I will link to this in my next diary.

How about undoing the questionable retrocession of Alexandria to Virginia? Not only is that clearly a constitutional option, it would turn solve the broader problem faced by DC which is the lack of a sustainable tax base to operate an actual city and could avoid the political issues by turning Virginia back to red.

…is that it’s so far removed from the rest of America. The founders wanted the capitol to be somewhat centrally located in order to provide for access by all Americans. They were afraid that a capital that’s geographically removed from most Americans would become “out of touch” and pehaps even tyrannical.

Welcome to 2009. I think if the founders were alive today, they’d insist it be located in Omaha, Kansas City, or Des Moines.

Indeed you are right, hogan. Reagan was right about this too. In most situtations facing us today, things will improve to the extent you remove government tampering. More layers of regulation and oversight just add to the bloat and further gum up the free market’s ability to fix itself.

The Dems have used the “do something” meme to stampede foolish people (Specter et al) into rash and destructive action.

It occurs to me that the passage of this bill has created opportunities for the Republican Party – and for America – that perhaps haven’t yet been considered. The Stimulus Bill was passed without a single Senator or Congressman (or the President himself) reading the thing or knowing what is in it. At least part of the reason it was passed was that a lot of Americans – and elected officials – had the bejeebers scared out of them and as this article suggests, just wanted to “do something.” They were willing to load everything imaginable into the gun in hopes that when they squeezed the trigger the chances of actually hitting at least one target might be improved. We can’t go back undo the thing. We didn’t have the votes to prevent it, we won’t have the votes to repeal it. At least not in toto. But the way to swallow an elephant is to take one bite at a time.

There are many provisions of the Stimulus Bill that would never have been able to pass had they not been buried in this massive boondoggle. Some of these have already come to light, and as they do Americans will be righteously indignant at the snake oil the Big Government liberals have sold them. One strategy for the Republicans would be to constantly remind the voters that they opposed this thing from the beginning. I would call this the “I told you so” plan. In some ways it has merit, but it makes them come across as victims… victims of the hyper-partisan Democrat majority. The “I told you so” strategy might allow Republicans to feel smug about themselves, but those who are hurt by the Bill (and that will be most Americans) will know by that time that they were wrong to have trusted the Democrats and they will not be comforted to hear someone else tell them “I told you so.”

A better strategy it seems to me, would be for the Republicans in Congress to scour the Bill and identify those individual components that are especially egregious. Rank them from worst to just bad. Call it the “low hanging fruit.” These would be those items of the Bill that would not have had a snowball’s chance in Phoenix of passage if they had been offered on a stand-alone basis. The public would not have stood for them. Beginning immediately, the Republicans should take one of these items every week or every month for the next 1-2 years and offer up bills to repeal that particular section of the larger Stimulus Package. This has the advantage of (1) reminding the country that they are trying to be good stewards with public funds; (2) reminding the country that the Democrats, in their rush to just “do something,” allowed some real stinkers get through; (3) removing the excuse that “I didn’t know that was in there” from the Democrats; (4) forcing the Democrats to go “on the record” for each and every individual piece of this Bill that was passed; (5) keeping the issue before the American public until either they vote the scoundrels out or until they peel enough Blue Dog Dems away from marching lock-step with their Party. When everything’s said and done, the Republicans will not have just one issue (the Stimulus Bill) to run on in the next election, they will have scores of different issues – the various pieces of the Bill that the Democrats refused to repeal. True, the Democrat leadership in the House and Senate are not likely to allow these kinds of bills to come to the floor for a vote. But even that is good for the Republicans as it will give them nowhere to hide in the next election.

along with the overall performance of city managed services, one would think that rather than Congressional representation declaring the city a mental emergency ward would be more appropriate.
Vote? They can’t even think, not that that is a qualification any more.

Of course if there was any chance that DC would send an occasional Republican to Congress talk of representation would vanish into thin air, which is where all liberal principles wind up.

