Lie of the Day
The lie of the day is that D.C. statehood is over voter disenfranchisement.
To understand the lie, one must first understand the disenfranchisement argument: Over 700,000 people who live in D.C do not have a voting member of Congress or representation in the Senate.
The proposed remedy is to make D.C. a state.
Another remedy would be to reduce the footprint of D.C. so that very few people voters were disenfranchised.
Constitutional Background
- Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution creates a “District (not exceeding ten Miles square)” as the “Seat of Government of the United States.”
- The 23rd Amendment to the Constitution allows American citizens residing in the District of Columbia to vote for presidential electors, who in turn vote in the Electoral College for President and Vice President. In layperson’s terms, the Amendment means that residents of the District are able to vote for President and Vice President.
As a result of the 23rd Amendment, enacted in 1961, now gives DC 3 electoral college votes in presidential elections.
Retrocession Background
If statehood was really only about disenfranchisement, the solution would be easy: Retrocession.
Exactly 100 square miles (259 km2) straddling the Potomac was designated by the 1790 Residence Act as the District of Columbia, ceded by the states of Maryland and Virginia; and the 1801 Organic Act placed the areas under the control of the United States Congress. The portion west of the Potomac, ceded by Virginia, consisted of 31 square miles (80 km2) in two parts: the city of Alexandria, Virginia, at the extreme southern shore, and its rural hinterland, short-lived Alexandria County, D.C. After decades of debate about the disenfranchisement that came with district citizenship, and tensions related to congressional negligence, this portion of the district was returned to Virginia in 1847. The remaining district assumed its current boundaries and area of 68.34 square miles (177 km2) east of the Potomac and 0.19 square miles (0.49 km²) of land on the west side of the Potomac River on Columbia Island.
DC Statehood Politics and Constitutionality
With that background, let’s dive deeper into DC Statehood politics and constitutionality.
Why was Alexandria allowed to retrocede in 1846?
The main stated reason was that the former Virginians on the west side of the Potomac felt neglected by the power base across the river, where the federal buildings were being erected. The real reason may have been that the Virginians feared slavery would be outlawed in DC and they would lose the slave market in Alexandria.
Why not just give most of the Maryland side of DC back to Maryland?
DC residents have their own all-or-nothing approach, choosing not to pursue retrocession of the portion of the District that was formerly part of Maryland.
What would happen to the 23rd Amendment if Congress made DC a state?
The bill before Congress says the US would start undoing the amendment. But it takes an amendment to undo an amendment. A constitutional amendment takes years of effort. While the statehood bill envisions a fast track to this process, it’d have to work flawlessly, otherwise the few people who still lived in the federally controlled district might continue to get three electoral votes. (This type of thing will be the subject of lawsuits.)
What do Americans in general say?
About two-thirds of Americans opposed making DC a state in a Gallup poll in 2019. Interestingly, polling found the reverse for Puerto Rico — two-thirds of Americans supported statehood for the territory.
Are there any other obstacles?
The plan to simply shrink the capital district is clever. But it’s not a foregone conclusion that it’s legal. The Supreme Court currently has a Republican-appointed majority, and it’s an open question how it would rule if Republicans took the case to court.
There’s also the weirdness of a country where such tiny states have such power in the Senate, which can put a stop to any legislation it wants. If we’re going to add seats for DC, why not add seats by breaking up California or Texas or Florida, massive states that only get two senators.
It’s All About Politics
Of course those in DC want a political power grab.
I want to cede from Utah and be my own state too.
In this case, because statehood would give to seats to Democrats the Democrats in Congress are happy to oblige.
But creating an extra state has a national impact. Two-thirds of the country is against the idea.
What Should Republicans Do?
Clearly the bill is headed nowhere. But Republicans should not kill it and walk away.
Republicans should sponsor a bill to cede portions of DC back to Maryland.
Democrats would not go along and that would expose the lie that this is about voter disenfranchisement.
