The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mystery-ak on June 26, 2020, 01:47:54 pm
-
House set for historic vote on DC statehood
By J. Edward Moreno and Marty Johnson - 06/26/20 06:00 AM EDT
The House is poised to pass legislation Friday that would make Washington, D.C. the 51st state, the first time such a bill has ever been approved.
The vote will be historic, as legislation to make Washington, D.C., a state has not even been brought to the floor since 1993, when it was soundly defeated.
Yet even if the legislation is approved on Friday, the passage will underscore the challenges the movement for D.C. statehood still faces.
more
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/504632-house-set-for-historic-vote-on-dc-statehood
-
If the District of Columbia becomes a State: Fiscal Implications
https://www.brookings.edu/testimonies/if-the-district-of-columbia-becomes-a-state-fiscal-implications/ (https://www.brookings.edu/testimonies/if-the-district-of-columbia-becomes-a-state-fiscal-implications/)
Congress expressly prohibited the District from taxing the income earned within its borders by non-residents, a power that all states have. State income taxes apply to income earned in the state, by residents and non-residents alike. A few cities also have commuter taxes that apply to income earned by commuters in the city, but these are normally small. It is the lack of a state-level income tax on non-resident income that depresses the District’s revenue-raising capacity significantly. Third, the city’s largest employer, the federal government, uses city services, but does not pay property, sales or income taxes. The same is true of embassies and international institutions. Many tax-exempt non-profits also locate here to be near the federal government. Moreover, the federal government often fails to reimburse the District for the costs of dealing with major national events, such as inaugurations and demonstrations.
More at link.
-
Proper funding is NOT justification for statehood. Resolving the problem is one thing, statehood brings powers that were never intended for the area to be the national capitol.
And yes, it is a given the Dems would vote for statehood. It will give them two more votes in the Senate for forever.
-
Proper funding is NOT justification for statehood. Resolving the problem is one thing, statehood brings powers that were never intended for the area to be the national capitol.
And yes, it is a given the Dems would vote for statehood. It will give them two more votes in the Senate for forever.
If I'm understanding the article correctly, basically it would give BLM/Antifa their own state. That little state would have full authority over the National Guard -- so ... they'd be responsible for protecting the WH?? Does the Senate need to vote on this and if not can Trump veto this bill??
-
D.C. Statehood: Not Without a Constitutional Amendment
The Heritage Foundation by Hewitt R. August 27, 1993
https://www.heritage.org/political-process/report/dc-statehood-not-without-constitutional-amendment (https://www.heritage.org/political-process/report/dc-statehood-not-without-constitutional-amendment)
Constitutional Barriers to Legislated D.C. Statehood The District's mechanical problems with its statehood drive are not, of course, the critical issue. The fundamental barriers facing the current proposals to make the District a state by legis- lation ar ise from the federal Constitution. Basically, there are three.
---Article 1, Section 8: Permanent Congressional Power Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives the Congress plenary authority over the District. The exact language reads:
The Congress shall have Power... To exercise exclusiv e 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....
The Supreme Court has construed this clause as giving Congress permanent and plenary power over the District.21 Congress can delegate various powers of home rule, as it has done in the past, but remains free to resume full control of the District at any time. What problem does this crea t e for legislated D.C. statehood? Once a district becomes a state, statehood is permanent. It can never be revoked, as the Supreme Court recognized in shortly after the Civil War in Texas v. White.22 Making the District a full state, therefore, would be an abrogation of power that the Constitution explicitly assigns to Congress alone.
---Article IV, Section 3: Maryland's Permiss ion Statehood's second constitutional problem is Article IV, Section 3, which provides that no new state may be created out of the territory of an existing state without that state's permis- sion.27Under this clause, doesn't Maryland need to give pem-iiss i on before a state can be created out of the District? It gave the territory that became the District to the federal government for use as the seat of government, not for making a new state.
---TheTwenty-third Amendment Perhaps the most difficult constitutional problem facing the District is its very own constitu- tional amendment. The 23rd Amendment, passe d in 1961, states that
2 7 The provision reads: New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
More at link.
-
For DC to become a state would require many hoops, and it will not happen.
Puerto Rico a few years ago finally voted in favor of statehood. The hurdles for DC are more involved and impassable.
I doubt either becomes a state.