One of the few things Thoreau said with which I agree. (I know, people attribute to Jefferson, but unfortunately, it appears Thoreau said it.)

Here is the strategy I think we should follow as a party. Make the Democrats and Obama own what they are doing. It’s obvious they don’t know what they’re doing unless it involves corruption or theft.
So flood the world with the name Obama. Use it in every day conversation in place of other words. Every plan is the Obama plan. Every obstruction or theft of rights, every attack on the Constitution is the Democrat obstruction, the Obama attack on the Constitution.

The guy is obsessed with himself, his Brand, as he calls it. Flood the market. Make people SICK TO DEATH of his name, sick to death of our complaining about him. Make them wish he’d just go away. Make them sick of the Democrats by extension.

We know it works.
They did it to us.

First
This DC voting rights issue is an injustice only the government is going to be able to correct. And so it should.

You know what else wasn’t a new issue, nor was it likely the biggest problem facing the nation or the world in 1919 and 1920? Women’s suffrage. We got that solved though.

Second

Besides the obvious point that only a small portion of the residents even pay taxes in the first place…

I have no idea where you’re pulling that from. I pay federal taxes here. I have no voting representation in Congress. That’s not ok. Not in this country.

Here’s something to think about in response to Justice Marshall:

Federalists argued that exclusive legislative jurisdiction over the seat of government was needed so the federal government would not be dependent on a state for security in case of mutiny or disruption. Samuel Osgood, a member of the Board of Treasury, said, “It has cost me a sleepless night to find out the most obnoxious part of the proposed plan, and I have finally fixed upon the exclusive legislation in the Ten Miles Square. What an inexhaustible fountain of corruption are we opening?” James Madison argued that the Constitution should be adapted despite concerns because District citizens “will have had their voice in the election of the government which is to exercise authority over them; as a municipal legislature for local purposes, derived from their own suffrages, will of course be allowed them.” Alexander Hamilton proposed an idea that wasn’t adopted – to let DC residents vote in the state from which they had previously belonged (Maryland and Virginia) until their population grew, at which time Congress would give DC voting representation in that body. The historical record indicates that the founders were concerned about the rights of District citizens and left open the possibility that future generations could address the inequity. However, at the time, getting approval for the federal Constitution was more important than assuring national representation for District citizens.

link

Third
I’m not sure what I should be impressed with here. The federal government obviously spends a lot of money here… on itself. And it doesn’t pay taxes as I pointed out before.

About 31 percent of all property value in the District is exempt from property taxation due to the federal and diplomatic presence (21 percent) as well as other tax-exempt properties (10 percent).

link (very informative)

Fourth
You say:

They do have a free will (i.e. they can move).

Some people are born here (not me). How about them? Just pack up and go like the Joads or something? Should we just make everyone in this area commute in from VA or MD? That’s impractical in the extreme.

Then you say:

They do have the entire Congress looking out for them in the end.

Should I be reassured by that? Seriously?

With regard to the Constitutional question, if the Constitution was a perfect document, we’d not have any amendments.

Fun fact: If I lived in Iran, I’d have more of a voice in Congress than I do now.

My point in all this is that this issue affects me personally, and I’d like to see some Republican leadership here. It would be an act of justice and not self-interest. Rare in politics, I know, but possible.

I do appreciate you raising the issue. It is worthy of discussion here and elsewhere.

DC’s representation is the entire representation of the United States of America.

to include proscribing participation in any activity intended to influence a state or federal election and extending it to officers and employees of any organization having a contract or receiving a grant from the federal government. Then and only then I might consider additional political rights for residents of the District.

And just to be clear, I strongly support the same sort of limitations on the rights of ANY public employee to influence the government for which they work and likewise any contractor or grantee of a state or local government.

then what priorities have been freely chosen? An individual choice of some sort has been arrived at, no vote but what other convenience or advantage? You take your pick and you pay your price and apparently not having the vote is not a problem sufficient enough to cause moving.
Therefore it ought not to be a sufficient reason to amend the Constitution.