WWTBAM Bored

I don't know why it would be running in Kentucky but I've seen an ad promoting DC statehood. It's run for several days.

earendel wrote:I don't know why it would be running in Kentucky but I've seen an ad promoting DC statehood. It's run for several days.

Because people in KY (and the other 49 states) can actually do something about making DC a state through their elected representatives. Residents of DC cannot.

silverscreenselect wrote:

earendel wrote:I don't know why it would be running in Kentucky but I've seen an ad promoting DC statehood. It's run for several days.

Because people in KY (and the other 49 states) can actually do something about making DC a state through their elected representatives. Residents of DC cannot.

Not very likely - 5 of the 6 members of the House are Republicans, plus we have "Moscow Mitch" and Rand Paul. None of them are likely to be supporters of DC statehood.

The House Committee on Oversight and Reform had a hearing today about making D.C. a state, which is sparking interest among political folks around the country.

Here's an alternative: Combine D.C., Maryland, Delaware and the Virginia Eastern Shore into a new state called Chesapeake. (I have more out-of-the box ideas that I doubt anybody wants to hear.)

jarnon wrote:The House Committee on Oversight and Reform had a hearing today about making D.C. a state, which is sparking interest among political folks around the country.

Here's an alternative: Combine D.C., Maryland, Delaware and the Virginia Eastern Shore into a new state called Chesapeake. (I have more out-of-the box ideas that I doubt anybody wants to hear.)

I first read this as Cheapskate, which has my full approval as a state name.

Vandal wrote: I first read this as Cheapskate, which has my full approval as a state name.

I want to move there. I could easily get elected governor.

jarnon wrote:The House Committee on Oversight and Reform had a hearing today about making D.C. a state, which is sparking interest among political folks around the country.

Here's an alternative: Combine D.C., Maryland, Delaware and the Virginia Eastern Shore into a new state called Chesapeake. (I have more out-of-the box ideas that I doubt anybody wants to hear.)

My suggestion would be to give back the parts of DC that would naturally belong to Virginia or Maryland and create a Federal district that included just the area inside the Beltway.

Vandal wrote:

jarnon wrote:The House Committee on Oversight and Reform had a hearing today about making D.C. a state, which is sparking interest among political folks around the country.

Here's an alternative: Combine D.C., Maryland, Delaware and the Virginia Eastern Shore into a new state called Chesapeake. (I have more out-of-the box ideas that I doubt anybody wants to hear.)

I first read this as Cheapskate, which has my full approval as a state name.

My mother loved to tell about the time she answered "Cheapskate Bay" to a question when she was in grade school.

Bob Juch wrote:

Vandal wrote:

jarnon wrote:The House Committee on Oversight and Reform had a hearing today about making D.C. a state, which is sparking interest among political folks around the country.

Here's an alternative: Combine D.C., Maryland, Delaware and the Virginia Eastern Shore into a new state called Chesapeake. (I have more out-of-the box ideas that I doubt anybody wants to hear.)

I first read this as Cheapskate, which has my full approval as a state name.

My mother loved to tell about the time she answered "Cheapskate Bay" to a question when she was in grade school.

When I was in elementary school and learned the state capitals, I referred to the capital of Wyoming as Cheney, which is how I thought Cheyenne was pronounced.

In retrospect, my answer may not have been all that wrong.

earendel wrote:

jarnon wrote:The House Committee on Oversight and Reform had a hearing today about making D.C. a state, which is sparking interest among political folks around the country.

Here's an alternative: Combine D.C., Maryland, Delaware and the Virginia Eastern Shore into a new state called Chesapeake. (I have more out-of-the box ideas that I doubt anybody wants to hear.)

My suggestion would be to give back the parts of DC that would naturally belong to Virginia or Maryland and create a Federal district that included just the area inside the Beltway.

I believe that the District long ago ceded back the portion of its original territory that once belonged to Virginia, and now does again. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

earendel wrote:

jarnon wrote:The House Committee on Oversight and Reform had a hearing today about making D.C. a state, which is sparking interest among political folks around the country.

Here's an alternative: Combine D.C., Maryland, Delaware and the Virginia Eastern Shore into a new state called Chesapeake. (I have more out-of-the box ideas that I doubt anybody wants to hear.)

My suggestion would be to give back the parts of DC that would naturally belong to Virginia or Maryland and create a Federal district that included just the area inside the Beltway.

I believe that the District long ago ceded back the portion of its original territory that once belonged to Virginia, and now does again. --Bob

As this map shows, the existing D.C. is already inside the Beltway.