Ten Miles Square
Let’s return to the constitution. Recall that Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution creates a “District (not exceeding ten Miles square)“.
It seems Congress created a district that was 100 square miles.
I interpreted that as 10 square miles but a reader pointed out it means 10 miles a side.
Regardless, this needs to be remedied, not by statehood and not by a Constitutional Amendment, but rather by ceding land back to Maryland.
10 squares miles is likely just about the right size to fit the needed buildings.
Mish
Interestingly, DC politicians ( Marion Barry, for example) used to call DC “America’s Last Plantation”. They don’t do it anymore since with gentrification and the locals moving outside the District to areas with vastly lower taxes and housing costs blacks are now a minority in DC. I expect in 10 years it will be 70% white if housing keeps going up.
Just based on my personal random sample of black people I’ve met from DC, it always seemed to me like DC was a place that attracted a lot of educated upper class black people….with that strong legacy from Howard University and Hampton and other nearby HBCU’s. The area seemed to be a place where the best and brightest African-American people could get ahead in the world. Never lived there, so maybe I’m completely wrong about that.
There’s some of that, but the majority live in what I would consider a slum. The DC school system has very good private schools where the white kids go. And probably the worst public school system in the US. Where the black kids go. The graduation rate in DC public schools is less the 50% and all you have to do to graduate is not drop out. No politician sends their kids to DC public schools.
Add Washington and Oregon to the breakup list as well.
DC has a larger population than Vermont or Wyoming, and comparable to North Dakota and Alaska. Two more senators to represent those people seems nothing but fair. As it stands, the senate is grossly weighted towards rural red states. Minority rule in the US will lead to further unrest and violence.
ROFLOL, Trump = bad man b/c of mean tweets so Mish hated on Trump, ignoring what the conservatives were saying and what Trump was saying.
Trump wasn’t the greatest, but he was the only bulwark against this insanity. But Trump SaID MeAN THinGs.
You get what you deserve.
Find a 100 square miles of empty desert somewhere and move government buildings there stone by stone. Good for gdp and no-one around to pull down statues etc. . If it was placed near a military base it would save on all the commuting also.
I prefer placing it at the geographic center of the nation, half in central Nebraska’s state line with Kansas and the other half in Kansas. It would be large enough to have all the federal offices needed to run a modern nation of a third of a billion people, but only offices and businesses would be located inside this Federal District, all residential would be located outside the district limits with very well planned public transit to swiftly get people into the city to do their jobs.
There are literally mile after mile after miles of nearly nothing all around, the nearest metro areas are a couple hundred miles away. You could build an international airport nearby, and utilities and subways and such would be cheap to install while there is nothing there but empty land as it is now.
This way the residents required for staffing the capitol would be residents of either KS or NE, and because the federal salaries are good, education levels high, they will bring higher population and more education to the states involved.
A lot of people would weep and moan about all the greatness we would be leaving behind in DC, but DC would still be a commercial and tourist center and I think industry would find a way to put everything to use. We can preserve some of the federal buildings as functional state and corporate office buildings, as well as historic sites, DC is a major economic hub as well as population center, that will not change. Thinking that it will all be abandoned without the federal government is just silly, Boston and New York and LA and SF and Seattle and Houston or Dallas/Ft. Worth are large and growing without being capitals of the nation.
Given the populations of KS and NE the new people would likely makes those swing states so I do not expect conservatives to go along with it, but if the minority party were smart it would opt for 50 swing states or as close to that as they can get, over 26 deep red states with small populations.
Put it in Puerto Rico and pray for a hurricane. Or maybe over the San Andreas Fault.
Maybe we can put it in Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan and start over.
Offer statehood to Cuba
FINALLY a state with decent universal free healthcare.
I’m not sure it’s free. Someone is paying for it.
The people are paying for it. Just like here. Except that we pay more. And get less.
