"The house we hope to build is not for my generation but for yours. It is your future that matters. And I hope that when you are my age, you will be able to say as I have been able to say: We lived in freedom. We lived lives that were a statement, not an apology."


Monday, September 17, 2007

D.C. Congressional Representation

Apparently the Senate will try to culminate Congress’ months-long effort to secure voting rights for the District of Columbia tomorrow by voting on a bill that would increase the size of the House of Representatives by two seats. The District would get one of the seats and, in a maneuver to placate Republicans opposed to adding an extra reliably Democratic seat, the other would be given to Utah, a seat which would presumably be safely Republican.

The bill appears to be very democratic, fair, and—politically—a complete wash for both parties in the ever-important Congressional balance of power equation.

Constitutionally however, there is no redeeming or validating quality within this legislation.

Article I, §2 of the U.S. Constitution states in clear and transparent terms that "The House...shall be composed of Members chosen...by the People of the several States"(Emphasis Added). The District is not a state (the reason for it being the seat of the national government) and thus its residents are not only not entitled to Congressional representation, but they are Constitutionally proscribed from enjoying it.

There are a few good options to rectify this, such as Constitutional Amendment or retrocession. This bill is not one. It is unconstitutional on its face and thus invalid. Hopefully a minimum of forty-one senators recognize this, or at least refuse to look the other way in the face of such a self-evident fact.