District of Columbia voting rights

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Voting rights in the District of Columbia, that is, the city of Washington, D.C., United States, differ from those of United States citizens in each of the fifty states. In particular, the more than half a million citizens of the District of Columbia have only a non-voting delegate in the United States House of Representatives and no representation in the United States Senate.

This situation originates from the "District Clause" of the U.S. Constitution^[1] which states (in relevant part) that "[The Congress shall have Power] To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States."

In 1801, with the passage of the Organic Act, the Congress assumed the powers described in the District Clause. Since the District of Columbia was no longer part of any state, the District's residents could no longer vote for the Congress.

From 1801 forward, District residents had no vote for any elected office in the federal government, but they have voted in Presidential elections since the Twenty third Amendment in 1961 (which first applied in the election of 1964). Citizens of Washington, D.C., are represented in the House of Representatives by a non-voting delegate who may vote in committee and participate in debate, but cannot vote for final passage of a bill in the House.^[2]

The District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act would address this issue by giving D.C. a voting member in the House, but not in the Senate. There are many arguments for and against this legislation giving the District of Columbia voting representation in the House of Representatives.

The voting rights and equal representation issue is often combined with, but not necessarily related to, other DC issues such as possible statehood, retrocession to Maryland (the original Virginia portion of the District was retroceded to Virginia in 1846 and is now known as Arlington, Alexandria and other nearby suburbs of DC in Virginia), or DC status of being under the complete control "in all cases whatsoever" of the Congress.

1 Political complications
2 History
3 Proposals for change
4 See also
5 References
6 External links

[edit] Political complications

Additional D.C. voting rights likely would benefit the Democrats and disadvantage the Republicans. For example, 89% of D.C. voters supported the Democrat John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election, a higher percentage than any candidate received in any state. The current non-voting delegate for D.C. in the House is a Democrat.^[3]

Additionally, DC's small population (at present in 2008, slightly larger than Wyoming) would still give DC residents a relative legislative presence larger than most other states if DC were to be treated as a state.

[edit] History

This section does not cite any references or sources. (February 2008)
Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed.

The justification against statehood for the District is explained in the Federalist No. 43, where it is noted that the federal government needs to ensure a level of stability in order to perform its duties that could not be guaranteed by a reliance upon any state. Such a provision was considered necessary following Pennsylvania's failure to use its authority to suppress a riot outside the Pennsylvania State House, then home of the Congress under the Articles of Confederation. Any organization has reasonable expectation that it control the rules governing how it conducts its business. This is true of the fifty states, and of the District of Columbia as well. Whether or not this implies that the residents of the District should not have representation in Congress or the Electoral College is debatable. Also debatable is whether this requires that Congress needs the same level of absolute control "in all cases whatsoever" as asserted by the British Parliament in the Declaratory Act of 1766, or whether the same result could be achieved with some lesser degree of control, while respecting the principles that power derives from the people, and that just power flows from the consent of the governed.

DC residents would argue, with James Madison, that "Equal laws protecting equal rights are the best guarantee of loyalty and love of country." (Madison to Jacob de la Motta, August, 1820).

In 1961, the Twenty-third Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified, allowing District residents to vote for President and Vice President. This right has been exercised by D.C. citizens since the election of 1964.

In 1978, the Congress passed on to the states another constitutional amendment, the District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment, which would have required that the District of Columbia be "treated as though it were a State" regarding Congressional representation, the Electoral College system (to a greater extent than under the Twenty-third Amendment), and Article V (the Constitutional amendment process). This proposed amendment would not have made the District of Columbia a State. A seven-year time limit was placed on the proposed amendment. The proposed amendment was subsequently ratified by only 16 of the states, far short of the three-quarters (currently 38) required for it to have been added to the Constitution.

In 1980 District voters approved the call of a constitutional convention to draft a proposed state constitution, just as U.S. territories in the late 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries had done prior to their admission as states. The proposed constitution was ratified by District voters in 1982 for a new state to be called "New Columbia". However, the necessary authorization from the Congress has never been granted.

Pursuant to the proposed state constitution, the District still selects two "shadow Senators" and a "shadow Representative" to lobby for statehood in both Houses of the Congress. These positions are not officially recognized by the Congress. In addition, the Congress has passed a law forbidding the spending of any money to lobby for statehood.

[edit] Proposals for change

Advocates have proposed several, competing reforms to increase the District's representation in the Congress. These proposals generally involve either treating D.C. more like a state or having the state of Maryland take back the land it ceded to form the District, as Virginia did in 1846.

[edit] Statehood

Main article: D.C. Statehood

Full statehood for D.C. could conceivably be achieved in either of two ways: via a constitutional amendment, or instead via an act of the Congress.

Outright statehood for D.C. was last discussed in the U.S. House of Representatives in November 1993. At that time, the proposal was defeated by a vote of 277 to 153.

[edit] Proposals to retrocede D.C. to Maryland

Main article: Retrocession (District of Columbia)

The process of reuniting D.C. with the state of Maryland is sometimes referred to as retrocession. The original District of Columbia was formed out of parts of both Maryland and Virginia, and from 1790 until 1801 citizens living in D.C. continued to vote for, and even run as, candidates for the U.S. Congress in Maryland or Virginia. In 1846 the land from Virginia was given back to Virginia, such that all the land in present-day D.C. was once part of Maryland. If both the U.S. Congress and the Maryland state legislature agreed, jurisdiction over the District of Columbia could be returned to Maryland, possibly excluding a small tract of land immediately surrounding Capitol Hill, the White House, and the Supreme Court building.

Under a less ambitious proposal, residents of D.C. would be treated as Maryland voters for the purposes of Congressional elections. The Congress could give D.C. residents the right to vote for Maryland candidates for the Senate and House of Representatives, and Maryland's representation in the House could be calculated accordingly.

[edit] Proposal to grant voting representation in both Houses of the Congress

Senator Joseph Lieberman introduced the "No Taxation Without Representation Act of 2003" (S. 617) on March 13, 2003, in the U.S. Senate, and Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton introduced the same bill in the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R. 1285). This legislation would have treated D.C. as if it were a state for the purposes of voting representation in the Congress. Unlike a constitutional amendment, this bill, if enacted, could have been repealed by a future Congress.

[edit] Proposal to grant voting representation only in the House

Main article: District of Columbia Vote in House of Representatives

A compromise was reached, allowing the District's delegate to the Congress to be raised to the status of a full voting member of the U.S. House but still leave the District unrepresented in the Senate. However, this proposal for a District of Columbia vote in the House of Representatives did not come to a vote during the 109th United States Congress. On April 19, 2007, the 110th United States Congress passed the DC Voting Rights Bill by a margin of 241-177. The Senate voted on ending debate (invoking Cloture) on this bill, but only could get 57 votes (60 needed for Cloture) to break the Republican filibuster. The Senate can't vote on a bill until it invokes Cloture on that bill. President George W. Bush has threatened to veto this bill on Constitutional grounds (see Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution).^[4]