House Passes Bill Proposing to Make Washington, D.C., the 51st State

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  flynavy1  •  2 months ago  •  127 comments

By:   Eliza Collins (MSN)

House Passes Bill Proposing to Make Washington, D.C., the 51st State
Backers call the bill a civil-rights priority, but critics cast it as a Democratic power grab.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



WASHINGTON—The Democratic-controlled House approved legislation Thursday that would make Washington, D.C., the 51st state, but the bill faces an uphill battle in the Senate amid broad Republican opposition and hesitation from some centrist Democrats.

Proponents cast the bill as a civil-rights priority, saying the city's residents deserve full self-rule and representation in Congress. Critics call it a power grab by Democrats to gain two more senators and point to possible constitutional hurdles.

Thursday's party line vote of 216-208 marks the second time the House has approved the measure, which is backed by the Biden administration. However, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) hasn't committed to bringing it up for a vote in the Senate, where current rules require 60 votes for passage and only 45 of the 50 Democrats are currently sponsoring the legislation.

"I believe strongly in D.C. statehood, and we will try to work a path to get it done, absolutely," Mr. Schumer said Tuesday when asked if he intended to bring the legislation up for a vote. But he didn't provide any time frame.

Were the bill to become law, most of present-day Washington, D.C., would take the name State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, in honor of Frederick Douglass. An area around the White House, the Capitol and the Supreme Court would remain as a two-square-mile federal area under the legislation. D.C. would be the first new state admitted to the U.S. since Hawaii in 1959, and proponents have already designed American flags that fit 51 stars.

Supporters say that residents of Washington, nearly half of whom are Black, deserve the same representation as other Americans. Residents pay federal taxes, register for selective service and fight in the military, but they don't have a full voice in Congress and local leadership can be overruled by the federal government. D.C. residents currently have a nonvoting delegate in the House, Democrat Eleanor Holmes Norton, and no representation in the Senate.

Washingtonians "pay taxes, fight in our wars, power our economy yet do not have a full voice in our democracy," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) told reporters Thursday.

Republicans argue that Congress doesn't have the authority to make D.C. a state with regular legislation, and instead it would require amending the Constitution, a much higher bar that requires ratification by three-quarters of the states. They say the city is too closely tied to the federal government and too small to operate as a true state, and also charge Democrats want statehood to increase their voting power in Congress.

The city votes heavily Democratic—93% of voters backed President Biden in the 2020 election—and it is expected that its elected federal officials would be Democrats.

"Let's be clear what HR 51 is all about: It's about Democrats adding two new progressive U.S. senators to push a radical agenda," said Rep. James Comer (R., Ky.), the top Republican on the Oversight Committee, ahead of the vote Thursday.

Even as support within the Democratic Party has grown, a small group of centrist Senate Democrats remain undecided on whether they would support the legislation.

"I think that all Americans have a right to equal representation, you know, even in the United States Congress. But I haven't made a decision on it one way or the other," said Sen. Mark Kelly (D., Ariz.) who isn't sponsoring the legislation.

Even if all 50 Democrats did end up supporting the legislation, the current 60-vote threshold in the Senate would block it from passage. Some supporters say it is another reason Democrats need to abolish the legislative filibuster to allow for bills to advance with a simple majority. So far, there isn't enough support within the Democratic caucus to remove the rule.

If it became a state, D.C. would be the smallest geographically, at just around 66 square miles. The city has slightly more than 700,000 residents, putting it ahead of Vermont and Wyoming. Some Republicans have proposed having most of the current district returned to Maryland, just as the western half of the district was returned to Virginia in 1847, but local leaders have opposed such a move.

Statehood legislation was first brought up for a vote in the House in 1993 and failed. At the time, 105 Democrats opposed it. The bill passed the House last year, but was never brought up in the then-GOP-controlled Senate.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
1  seeder  FLYNAVY1    2 months ago

Is there any constitutional reason for D.C. to not be granted statehood?

Taxation without representation..... Kind of why our country came to be in the first place isn't it?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @1    2 months ago

None that I can think of, but why rename it the State of Washington? Why not just call it Douglass and call it a day?

 
 
 
devangelical
PhD Principal
1.1.1  devangelical  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.1    2 months ago

call it jefferson and short sheet the aspirations of a certain dumb ass teavangelical.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.1.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  devangelical @1.1.1    2 months ago

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
1.1.3  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  devangelical @1.1.1    2 months ago

That just might be the funniest, not to mention most meaningful, comment I've read today!!  

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
1.1.4  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.1.3    2 months ago

That wasn't a jab...... Damn haymaker that started off in Georgia, gathered speed through the Midwest/Nebraska-ish, and found it's mark somewhere in Northern Ca.  Yea Baby!

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @1.1.1    2 months ago
call it jefferson and short sheet the aspirations of a certain dumb ass teavangelical.

jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
1.1.6  bbl-1  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @1.1.4    2 months ago

Unless I am mistaken the CA Jefferson movement has Russian Intelligence roots.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
1.1.7  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  bbl-1 @1.1.6    2 months ago

CA Jefferson movement has Russian Intelligence roots.

This is just begging to be researched for our teavangelical friends here on NT!

