Cooked Crack Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 WASHINGTON - The District of Columbia's two-century-long wait for a voice in Congress was a step closer to ending Tuesday with a crucial Senate vote to take up legislation giving the capital city's 600,000 residents a full seat in the House of Representatives. The Senate voted 62-34, two more than needed, to begin debate on the measure that would increase the House to 437 members. It would give the Democratic-dominated city a new vote while adding a fourth seat to Republican-leaning Western state of Utah. Key to the vote was that Democrats, who overwhelmingly support the bill, have seven more Senate seats than two years ago when the chamber fell three votes short of the 60 required to end a Republican-led delaying debate. The bill still faces contentious amendments and may have to overcome Republican opposition to moving to a final vote. If it does pass the Senate, possibly by the end of the week, the bill goes on to a receptive House and ultimately to President Barack Obama, who supports it. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29362689/ Last I read its going to be taken up by the House next week. Personally I think we should let DC and the territories have a vote in the House. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Yes, no one who pays taxes should be unrepresented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rincewind Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I think they should have a voice in the Senate as well. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I think they should have a voice in the Senate as well. :2cents: I agree with that too. What happened to no taxation without representation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegionOfDoom Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 House and Senate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 No, Washington is a federal city. If they were a state they obviously would have all of the benefits of being a state. I would be receptive of the idea of attaching them to Maryland for the purpose of getting a voting congressman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 They should either have a vote in both houses, or not pay federal taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacase Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Its a federal city, don't live there if you don't like the rules. Its not like they didn't know what the rules were before they moved there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bird_1972 Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Its a federal city, don't live there if you don't like the rules. Its not like they didn't know what the rules were before they moved there. Do you think they should have to pay federal taxes then, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_Edwards_Fan Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I have a bit of a differant take on this than i think the question is actually asking. I think that the ACTUAL Fed land should be DC, i think that the residential areas of the city should not be part of the federal district. The harder question is what happens to the residential areas, the residential areas of the city dont have the tax base to be self sustaining and neither MD nor VA would want to take on the expense of DC residents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 No. What I think should happen is that the residential areas be returned to Maryland, so that they can vote under that auspice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_Edwards_Fan Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 No. What I think should happen is that the residential areas be returned to Maryland, so that they can vote under that auspice. But is MD willing/able to take on that cost? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacase Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Do you think they should have to pay federal taxes then, too. Why wouldn't they? You still have to pay taxes if you live overseas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 But is MD willing/able to take on that cost? Force them. The Feds assign unfunded mandates all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 OR no taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenspandan Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 such tortured logic is required to say no to this. the people living there are amercan citizens. of course they deserve representation in our government. i thought that was the whole point of democracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Why wouldn't they? You still have to pay taxes if you live overseas. But you still have representation in Congress if you live overseas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacase Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 But you still have representation in Congress if you live overseas. Who represents you if you are an American living in the Philippines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted February 26, 2009 Author Share Posted February 26, 2009 Who represents you if you are an American living in the Philippines? Probably depends on where you're registered to vote. Unless you registered in DC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Its a federal city, don't live there if you don't like the rules. Its not like they didn't know what the rules were before they moved there. the way a democracy works is that people propose rules, legislate them, and then enforce them. If enough people don't like the rules, they change them. That's what's happening right now, it's not that complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 i'm sure the dems being in control have nothing to do with politicians being in favor of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacase Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Probably depends on where you're registered to vote. Unless you registered in DC. So that is basically a WAG? Gotcha you don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 so someone explain the history here... isn't this the way it's been set up since day one? why is it different now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 i'm sure the dems being in control have nothing to do with politicians being in favor of this. Yep. DC voters would by and large vote democratic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Personally, I don't think people should be allowed to live within the District. It kind of defeats the purpose of why it was set up to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.