What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

DC as 51st state (1 Viewer)

squistion said:
It is a move to do the right thing for democracy. It should have been done years ago no matter which party it helps.
Click to expand...
Why does it have to be an extra state, though?  Why not follow the established precedent and cede most of the land to a neighboring state?  That accomplishes the goal of representation for this population without the partisan grab for power.

Puerto Rico, on the other hand, should probably be voted in as a state if the population of PR votes for it.  You don't hear near the amount of press for this as, *gasp*, the population is much more split in political affiliation.

 
Sand said:
Why does it have to be an extra state, though?  Why not follow the established precedent and cede most of the land to a neighboring state?  That accomplishes the goal of representation for this population without the partisan grab for power.

Puerto Rico, on the other hand, should probably be voted in as a state if the population of PR votes for it.  You don't hear near the amount of press for this as, *gasp*, the population is much more split in political affiliation.
Click to expand...
Because the residents of DC have never wanted that - they want equal representation and self-governance

 
Sand said:
Why does it have to be an extra state, though?  Why not follow the established precedent and cede most of the land to a neighboring state?  That accomplishes the goal of representation for this population without the partisan grab for power.

Puerto Rico, on the other hand, should probably be voted in as a state if the population of PR votes for it.  You don't hear near the amount of press for this as, *gasp*, the population is much more split in political affiliation.
Click to expand...
That's all it is.  Not exactly "normal" government everyone said they wanted with Biden.  

 
squistion said:
Because the residents of DC have never wanted that - they want equal representation and self-governance
Click to expand...
Merging with a state does exactly the same thing.  What you're talking about is wanting outsized representation.  Just return the land to Maryland and be done. 

 
Sand said:
Merging with a state does exactly the same thing.  What you're talking about is wanting outsized representation.  Just return the land to Maryland and be done. 
Click to expand...
Does Maryland want DC to be merged into the state?  Do people in DC want to join Maryland?

If DC becomes a state they won't have more outsized influence than any of the other 3 EC vote states.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Do those of you pointing out the partisan reasons to support statehood also recognize the partisan reasons to oppose statehood?  Or do you feel like the anti-statehood folks have entirely nonpartisan reasons for their position?
Click to expand...
So, if we don't give Democrats more power then WE'RE the partisan ones?

 
Insomniac said:
Does Maryland want DC to be merged into the state?  Do people in DC want to join Maryland?

If DC becomes a state they won't have more outsized influence than any of the other 3 EC vote states.
Click to expand...
As the seat of Federal power they already have a huge amount of influence on the rest of the country's population.

I have no idea if Maryland wants this land or population.  But we have the precedent of the 1847 movement of land back to Virginia that was previously ceded to DC.  It's disingenuous to not reach for that solution and instead reach for the solution that gives one political party a huge advantage.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
NorvilleBarnes said:
Of course.

There are secondary reasons on both sides, but they are absolutely secondary imo.
Click to expand...
OK thank you.  There are clearly partisan motivations in both directions.  We should discuss the merits of the proposal without accusing each other of only holding our position for partisan reasons.

Here are some reasons I think D.C. should get statehood:

1) There are a lot of people that live there and it seems really undemocratic for them not to have representation in the House and Senate.

2) The population of DC is larger than two existing states so it’s hard to argue that it is too small to be a state.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
Here are some reasons I think D.C. should get statehood:

1) There are a lot of people that live there and it seems really undemocratic for them not to have representation in the House and Senate.

2) The population of DC is larger than two existing states so it’s hard to argue that it is too small to be a state.
Click to expand...
Here are some reasons I think D.C. should not get statehood:

1) We have an established procedure from 1847 to redistribute the land and population back to the states that ceded land to DC.  This solution satisfies the desire for self-governance.

2) The population of DC already has a huge influence over the rest of the population as it stands.  Also giving them statehood establishes a super-state.

 
Sand said:
As the seat of Federal power they already have a huge amount of influence on the rest of the country's population.

I have not idea if Maryland wants this land or population.  But we have the precedent of the 1847 movement of land back to Virginia that was previously ceded to DC.  It's disingenuous to not reach for that solution and instead reach for the solution that gives one political party a huge advantage.
Click to expand...
I don't see how the people that live there have much influence. They will have 2 Senators and 1 Rep and there's no reason they would be more powerful than other members.