The DONORcrat Party has to resort to these things because it is a right-wing party. If they really fought for key issues like Medicare For All, minimum wage hike and ending foreign wars, they can win even in the so-called Red states. But they won’t. That is why the DONORcrats end up trying these sort of desperate maneuvers and gambles.
Whoa, okay then, you want to post total bullshit? We can do that.
I like Mish, agree with a lot he says, not everything, and there are degrees to all public debate and discourse.
But what you just posted was pointless and inflammatory. So right back at ya asshole. The republican party has become a batshit ghost of itself that will never again win an election, at least not till your fat assed orange spy dies, may god grant us that gift soon. The conservatives I know are distancing themselves from the GOP and writing it off as a lost cause, while the fascist orange cult has all but started wearing brown shirts to their organized terror riots they blame on BLM and Antifa.
So I really could go on and post even more but I think you get the point. We do not do your type of posts at Mish. That is why when trolls like you show up you get blasted and it is why conservatives and liberal can still discuss here with respect and an agreement to disagree with respect where there can be no real compromise.
Your post is garbage.
Whoa! Baseless assumptions anyone?! LOL. What made you think that I am a fan of Trump or the Republicans? Is it impossible to be opposed to both the DONORcrat and Republican parties?!
Where are you here?
I’d say the middle of the top left quadrant. The DONORcrat Party is about the same on the opposite side – i.e. middle of the bottom right quadrant. Only its Dumbocrat fans think it is a left-wing party! LOL
I find it funny all the people who wave the constitution about gun rights/ freedom of religion. Etc. are not up in arms about 700000 american citizens not having equal representation in government. Is that not what the revolutionary war was fought for to begin with. Oh yeah Population of of wyoming is about 580000. They have two seats in the senate and representatives in the house. Know one complains.
Is it a power grab sure. Is it a power grab to deny their rights also.
Maybe both political parties should focus on policies which attract more voters instead of relying on gerrymandering voter suppression etc. .
Ps my understanding is the civil war was fought over balance of power between slave states and free states.
Dangerous times.
“If senators were allocated by money, Apple should have 8 senators!”
Pretty much all senators have sold themselves to corporations. It is only in the nominal sense that they represent state A or B or C or X or Y etc.
Make DC part of Maryland. Problem solved. Democrats would heavily oppose it. This has nothing to do with lack or representation.
As I’ve written elsewhere, about 15 years ago there was a push to make DC part of MD. No one in the state wanted it. Absolutely not. Financially, it would be a disaster, and Baltimore would lose its domination of state politics.
I don’t really know, but times have changed. I suspect many of lefties in the DC area would love the idea of always having a dem governor.
How come you don’t hear Democrats complaining about Delaware and Rhode Island being small states with 2 senators? They only have about 1 million people. California has 40 times the people as these small states. Of course, the reason is that these small states vote for Democrats. So, it’s OK they have 2 senators.
I think we should do it by county. Each county gets an electoral vote. Hmmm, I think that might favor Republicans, but I’m sure my bias isn’t affecting my judgement. I’m just thinking about principles, just like high-minded Democrats do.
Heck, why not do it by person?
They pick where they want to live. They know the rules. Suck it up.
By person would favor Democrats. And so, if you’re a Democrat, you like it. If you’re a Republican, you don’t. But let’s stop pretending there are any principles to these discussions.
Hilariously, the Democrats are making their states so toxic that Texas got 2 new seats and NY and CA lost 1. Blow back is a bitch
“DC residents have their own all-or-nothing approach, choosing not to pursue retrocession of the portion of the District that was formerly part of Maryland.”
That just might have to do with the fact that Prince George County, on the Maryland side, happens to be home to FIVE of the ten most affluent black communities in the whole country…..and I expect some of those African-American folks are Republicans. Imagine that.
The DC area is in richest part of the US. Because federal employees are well paid on average. PG county is heavily democratic along with the entire DC region. PG county is actually the poor part of the DC metro area.