If you make a small Federal District, comprising just the downtown office buildings and landmarks, almost all current D.C. residents could vote in Maryland. However, the few Federal District residents would still have 3 presidential electoral votes unless you repealed the 23rd Amendment. So statehood or my Cheapskate proposal are better ideas.

jarnon wrote:If you make a small Federal District, comprising just the downtown office buildings and landmarks, almost all current D.C. residents could vote in Maryland. However, the few Federal District residents would still have 3 presidential electoral votes unless you repealed the 23rd Amendment. So statehood or my Cheapskate proposal are better ideas.

After I posted I read an article that spoke about this issue - shrinking the district to a small enclave would be good, but it would then make the residents of that district responsible for those 3 electoral votes. Not being sure, but wouldn't that mean just the president and his (or her) family?

earendel wrote:

jarnon wrote:If you make a small Federal District, comprising just the downtown office buildings and landmarks, almost all current D.C. residents could vote in Maryland. However, the few Federal District residents would still have 3 presidential electoral votes unless you repealed the 23rd Amendment. So statehood or my Cheapskate proposal are better ideas.

After I posted I read an article that spoke about this issue - shrinking the district to a small enclave would be good, but it would then make the residents of that district responsible for those 3 electoral votes. Not being sure, but wouldn't that mean just the president and his (or her) family?

Yes, here's a map:



The Old Post Office is leased until 2073 to Donald J. Trump. So your proposal would have strong GOP support.

I see no value to the 50 states for creating a new state. I also see no value (in fact, the opposite) for retrocession. If I were a Maryland resident I wouldn't want to add a bunch of state voters who are primarily focused on national issues and couldn't care less about local Maryland issues.

BackInTex wrote:I see no value to the 50 states for creating a new state. I also see no value (in fact, the opposite) for retrocession. If I were a Maryland resident I wouldn't want to add a bunch of state voters who are primarily focused on national issues and couldn't care less about local Maryland issues.

But, as the ad I've seen points out, there are 700,000 or so individuals who are being taxed without representation (they have an "observer" in the House). If there was some way to give them the right to vote and give them full representation without statehood or "retrocession", I would be OK with that.

BackInTex wrote:I see no value to the 50 states for creating a new state. I also see no value (in fact, the opposite) for retrocession. If I were a Maryland resident I wouldn't want to add a bunch of state voters who are primarily focused on national issues and couldn't care less about local Maryland issues.

It's rarely convenient to provide equal representation to possessions. But it's still the right thing to do, at least in this case. I can think of no reason the citizens of D.C. shouldn't have the same rights to representation in our federal government that the states already have. --Bob

BackInTex wrote:I see no value to the 50 states for creating a new state. I also see no value (in fact, the opposite) for retrocession. If I were a Maryland resident I wouldn't want to add a bunch of state voters who are primarily focused on national issues and couldn't care less about local Maryland issues.

What gives you the idea that the residents of D.C. are focused on national issues instead of local ones?

It seems that the main problem with giving the residents a vote is that the population is only 36.8% non-Hispanic White.

Bob Juch wrote: It seems that the main problem with giving the residents a vote is that the population is only 36.8% non-Hispanic White.

No. However, a real problem is the uneducated electorate (44% of over 24 years of age have less than a high school degree) of D.C. elected Marian Berry to four terms as mayor. Not a good record. Based on that record, would probably continue with the same standards for candidates.


But thanks for continuing to prove you and your party are racist. Everything to you is based on race.

BackInTex wrote:

Bob Juch wrote: It seems that the main problem with giving the residents a vote is that the population is only 36.8% non-Hispanic White.

No. However, a real problem is the uneducated electorate (44% of over 24 years of age have less than a high school degree) of D.C. elected Marian Berry to four terms as mayor. Not a good record. Based on that record, would probably continue with the same standards for candidates.

That's really not all that far from saying you want to impose a literacy test. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

BackInTex wrote:

Bob Juch wrote: It seems that the main problem with giving the residents a vote is that the population is only 36.8% non-Hispanic White.

No. However, a real problem is the uneducated electorate (44% of over 24 years of age have less than a high school degree) of D.C. elected Marian Berry to four terms as mayor. Not a good record. Based on that record, would probably continue with the same standards for candidates.

That's really not all that far from saying you want to impose a literacy test. --Bob

Wikipedia wrote:A 2007 report found that about one-third of District residents were functionally illiterate, compared to a national rate of about one in five. This is attributed in part to immigrants who are not proficient in English.