If you had a vote in both Md and DC I think both would opt for DC to be a separate state.

 
Insomniac said:
I don't see how the people that live there have much influence. They will have 2 Senators and 1 Rep and there's no reason they would be more powerful than other members.

If you had a vote in both Md and DC I think both would opt for DC to be a separate state.
Click to expand...
This population runs the machinery of the federal government.  They have huge influence as it is.

And of course neither would vote for it.  They both see the opportunity for a new blue state.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sand said:
This population runs the machinery of the federal government.  They have huge influence as it is.

And of course neither would vote for it.  They both see the opportunity for a new blue state.
Click to expand...
When I lived in the DC metro area ~25 years ago I was under the impression that most of the people who worked for the federal government lived in Maryland and Virginia not in DC itself. I'd guess the same was / is true for the elected Reps and Senators. I can't recall either Virginia or Maryland having any additional power due to proximity.

There's been discussion on this board about how the divide in the country is divide between rural and urban area.The rural areas of the country have more than their share of power - at least if it's based on population and economic impact.  Making DC a state, IMO, would reduce that disparity.

 
Sand said:
2) The population of DC already has a huge influence over the rest of the population as it stands.  Also giving them statehood establishes a super-state.
Click to expand...
Can you expand on both of these ideas please.  I understand some of the population works in the federal government but it certainly isn’t the majority, see link below, (and a lot of those federal workers are R’s too) so I’m not really understanding where the huge influence is.  What’s a “super-state”, isn’t that the same thing as your other point is trying to make?  TIA. 
 

https://wtop.com/business-finance/2018/02/exactly-many-washingtonians-work-federal-government/

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BladeRunner said:
This is nothing more than a naked partisan power grab.  That's all.  It has nothing to do with "representation".  It's to get votes to ensure that the Democrat Party never loses power.
Click to expand...
Much like McConnell holding garlands nomination and ramming ACB through, it’s a legal partisan power grab, so not much you can do about it. 

 
MTskibum said:
I do not want either the republicans or the democrats to gain too much of an advantage in congress or in future presidential elections. I think the logical solution is for them to join an existing state.

I would also oppose North Dakota splitting into 2 states to increase the republican count.

In the next 24 years I want 12 years of republicans presidents and 12 years of democrats and this seems like a it could have a major impact on that.
Click to expand...
Maybe we should combine North and South Dakota and just make one state. And they would still only have 1.6 million people....less than 25% of DC. When California and it’s 40 million residents get 2 Senators and Wyoming with under 600,000 residents get two Senators there seems to be an incredible injustice of equal representation when you consider the power the Senate has. I realize it was never about population but I don’t think the founders ever thought the Senate would have this lopsided type of representation

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Insomniac said:
When I lived in the DC metro area ~25 years ago I was under the impression that most of the people who worked for the federal government lived in Maryland and Virginia not in DC itself. I'd guess the same was / is true for the elected Reps and Senators. I can't recall either Virginia or Maryland having any additional power due to proximity.

There's been discussion on this board about how the divide in the country is divide between rural and urban area.The rural areas of the country have more than their share of power - at least if it's based on population and economic impact.  Making DC a state, IMO, would reduce that disparity.
Click to expand...
I think without the 'disparity', the power in each state swings so far to the most populous areas, aka the cities, which will basically negate any power non-urban areas would have.  Further down the road, I believe making a CITY a state sets a bad precedent, because then Los Angeles, Chicago, New York City, etc. will want to follow suit, and this will be the justification.

Not that I'm unique here, but as someone who grew up in one of the counties in MD that borders DC, I know that DC residents use the addresses of friends/family that live in MD (and probably VA) to enable their kids to go to schools outside of DC. I'm not judging here, only pointing out that this practice (it's doubtful any concrete numbers can ever be produced that would show how prevalent it is), and probably other similar practices to take advantage of the benefits provided by neighboring states are causing a drain on the bordering counties and states economies. To me, making DC a state probably wouldn't change this issue, as I doubt the DC school systems and local programs (welfare, social services, etc) will magically change into something more desirable, so from a more politically neutral perspective, I think while it would be complicated, making DC residents fall under MD and VA for voting and administrative purposes makes more sense.  On the MD side, the two counties that would be most affected, Prince George's (the richest per capita African-American county in the country) and Montgomery (one of the overall richest counties in the country) pretty much dictate the politics for the entire state already, so this wouldn't really tip state politics much either, and the DC citizens would get their beloved representation.

