Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

Permalink
View Article Stats      (2 comments)

Free DC! The Obama Inauguration and a New Chance for Democracy in Our Nation's Capital

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend

Become a Fan
Get Embed HTML Code
By (about the author)

Become a Fan Become a Fan  (8 fans)   -- Page 2 of 3 page(s)

opednews.com

A report published on February 12, 2007, by the Congressional Research Service noted the bill's suspect constitutionality: "Although not beyond question, it would appear likely that the Congress does not have authority to grant voting representation in the House of Representatives to the District."

Or, to be more precise, the District probably cannot hold a voting seat unless Congress amends the Constitution (requiring ratification by two thirds of the states), makes the District part of Maryland or another state (this is called 'retrocession'), or grants statehood.

The voting rights bill contains a nonseverability clause, but a temporary injunction in the event of a law suit may allow Utah its new voting seat while the District vote would be blocked until a ruling is issued. It's likely that, should the bill fail, Congress will be discouraged from considering legislation expanding democratic rights for DC citizens for decades to come.

At best, voting rights is a temporary measure. In 1997, Congress passed and President Clinton signed the DC Revitalization Act, stripping District government of many powers and functions that had been granted in years past. Even if the voting rights bill were passed and enacted without a legal challenge, Congress would retain power to revoke the voting seat in the House and repeal the District's limited home rule, and may very well do so if a hostile Republican faction regains control in the future. If Washington, DC became a state, Congress wouldn't have any such authority, any more than it can take over the government of California or Connecticut. Except for Southern states after they rebelled, Congress has never rescinded any state's power to govern itself.

Some local democracy advocates have declined to endorse the voting rights bill because the bestowal of a single voting seat in Congress, compared to the three voting seats representing every American who lives in a state, turns District residents into 'one-third citizens.' The voting rights bill thus recalls the 1787 Three-Fifths Compromise that labeled slaves 'three-fifth citizens' for purposes of voting apportionment in Congress -- a stinging insult for a city with an African American majority.

And finally, the voting rights bill does little or nothing to solve the lack of self-government. Let us not forget that political self-determination and self-government, not representation in a legislature, are the true measures of democracy.

Throughout history, colonies in Africa and Asia and conquered European nations like Ireland held voting seats in the legislatures of nations that ruled over them, while they still suffered exploitation and oppression. Many of these colonies, like Algeria, a French possession until 1962, became free only after violent revolutions. Our own Founding Fathers and Mothers in the thirteen colonies fought for independence, not voting rights. Patrick Henry never said, "Give me a vote in Parliament or give me death."

In the same spirit, groups like the Stand Up! for Democracy in DC Coalition, the DC Statehood Green Party, and the new multi-partisan DC Statehood -- Yes We Can coalition have adopted "DC Statehood Now!" and "Free DC!" as rallying cries. DC Statehood -- Yes We Can has led the effort to place posters throughout the city in preparation for Inauguration Day. With the encouragement of Michael Brown, the District's 'Shadow Senator' (some prefer the appellation 'Statehood Senator'), supporters lined the streets with 8,000 signs by Monday, January 13.

How DC Will Become a State

If a court rules that a voting seat in the House for Washington, DC is only possible through a constitutional amendment, then statehood will be easier to achieve, since it won't require ratification by the two-thirds of states necessary for an amendment.

In 1846, an Act of Congress removed Arlington from the District and ceded it to Virginia, demonstrating that, by simple majority, Congress may alter the borders of the constitutionally mandated federal enclave. Congress may therefore reduce the borders again, this time to encompass only the federal properties (the Mall, the land occupied by the White House, etc.), freeing the rest of the District to choose statehood in a plebescite vote.

Washington, DC (or whatever new name is chosen for the new state) would then be admitted to the union by a second simple-majority vote in Congress, as were all other states after the thirteen original colonies.

Arguments have been made for retrocession to Maryland, but both Maryland and District residents have mostly rejected the idea. Marylanders see Washington as a potential economic drain on their state, while District residents have traditionally favored statehood and balked at absorption into an existing state.

What will the new state look like? Its citizens will get their two Senators and one Representative as well as freedom from Congress's authority. We'll have our first state with an African American majority. Americans all over the US who live in cities, and who are now underrepresented in Congress -- especially in the Senate, since voters from suburban and rural areas tend to prevail in Senatorial elections -- will have permanent voices in both chambers speaking for their interests.

Two years ago, the DC Statehood Green Party and Stand Up! for Democracy in DC Coalition drafted a petition for DC statehood (http://www.dcstatehoodgreen.org/statehoodnow) to be sent to the United Nations Committee on Human Rights and the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which monitor compliance with treaties that the US has signed and ratified. In 2006, the Human Rights Committee found that the District's lack of voting representation in Congress violated the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The ruling was the result of a decade of work by democracy advocate Tim Cooper.

DC statehood is attainable, but only if District residents can enlist the solidarity of Americans everywhere. The Obama inauguration will be an opportunity to place the argument for statehood in the national spotlight and persuade visitors enjoying Washington, DC hospitality that, as Gail Dixon has said, democracy for the District "is one of the last major legal civil rights hurdles."

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

 

Scott McLarty has served as media coordinator for the Green Party of the United States and for the DC Statehood Green Party. He has had articles, guest columns, and book reviews published in Roll Call, CommonDreams.org, Z Magazine, Green Horizon, (more...)
 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
2 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Constitutional amendment not necessary for DC statehood by Scott McLarty on Sunday, Jan 18, 2009 at 5:11:37 PM
Empty DC by Gallaher on Sunday, Jan 18, 2009 at 9:28:57 PM