Making DC part of Maryland makes the most sense. It won’t happen because while Maryland may gain a congressional district or 2, giving it 2 more electoral votes. DC will lose it’s 3 votes. It won’t be because suburban Maryland doesn’t want it.
The average federal employee salary is higher than that of the average Joe’s because most feds have college degrees, often advanced ones, and are older, average age of a fed is late 50s. Compared to the same demographic outside the DC area, the salaries are the same, possibly a bit lower. Certainly doesn’t translate into greater wealth. I make over $150K a year (I’d make $90K if I was a fed) and the most I can afford is an 1100 square foot house, if I want a commute that’s less than an hour.
Which isn’t to say there isn’t some money in the area, but it’s a case of a small number of super-McMansions vs. a vast majority of average to crappy neighborhoods.
As I’ve written elsewhere, MD in the past has refused to even consider the idea of taking DC back for economic (taxation) and political reasons. Prince George’s County is part of MD, that’s not entirely clear from your post, if you don’t mind me saying so. True, PG county has some wealthy black areas but that’s a very relative term. A few black wealthy areas are “pretty nice”. Others, if they were white, would be “eh, OK”, nothing that would be considered wealthy. The whole county votes democratic, since time began. I suppose there might be a few black individuals who vote republican but not enough to elect anyone to the county executive council, for example.
I believe that in Texas’ constitution it could split itself into five different states without the OK of Congress although that point might be contested.
That option was precluded at the end of the Civil War. The constitution specifically prohibits states breaking up without proper consents:
New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
So, in the case of Texas it was admitted under a joint resolution of congress that would allow it to self partition into as many as five states, but, both congress and the legislature of Texas would have to approve of such an statehood proposal for that to happen.
In essence the joint resolution of congress allowing such a division of Texas into five parts is meaningless because all states already have that right provided they get the proper consent.
Then again Texas was admitted to the union under this joint resolution, but then left the union as part of the Confederacy, and was readmitted under the terms of reconstruction post Civil War, that would have tended to void any agreements under which it was originally admitted in 1845.
See this from the Library of Congress website:
The Reconstruction Acts established military rule over Southern states until new governments could be formed. They also limited some former Confederate officials’ and military officers’ rights to vote and to run for public office. (However, the latter provisions were only temporary and soon rescinded for almost all of those affected by them.) Meanwhile, the Reconstruction acts gave former male slaves the right to vote and hold public office.
Congress also passed two amendments to the Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment made African-Americans citizens and protected citizens from discriminatory state laws. Southern states were required to ratify the Fourteenth Amendment before being readmitted to the union. The Fifteenth Amendment guaranteed African American men the right to vote.
Readmission means southern states were part of the US, left, and then forced back in under different conditions. And in the case of Texas that joint resolution of congress for the original admission was abandoned by Texas when it seceded.
“In 1847, the portion of the city that had originally belonged to Virginia was retroceded, after the voters of Alexandria elected to leave DC, feeling that they had been left out of development on the other side of the river.”
I lived in the Hybla Valley part of Alexandria after college in the 90’s, about three miles from Mt. Vernon, and it was Washington that laid out the original location of the new capitol, notice he left his own estate out of that boundary.
Personally I do not approve of the creation of the new state from DC, the several hundred thousand people who are permanent residents had the choice to live there or not with the condition that they have no real representation in congress. So, this is nearly entirely about the creation of two new safe senate seats for democrats, and as a democrat I am in favor of new safe seats for us, but I would like that done by having policy that benefits most Americans and not by turning a single city into a state. I think it sets a very bad precedent.
On the other hand, I also think that we are struggling in part because representation in congress and the court system is grossly overloaded. Basically all US House representatives now have 3/4 of a million people in their districts. And senators have anywhere from 350,000 residents each in their states, to over 20 million in California. The SCOTUS is at 9 justices, where it was before the Civil War, and has been since 1869. There was a period when the court was 11 seats and a lot of people don’t know this. In 1867 a seat was abolished under the Judicial Circuits Act, and another in 1866 with the Eighth and Ninth Circuit Act.
