federal taxes I've ever paid, and an "exempt" tax status going forward.

Reverse taxation without re... (Below threshold)

Reverse taxation without representation is tyriffic.

Let's be honest here, shall... (Below threshold)

Let's be honest here, shall we? The posturing by both parties is due to the fact that the Democrats want a guaranteed extra seat, and the Republicans don't want them to have one. This is the reason that DC will never achieve full statehood without Democratic supermajorities in place.

The facts are that there are 600,000 American citizens who have no representation. I don't think merging DC with Maryland is a viable solution either - it would need a statewide referendum, and I can't see Maryland's population being happy to take on DC's multitude of problems. An alternative solution might be to allow DC's House member a vote, and to make Maryland's Senators the senators for "Maryland and DC". One extra Democrat wouldn't make much difference to the House balance, and Maryland tends to send Democrats to the Senate anyway, so it could theoretically work.

And Exposer: can I assume then that you want Wyoming, which has a smaller population than DC, to merge with Montana or Utah?

By that vote margin we shou... (Below threshold)

By that vote margin we should be able to get this through in the next Congress where we are likely to gain 5 or so Senate seats. We'll also have a Democratic president who will sign the bill. The Republicans will look like fools for blocking representation for DC. Another swift move by them to write off the minority vote.

You cannot ADD representati... (Below threshold)

You cannot ADD representatives. Read the constitution. D.C. would have to be recognized and excepted as a state which will never happen. Split it up between Maryland and Virginia if they want representation so much. This is politics plain and simple and "gasp" lead by the democrats. ww

D.C. was never meant to be ... (Below threshold)
Les Nessman:

D.C. was never meant to be represented by Congressmen. It has been this way for centuries. Everyone who has ever lived there knows this, going back several generations. The only reason the Democrats are pushing for this is because it is mostly Black, hence, overwhelmingly Democrat.

Pure politics, and honest Democrats should oppose it. Those who don't are doing so for purely politcal reason. A cheap and dishonorable trick.

Well with all of the high f... (Below threshold)

Well with all of the high fallutin democrap control of congress they should be able to do anything they want. The Sissies won back congress didn't they? Getting dc representation should be a cake walk with all of that pelosi-reed power and their "mandate from the people". heh heh

Constitution anyone???? Hey... (Below threshold)

Constitution anyone???? Hey elected representatives, how about following it! Naw, let's not let an outdated document stand in the way of our continuous grasping of power.

Trackbacked by The Thunder ... (Below threshold)

Trackbacked by The Thunder Run - Web Reconnaissance for 09/19/2007
A short recon of what's out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.

All of these comments are s... (Below threshold)
Granddaddy Long Legs:

All of these comments are spoken by American citizens that already enjoy Federal representation. I just moved to SC from DC after being there for years. There's a reason why the DC license plates read, "Taxation Without Representation" at the bottom. If it was a good idea 230 years ago, it's a good idea now.

And as for everyone who is standing behind the constitution, what do you think Amendments are for? How about new legislation? And in what world would DC want a VA or MD congressman? Why not our own Congressmen and Senators? The district already has Tom Davis, (R-VA - Fairfax) who is practically the federal custodian of the city. I think we could use some real representation, be they Democrat or Republican.

And just to set the record staraight, DC
already has a Congresswoman, but she's ex-officio.

The District was specifical... (Below threshold)

The District was specifically designed as it is. There are no walls forcing anyone to stay in it.

As to the "taxation" angle: we will happily refund 100% of federal taxes paid by DC residents - as soon as they refund HALF of the federal subsidies they've received. Guess who will be writing a check?

DC is the most heavily subsidized city on the face of the earth. What dog gives his fleas a vote?

...especially fleas that ke... (Below threshold)

...especially fleas that kept re-electing that tick marion barry....

DC's residents are fleas? C... (Below threshold)

DC's residents are fleas? Charming. And "if you don't like it, move" is a very poor argument for what is essentially 600,000 disenfranchised people.

I repeat, this is not about principle or about constitionality. We all know perfectly well that if DC was 90% Republican, the Republicans would be making the same arguments, and the Democrats would be making the same complaints. That's politics. And I would submit that the Democrats realized that this would never go through. Even if they got 60 votes, they would never get a veto proof margin. They wanted to either put the Republican Senators in the position of having to justify filibustering DC represenation, or Bush to have to justify vetoing it. That's politics too, and what a shameful place for them to play it.

No. Republicans, you see, ... (Below threshold)

No. Republicans, you see, actually believe that the document called the constitution actually MEANS what is written down on the paper rather than whatever a liberal wants it to mean at that particular time.

I'm sure they do believe in... (Below threshold)

I'm sure they do believe in the letter of the constitution at this point in time. That letter is stopping the Democrats getting an extra seat.

Question: Leaving aside the fact that it has zero chance of passing, if the Democrats get a constitutional amendment tabled that allows DC a vote in Congress, would you support it? And if DC voted 90% Republican, what would your attitude be then?

There are good reasons invo... (Below threshold)

There are good reasons involving the Federal system of government not to allow the Federal reservation that D.C. is to have a vote. Allowing the Federal government itself to be in control of a quasi-state's votes in Congress disturbs the balance of Federalism.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy