Should Washington D.C. Have Voting Rights In Congress?
Article I Section 2. The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states, and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislature.No person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the age of twenty five years, and been seven years a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that state in which he shall be chosen.
D.C. voting bill tripped up in the Senate
September 19, 2007
The D.C. voting rights bill failed to attract the 60 votes necessary to limit debate in the Senate on Tuesday as one Democrat joined most Republicans in dealing a major setback to efforts to give the District a full voting member of Congress.
Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), a sponsor of the measure, said he was “deeply disappointed and deeply outraged” by the failure, but remained optimistic.
“We’ve waited too long for this injustice to end … but we’re not going to give up,” Lieberman said. “We’re going to try to get 60 votes during this session.”
Eight Republicans voted for cloture, but Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) voted against it, believing expanding the size of the House would “dilute” Montana’s influence in Congress.
The Republicans who voted for the bill were Sens. Bob Bennett (Utah), Norm Coleman (Minn.), Susan Collins (Maine), Orrin Hatch (Utah), Richard Lugar (Ind.), Olympia Snowe (Maine), Arlen Specter (Pa.) and George Voinovich (Ohio).
Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), who backs full voting rights for the House and Senate, did not vote. Byrd has constitutional concerns with the bill, and favors a resolution that would amend the Constitution.Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) expressed his disappointment, saying citizens who pay taxes, serve on juries and fight in the armed services should be given a voting member of the House.
“If we can send D.C. citizens to fight for democracy in Baghdad and ensure Iraqis have the opportunity to vote, the least we can do is give the same opportunity to our fellow Americans,” Reid said.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said the bill is unconstitutional because the Constitution limits membership in the House to the states and thus excludes the District.
McConnell encouraged citizens to amend the Constitution in order to gain the seat.
“If the residents of the District are to get a member for themselves, there remains a remedy: Amend the Constitution,” he said in a floor statement Monday.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) also voted against cloture. “I come down on the constitutionality side of it,” he said.
Most GOP presidential candidates have not taken a position on the measure. However, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) recently said he backs it.
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), a co-sponsor of the bill, said the measure deserved to pass to give citizens voting rights. “Frankly, if it’s so unconstitutional, then what does the other side have to fear?” he said. “We’re prepared to accept whatever the Supreme Court says.”
The preceding arguments promoting the D.C. voting rights bill are as baseless as the arguments opposing it.
Lieberman calls it an injustice that D.C. does not have a vote in the House. Sorry Joe, but the Constitution says no.
Harry Reid’s reason to add D.C. because, “citizens who pay taxes, serve on juries and fight in the armed services should be given a voting member of the House,” is historically unenlightened. On June 11, 1800 Washington D.C. became the seat of the national government. Taxes were being paid, citizens were serving on juries and citizens joined the armed services in a short time after George Washington’s chosen area for the fledgling nation’s new capital expanded. The idea of granting Washington D.C. a seat in the House was immaterial to the founders.
John McCain and Mitch McConnell’s rationale for opposing the vote paralleled pure constitutional acumen.
Mike Huckabee’s advocacy of the vote is impudent, especially running as a conservative Republican for the 2008 presidency. This is not a gray area or an ad hoc ideological mishap from him. If he does not, at this stage of his political career, have a comprehensive understanding of the Constitution to lead the country within the parameters of its boundaries or deems it irrelevant as a compass for leadership, there is nothing to distinguish him from the Marxist presidential candidates cloaked as Democrats. Both of these processes are defective and are precursors for another Republican President lacking a strong set of conservative values, principles and fundamentals .
Orin Hatch’s “lets just throw it against the wall and see what happens” posture is categorically nonsensical. Hatch’s motivation could probably be the trade off for picking up an extra seat for Utah in the House. If this is his reasoning, it is unethical at best. This is one of the myriad reasons Congress’s approval rating is at 11% today.
Perhaps it is ignorance and apathy of the Constitution, as is the case with Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), or blatant disregard. Either way Olympia Snowes’ statement today is nothing short of dangerous:
When asked whether she supported voting rights for D.C., Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) said “yes.”
And when asked by Cybercast News Service about the Constitution, which says that members of the House shall be chosen by the people of the states and that voting rights for D.C. might require a constitutional amendment, Sen. Snowe said: “Well, I don’t know, I don’t know what the arguments have been, and I haven’t heard from both sides. I think this is a fair and equitable resolution.”
When Cybercast News Service mentioned Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution again, and asked whether providing House representation for D.C. would require a constitutional amendment, Snowe told Cybercast News Service: “I don’t believe it does.”
Should Washington D.C have a seat in the House? Absolutely not under the proposed conditions it would arise from. I state this without prejudice. Either give Washington D.C. statehood or amend the Constitution to allow a seat in the House. There is always a proper remedy. Either way, know enough about your profession to, at the minimum, know the rules and play by them.
[digg=http://digg.com/political_opinion/Should_Washington_D_C_Have_Voting_Rights_In_Congress]
Comments (2)
[...] asked if Washington D.C. should have voting rights in the House Huckabee said he supported it, not an amendment, but a bill. He was constitutionally [...]
[...] asked if Washington D.C. should have voting rights in the House Huckabee said he supported it, not an amendment, but a bill. He was constitutionally [...]