 
Charlie Steiner said:
I think without the 'disparity', the power in each state swings so far to the most populous areas, aka the cities, which will basically negate any power non-urban areas would have.  Further down the road, I believe making a CITY a state sets a bad precedent, because then Los Angeles, Chicago, New York City, etc. will want to follow suit, and this will be the justification.
Click to expand...
The justification wouldn't come from pointing to DC though. Completely different situations. The reasons people are putting forth for DC to become a state do not apply to other large cities.

 
BladeRunner said:
Listen, you might be able to fool the choir into thinking it's "giving people a voice", but smart people know exactly why it's being done and what's going on here.  And it's not because they want to give people a voice.  It's because they want to solidify power, plain and simple cut and dried.

You better believe that if DC was 95% Conservative this wouldn't even come up by the Democrats.
Click to expand...
I’m usually not as cynical as you but this time I agree. 

 
Sand said:
That's an interesting, and ludicrous, equivalence.
Click to expand...
I don’t mean to say the situations are identical.  But it seems to me like the big anti-statehood talking point from many (not you*) is that because statehood would help the left and because The left wants it at least in part for that reason, that it should therefore be opposed.  It seems to me identical arguments could have been made about suffrage for minorities or women. 

*I’m still planning to look into what you said about the procedure for admitting states 200 years ago but haven’t yet.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BladeRunner said:
Listen, you might be able to fool the choir into thinking it's "giving people a voice", but smart people know exactly why it's being done and what's going on here.  And it's not because they want to give people a voice.  It's because they want to solidify power, plain and simple cut and dried.

You better believe that if DC was 95% Conservative this wouldn't even come up by the Democrats.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure I’m in favor of it but either way I think the Democrats should just give the same response as the Republicans did to the Supreme Court seat - its in the rules and fair game.  I’m not sure why they should be interested in what Republicans think on the issue - I know Republicans didn’t care what Democrats that on the SC issue. 

 
timschochet said:
On 1/27/2021 at 1:01 PM, BladeRunner said:
Listen, you might be able to fool the choir into thinking it's "giving people a voice", but smart people know exactly why it's being done and what's going on here.  And it's not because they want to give people a voice.  It's because they want to solidify power, plain and simple cut and dried.

You better believe that if DC was 95% Conservative this wouldn't even come up by the Democrats.
Expand  
Click to expand...
I’m usually not as cynical as you but this time I agree. 
Click to expand...
Does anyone really doubt that if DC was considered a conservative population that the GOP wouldn’t have pushed them through the first opportunity they had?

 
Charlie Steiner said:
I think without the 'disparity', the power in each state swings so far to the most populous areas, aka the cities, which will basically negate any power non-urban areas would have.  Further down the road, I believe making a CITY a state sets a bad precedent, because then Los Angeles, Chicago, New York City, etc. will want to follow suit, and this will be the justification.

Not that I'm unique here, but as someone who grew up in one of the counties in MD that borders DC, I know that DC residents use the addresses of friends/family that live in MD (and probably VA) to enable their kids to go to schools outside of DC. I'm not judging here, only pointing out that this practice (it's doubtful any concrete numbers can ever be produced that would show how prevalent it is), and probably other similar practices to take advantage of the benefits provided by neighboring states are causing a drain on the bordering counties and states economies. To me, making DC a state probably wouldn't change this issue, as I doubt the DC school systems and local programs (welfare, social services, etc) will magically change into something more desirable, so from a more politically neutral perspective, I think while it would be complicated, making DC residents fall under MD and VA for voting and administrative purposes makes more sense.  On the MD side, the two counties that would be most affected, Prince George's (the richest per capita African-American county in the country) and Montgomery (one of the overall richest counties in the country) pretty much dictate the politics for the entire state already, so this wouldn't really tip state politics much either, and the DC citizens would get their beloved representation.
Click to expand...
I think Md doesn't want DC and DC would rather be on its own.

