The Thread

View Original

Should D.C. be a State?

The Thread

KEY THEMES

Politics
Elections
Economy

location

United States

KEY SOURCES

William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Brooking Institution
Adams v. Clinton
Cato Institute

WHY THIS QUESTION MATTERS: 

Since the killings of George Floyd and Ahmaud Arbery, high racial tensions have driven enfranchisement efforts for minorities especially in the Washington D.C. area, which is 46% Black or African American as of July 2019. 

On Friday, June 26th, 2020 the House passed a bill to make Washington D.C. the 51st state, which represents the first time a bill of this nature has passed either chamber. If successful, D.C. would be granted one representative in the House and 2 in the Senate. Is this a good idea? Let’s dive in.


HOW WOULD THIS WORK?

  • A specific area of land would still remain as the “capital district.” 

  • The DC mayor would transition to the title of state governor and the district council would serve as a legislative body. The Home Rule policies, under an act passed on Christmas Eve of 1973 that gave Congress the power to review all legislation passed by the district council of DC and giving Congress power over the budget, would be dissolved.

  • The 23rd amendment, ratified in 1961, would also likely be repealed. This amendment gives electoral votes to DC, but will not be needed because the new capital district would have few if any residents. 

  • The Senate Majority Leader has criticized the legislation, making it seem unlikely that it would pass anytime soon under the current administration.

PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS FOR STATEHOOD:

  • In late November of 1993 the House of Representatives voted on legislation to make DC a state. It was defeated 277 to 153 with 40 Democrats and all Republicans except 1 voting against the legislation.  This was still considered somewhat a victory to advocates for statehood because of the bill receiving over 150 votes in support. 

  • DC voted to petition Congress to become a state in a referendum in November of 2016 days before the presidential election. The measure passed with 79% of the vote. The measure stated that DC would become a state known as New Columbia.

  • House Republicans wanted to amend this legislation to retrocede DC back to Maryland, calling it the “District of Columbia-Maryland Reunion Act.” Republicans would also ask that DC pay back the costs of running DC courts and US marshals. Also that DC take back thousands of federal prisoners who were convicted in DC. 

  • Compared to the rest of the country, Maryland residents are more supportive of DC receiving statehood. Most Maryland residents oppose the popular alternative to statehood of making DC a county in Maryland. As far as DC receiving statehood, 51% support statehood and 40% oppose it in Maryland. 29% support it and 64% oppose it across the US. Residents who live in suburbs of DC within Maryland are much more likely to support DC statehood than those living in Baltimore or its suburbs.

THE COMMON THREAD:

Citizens should have a voice and representation should be fair.

FIND YOUR THREAD:

Supporters of D.C. statehood are worried about economic growth and adequate representation of a population larger than Vermont or Wyoming. Opponents of D.C. statehood are concerned about economic stability and the potential centralized power of a city-state.

What do you think?

​Yes, D.C. should be a state.

Reason 01

Statehood would grant D.C. greater power via Equal Footing doctrine and greater influence at the national level.

  • Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress full power to make legislation for the district, any local government exists due to permission granted from the federal government. As a state D.C. would be included in the Equal Footing Doctrine which says that all states have the same powers and dignity as any other state. They would have “the power to pass civil and criminal laws, to tax, to insure the health, safety, and welfare of their residents to the same extent as all other states, and to participate in the national government on equal terms.” William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal

  • Voting rights have changed since DC’s origin. In 1800, the population of DC was only 8,000 and most of those people were unable to vote due to race, gender, or lack of property ownership, so there were not many people who would have felt underrepresented and spoke out about it at that time. However, today the majority of DC residents are of voting age and are not under any voting restriction laws. Brooking Institution

  • DC is large enough to be a state with 702,000 residents (more than Vermont or Wyoming and of a comparable size to Delaware and Alaska). The lack of voting rights in the House is disenfranchising the voices of over 400,000 Black and Latino voters who live there. Brooking Institution

     

​

Reason 02

Residents are expected to pay taxes and follow laws that are decided without representation.

  • In Adams v. Clinton in 2000, residents of D.C. challenged the fact that they had no representation in Congress despite the fact that they paid taxes and fought wars for the federal government. The court said that they didn’t have the power to grant DC statehood Adams v. Clinton

  • DC is financially able to survive as a state - DC had a financial crisis in 1995, but has balanced its budget every year between 1997 and 2014, and proved fiscal responsibility. Brookings Institution

  • While DC currently has a representative in the House, she cannot vote in a decisive way and has often been denied the right to speak on the floor on legislation that directly affects the district. As a state the Representatives would have the same power and respect granted to other Representatives and Senators William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal

​

Reason 03

Changing DC to a state would allow for greater economic growth.

  • As a State DC would be more able to benefit from periods of economic growth. The combination of City and State governments offers new opportunities though, it could be a “powerful change for innovation.” Meaning, policies would be a direct reflection of the needs of the city.  William and Mary Bill of Right Journal

  • They might also be free of the Height of Buildings Act  which would allow the city to build up more offices and houses to potentially relieve stress on the housing market and make housing more affordable. As a district, they can’t change this law. William and Mary Bill of Right Journal

  •  The Home Rule Act stops the city from taxing the income of residents who work in DC but don’t live in the city, a power it would gain as a state, it’s estimated this costs about 2.2 billion per year in 2005. William and Mary Bill of Right Journal

No, D.C. should not be a state.

Reason 01

Statehood would leave DC vulnerable to economic downturns and no longer qualify for federal support.

  • States can normally move money around inside their borders to help mitigate issues in areas that need help, DC would not have this ability due to the size of the state. It would also be more vulnerable to economic downturns since it would be only one economic region, which is 100 percent urban. William and Mary Bill of Right Journal

  • DC would lose funding it gets from the federal government (Medicaid, child and family services, and higher education), which it currently receives because it doesn’t have the same taxation power as states. William and Mary Bill of Right Journal

  • Washington D.C. would be in a far worse taxing position than other states because of the huge amount of nontaxable property in the District. For example, federal land takes up 28% of the District's land acreage. If the District could tax this property, it would increase its revenue by $550 million. The District still, however, has responsibility to provide police, fire, and other services for these areas. Further, another 3.9% of the District's taxable wealth is owned by non-profits. When combined with other property tax exempt properties, 42% of the total property wealth of the city cannot be taxed.  William and Mary Bill of Right Journal

​

Reason 02

The ‘City-State’ design was predicted by the founding fathers and we were warned against it.

  • The Founding Fathers envisioned a capital district that was not dependent on any state. James Madison argues this in Federalist 43 saying we need a separate territory where Congress could have “exclusive” jurisdiction. This is also to keep any one state from being overly influential in the federal government as well. Cato Institute

    DC would be our only “city-state,” something that Madison warned against in Federalist 51 because he says that states need to have a “multiplicity of interests,” including urban and rural interests, something that DC does not have. Cato Institute

Reason 03

DC is a political ‘power’ grab and lends itself only to a homogenized political environment should it become a state.

Subscribe to our weekly email to cast your vote on a fresh topic every week.

See this form in the original post