If D.C. becomes a "state", what stops other cities from becoming states?

[oze]

To do it legally, it would require a Constitutional Amendment to make D.C. a state.
But the US Constitution is the last thing Democrats care about or abide by (if at all).

Unfortunately, that's not true. What the donkeys plan to do is to redefine the federal District of Columbia to a tiny zone encompassing the Capitol Building, White House, etc. The rest would be their 51st state.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

 

[JEBland]

Right now 6 counties in my area vote on constitutional lines, yet one large county overrides us and we have no say in anything. In a way our vote and our ideals mean nothing and do not get represented.

The house of representatives is way under what the constitution calls for per population. This is another reason for lack of representation.

These are two separate issues, right? I agree that these are genuine problems, and they deserve detailed answers (I don't study either in detail, and I don't have a team of people to do a good job of figuring out those solutions, so I'll skip the debate on them). But calling people totalitarians while also asking them to change the way that votes are counted isn't productive, to say the least.

 

[DadSmith]

These are two separate issues, right? I agree that these are genuine problems, and they deserve detailed answers (I don't study either in detail, and I don't have a team of people to do a good job of figuring out those solutions, so I'll skip the debate on them). But calling people totalitarians while also asking them to change the way that votes are counted isn't productive, to say the least.

I'd be happy if the House of Representatives was actually expanded to the size the constitution calls for.


The Permanent Apportionment Act in my opinion is unconstitutional.

 

[cobber]

Unfortunately, that's not true. What the donkeys plan to do is to redefine the federal District of Columbia to a tiny zone encompassing the Capitol Building, White House, etc. The rest would be their 51st state.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

Just divvy the 'rest' among Maryland and Virginia. No need to redo the flag with 51 stars.

 

[oze]

Just divvy the 'rest' among Maryland and Virginia. No need to redo the flag with 51 stars.

But the whole point is to guarantee 2 extra donkeys in the Senate in perpetuity.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

 

[cobber]

Heck, why couldn’t the GOP come along the next congressional session and make, say, Fountain County a State? Why would it have to be a city?

 

[SnoopLoggyDog]

Please check your spelling in the future, it is feelz, please make a note of it. LOL

My sincere apologies. I'm just an old boomer with a crusty sense of reality.

 

[Bill2905]

Most if not all of these radical leftist bills being passed in the House are not likely to succeed. Their purpose is to satisfy the hard core left wing of the Donkey party and much more importantly, distract everyone from what is going on behind he scenes. While we fight about D.C. statehood or Federalizing elections, no one is watching the border or looking at what is happening inside the multitude of Federal agencies now under Democrat control. That is where they can do a lot of damage with little opposition.

 

[tbhausen]

I think most of the corruption in Springfield happens at the hands of carpetbaggers from Cook County.

Check your spelling. That’s “Crook County”. We used to live in it. Truer words were never spoken.

 

[KLB]

Unfortunately, that's not true. What the donkeys plan to do is to redefine the federal District of Columbia to a tiny zone encompassing the Capitol Building, White House, etc. The rest would be their 51st state.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

If they want to redefine what DC is, anything they remove should go back to the state it originally belonged to.

The issue here is that they never should have allowed anyone to reside in DC except for the politicians.

 

[tbhausen]

But the whole point is to guarantee 2 extra donkeys in the Senate in perpetuity.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

Two asses.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Right now 6 counties in my area vote on constitutional lines, yet one large county overrides us and we have no say in anything. In a way our vote and our ideals mean nothing and do not get represented. The house of representatives is way under what the constitution calls for per population. This is another reason for lack of representation.

Because of this we are literally being taxed and ruled without proper representation.

.

I'd be happy if the House of Representatives was actually expanded to the size the constitution calls for.


The Permanent Apportionment Act in my opinion is unconstitutional.

What does the Constitution call for? I see no minimum number of representatives, other than each state will have at least one. And no more than 1 per 30,000. It doesn't say it has to be 1 per 30,000. If I'm missing something I'd like to see it.

"The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative"

 

[Bugzilla]

Just like it’s in the Constitution that DC cannot become a state, I think that there is also language that states cannot break up into multiple states. But when did the democrats ever care what the Constitution said.

 

[jsx1043]

 

[DadSmith]

.

What does the Constitution call for? I see no minimum number of representatives, other than each state will have at least one. And no more than 1 per 30,000. It doesn't say it has to be 1 per 30,000. If I'm missing something I'd like to see it.

"The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative"

So until 1920 they were adding representatives for every 222,000 then they capped it. I'd say that it was a well established precedence until they capped it.

 

[jsx1043]

Just like it’s in the Constitution that DC cannot become a state, I think that there is also language that states cannot break up into multiple states. But when did the democrats ever care what the Constitution said.

I referenced that above. It can be done but it takes senate approval.

Needless to say, they’ll approve DC, but wouldn’t approve Jefferson (the mix-and-match of parts of Northern California and southern Oregon.

Jefferson (proposed Pacific state) - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Timjoebillybob]

So until 1920 they were adding representatives for every 222,000 then they capped it. I'd say that it was a well established precedence until they capped it.

So precedence and not Constitutional. Big difference.

 

[DadSmith]

So precedence and not Constitutional. Big difference.

Really you are for the system in place now? You like the lack of representation? There should be at least 1,500 representatives in congress for our country to get fair representation.

The way it is set up now millions have no representation.

The way it was going before the cap if there was no cap Indiana would have approximately 30 representatives today.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Really you are for the system in place now? You like the lack of representation? There should be at least 1,500 representatives in congress for our country to get fair representation.

The way it is set up now millions have no representation.

The way it was going before the cap if there was no cap Indiana would have approximately 30 representatives today.

I never said I was for or against it. You are the one who stated that there weren't enough per the Constitution.

And no, everybody has representation. They may just not like it or their representative. And you want to over triple the size of the house?

 

[DadSmith]

I never said I was for or against it. You are the one who stated that there weren't enough per the Constitution.

And no, everybody has representation. They may just not like it or their representative. And you want to over triple the size of the house?

I and 6 counties around me do not. The gerrymandering us with a big liberal county has destroyed our voice. So we do not have representation.

Yes I do. That would give true representation of the people.

Oh again there isn't enough if you go by historical precedence. However, you don't think that since the country ran on precedence for around 130 years it's constitutional.


The SCOTUS even uses precedence.