 
Sand said:
Here are some reasons I think D.C. should not get statehood:

1) We have an established procedure from 1847 to redistribute the land and population back to the states that ceded land to DC.  This solution satisfies the desire for self-governance.
Click to expand...
OK so I finally looked this up, here’s a helpful Wikipedia entry:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_retrocession
 

Thanks for mentioning this, it does seem to be a potential solution.  But as others have noted, neither the citizens of DC nor Maryland seem to want it.  I don’t think there are any historical examples of territories or states being forced to merge against their will.  So that’s a big hurdle to making it happen.
 

We also have plenty of examples from our history of territories becoming states, most recently Alaska and Hawaii.  That’s what both DC and Maryland seem to prefer.  Do you think that procedure isn’t constitutionally available here or do you just think it shouldn’t be done for prudential reasons? (e.g. your super-state argument)

 
dkp993 said:
Does anyone really doubt that if DC was considered a conservative population that the GOP wouldn’t have pushed them through the first opportunity they had?
Click to expand...
Of course they would have. Both sides are hungry for power. I think we know that. 
 

But as it happens, DC is largely Democrat so the Democrats are pushing for it. Which makes @BladeRunnerabsolutely correct when he points out that, rather than agree to make DC part of Maryland or Virginia, the Democrats are demanding statehood, and that makes the whole thing a power grab and not really about representation. Would BladeRunner argue differently if DC was a a Republican stronghold? He might. I would not, however. 
 

It’s a cynical power grab. But I’ll go further. The Democrats in Congress don’t care about this issue. They know that it’s extremely unlikely that it will ever pass. So why do they talk about it? Because the way you please your base in this country is talk about stuff that will never happen. 

 
timschochet said:
Of course they would have. Both sides are hungry for power. I think we know that. 
 

But as it happens, DC is largely Democrat so the Democrats are pushing for it. Which makes @BladeRunnerabsolutely correct when he points out that, rather than agree to make DC part of Maryland or Virginia, the Democrats are demanding statehood, and that makes the whole thing a power grab and not really about representation. Would BladeRunner argue differently if DC was a a Republican stronghold? He might. I would not, however. 
 

It’s a cynical power grab. But I’ll go further. The Democrats in Congress don’t care about this issue. They know that it’s extremely unlikely that it will ever pass. So why do they talk about it? Because the way you please your base in this country is talk about stuff that will never happen. 
Click to expand...
Re the bolded: In today’s hyper partisan environment I’m not sure we do.  Which is why I pointed it out.  It’s much more indicative of pure politics then blue=bad and red=good or vise versa.  (Which is the point your making too, I’m just not sure everyone is making that same point). 

 
The Z Machine said:
What if the citizens of DC don't want to be part of MD because they feel their interests don't align sufficiently with MD?  "Too bad, so sad?"
Click to expand...
The citizens of the majority of VA don't agree with Northern VA.  Should they just split into 2 states or is it too bad so sad?

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
We also have plenty of examples from our history of territories becoming states, most recently Alaska and Hawaii.  That’s what both DC and Maryland seem to prefer.  Do you think that procedure isn’t constitutionally available here or do you just think it shouldn’t be done for prudential reasons? (e.g. your super-state argument)
Click to expand...
DC isn't a territory.  I'm sure a state can be crafted in such a way that it doesn't contradict the Constitution, but it certainly goes against the spirit of the Constitution.  

Puerto Rico IS a territory and that should be the one we're talking about.  Of course, we could also talk about making Guam and the Northern Marianas a state.  The red team would love that.

BTW - thanks for my word of the day.  Never heard "retrocession" before.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

knowledge dropper
*** Official Commitment to America Plan Thread ***
2 3
Replies
143
Views
2K
The General
The General
jm192
Bernie Sanders calls for Refunds for delayed flights
Replies
46
Views
600
waiver wire
W
The Z Machine
Abortion - Where do we go from here? (Policy and politics, not law)
2 3
Replies
113
Views
2K
supermike80
supermike80

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top