Most of our institutions that were set forth by the constitution were so in a nation of about 4 million rural agricultural colonies forged into a union. Now we have had vast growth, an industrial revolution, a post industrial information age, and a third of a billion inhabitants. What worked in the 1790’s just does not work any longer and change is needed. Of course conservatives oppose change in general because they want to CONSERVE! Their entire political and social viewpoint is that change is bad. And no small part of this is because they were imbued with overwhelming white male (straight) power and privilege which is not going to get enhanced by change. It can only be diminished or diluted so of course they object to the extension of rights and better government to others. They had to give in post Civil War when slaves stopped being the property of mostly white males and became citizens of the US. Ditto they resisted women’s suffrage for a very long time till 1920. But, through all the change they have managed to retain most of their power.
But, like it or not this is going to end and better to accept that which is inevitable with grace and aplomb than to fight it both socially and militarily as so many now threaten to do. Because wealth inequality in a land as wealthy as America simply is not going to get much worse before change is from violence rather than mutual agreement. You now have a majority of people who have a negative net worth, a majority that cannot lay hands on $500 in an emergency.
And then there is my favorite map, it is pre Covid and things have only got much worse since then:
Nice legal brief on Texas ruined by the assertation that most problems are caused by white male privilege.
You are definitely correct on the Texas point. The outcome of the Civil War negated the previous agreement. End of story.
There was one big proponent of the idea in the 20th century, John Nance Garner, who was Speaker and later VP, who kept pushing it, but it hasn’t been considered a serious possibility since the 1930’s. It keeps coming up lately along with all the secession crap.
Why cede?
Texas would be better to dissolve it’s statehood and go back to being a territory like Puerto Rico is. You lose your federal vote (senators and congressman) but you also stop paying federal taxes and gain control over things like setting your business tax rates, deciding whether you want to frack or how/if to pursue green energy etc.
That DAMN sure is not going to fly with the federal government. They’d nuke Houston and Dallas before they let that happen.
I agree ceding it to Maryland is the proper course of action. 1 nit: “10 miles square” is not the same thing as “10 square miles”. Clearly 10 miles square = 100 square miles.
Thanks for that. Corrected.
This was brought up about 15 years ago. The MD state legislature was overwhelmingly against taking any part of DC. It would be like adding another Baltimore: crime, no tax base, huge sink for all types of public services. I assume the proletariat of MD would fee the same way, especially Baltimore. It would greatly dilute the city’s influence (read, gouging tax dollars from the state). The rest of MD, which is really all rural and conservative, would love to give Baltimore to any state or nation that would be dumb enough to take it.
Oh, Just make Puerto Rico a state.
Yet another bug in our legal software, ripe for exploitation. They’re clearly pushing to get another couple of dem senators. They don’t need to. The migration from the expensive coasts will turn more states blue over the next couple decades. This is what has the republicans ginning up conspiracies, making coup attempts, and trying to suppress voting.
If democracy is allowed to continue, the GOP is burnt toast. Crazy only sells to crazies.
Not from where I’m sitting in Illinois. Illinois population losses have resulted in a loss of a congressional district. One less representative from Illinois, yet 2 additional in TX. Illinois may be more “blue”, but that blue influence is diminishing.
Why each of these states lost a seat is for different reasons but the truth is Texas is turning more purple. They will try to gerrymander their way to being less purple but it won’t work because they always leave some people behind. The largest population centers in Texas are blue but somehow the land votes more than the people.
We don’t have a “democracy”, we have a Constitutional Republic, as Ben Franklin remarked when asked “What kind of government have you given us”? He actually told the lady, “A Republic, Madam, if you can keep it”.
I wouldn’t assume the illegals the dems are trying to make voters are going to be blue in a few decades. Trump did surprisingly well along the southern border counties. Better than in 2016. Hispanics may not be voting blue in the future.