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
1.1.8  Tacos!  replied to  bbl-1 @1.1.6    2 months ago

It was developed by a guy in Oregon in 1941. No Russians involved, intelligent or otherwise.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
1.1.9  bbl-1  replied to  Tacos! @1.1.8    2 months ago

During WW2, right?  No.  Follow the money and follow the 'social media' IP's.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
1.1.10  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  FLYNAVY1 @1.1.7    2 months ago

The early jefferson movement was before WW2 but got put on hold after Pearl, todays movement is iffy and started when cali started talking about seceding with oregon and washington state a few years back , even talking about going as far east as idaho and wyoming , i read that and laughed my ass off, seems some state is always talking of forming their own country when the political winds are not in their favor or liking.

 
 
 
MrFrost
PhD Principal
1.1.11  MrFrost  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.1    2 months ago
but why rename it the State of Washington

I live in the "State of Washington". 

Trust me, I went to D.C......11, 12 years ago? Just because I had never been there. Every time someone asked me where I was from, I answered, "Washington"..and every reply? "Oh, so you're a local then?!"

Seems that on the East Coast, they aren't aware of any states on the West Coast. 

Name D.C. something OTHER than Washington, there is enough confusion as it is. 

 
 
 
zuksam
Sophomore Silent
1.1.12  zuksam  replied to  MrFrost @1.1.11    2 months ago
Name D.C. something OTHER than Washington, there is enough confusion as it is.

How about Maryland ?

 
 
 
Ronin2
Masters Quiet
1.1.13  Ronin2  replied to  zuksam @1.1.12    2 months ago

The land that Washington, DC came from was Maryland and Virginia. Virginia received their land back in 1847. Maryland can have it's land back now; along with all of the people residing on it. They will still have a mayor; can vote for the governor; and will have representation in the House and Senate.'

Of course Democrats don't want that. They want more seats in the House and Senate; and more representation if the electoral college.

It is nothing more than a power grab to make Washington DC a state.

 
 
 
zuksam
Sophomore Silent
1.1.14  zuksam  replied to  Ronin2 @1.1.13    2 months ago
It is nothing more than a power grab

Of course it is, I think it's a bad idea either way. The Capitol needs room to grow and for security purposes Congress needs to control the area and the Capitol Police need jurisdiction throughout DC as they do now. If most of DC became it's own State or reverted to Maryland it would be a jurisdictional nightmare for Capitol Security. If anyone thinks the Federal Government isn't going to need to build many more buildings in the future they are sadly mistaken. They will not only will need to expand but they also need to keep it under a unified jurisdiction. We'll probably need to move into areas that are now housing as our country grows. We'll not only need more Government buildings but we'll also need more Parks, Memorials, Museums, and Hotels.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
Masters Participates
1.2  r.t..b...  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @1    2 months ago

A small population, only behind Vermont, but home to the seat of our government.

They deserve the same representation as every other citizen enjoys.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
1.2.1  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  r.t..b... @1.2    2 months ago

I checked, DC has a greater population than Wyoming as well.....

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
1.2.2  bbl-1  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @1.2.1    2 months ago

And Utah, Idaho and Montana.  There's six senators.  Sounds like the power grab has been accomplished by the GOP.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.3  Texan1211  replied to  bbl-1 @1.2.2    2 months ago

Power grab?

LOL.

Because they beat Democrats in elections in those states--according to the US Constitution?

Yeah--right.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
1.2.4  bbl-1  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.3    2 months ago

No.  Am only referring to representation.  

Example:  The population of D.C. is greater than the population of Utah.  

Vote for whom you believe best represent you.  No problem.  But that is not what this discussion is about.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
1.2.5  Tacos!  replied to  bbl-1 @1.2.4    2 months ago
The population of D.C. is greater than the population of Utah.

No, it isn’t.

Population of Utah: 3,206 million

Population of Washington D.C.: 692,683.

You don’t get to use the metro area for population. Those people live in Maryland or Virginia, and already have all the representation they have coming to them. The borders of the District of Columbia are constitutionally limited and defined by law since 1790.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
1.2.6  Tacos!  replied to  r.t..b... @1.2    2 months ago
They deserve the same representation as every other citizen enjoys.

I agree. But the way to do that is make them citizens of Maryland. Then, they can vote for a Representative in the House and both Senators. Heck, Maryland may even pick up a seat in the House.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
1.2.7  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Tacos! @1.2.5    2 months ago
You don’t get to use the metro area for population.

I see another problem here, it sets a precedent for citys/ metro areas to petition to become city states or states within states . NYC , LA SF Chicago , add those you think would go for that idea. 

 Now that may work in repbs favor , taking the major population centers within a state and making them states , and if the rest of the state usually votes the other way , well they get the representation without being outvoted by the cities . just have to go look at the county breakdown of elections to see how they vote.

 There was a reason DC was established and not part of any one state. 

 maybe its time to designate another 10 by 10 square mile area more centrally located in the nations borders  to become the nations capitol , preferably someplace NOT built on a swamp.

, and make what currently exists into a national historic site ran by the park service , they already run most of it anyway.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
1.2.8  bbl-1  replied to  bbl-1 @1.2.2    2 months ago

You are correct.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.9  Texan1211  replied to  bbl-1 @1.2.4    2 months ago
No.  Am only referring to representation.  

Really? Your post says otherwise, or am I supposed to glean what you really meant from this:

Sounds like the power grab has been accomplished by the GOP.

Don't try peeing on my leg again.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
1.2.10  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  FLYNAVY1 @1.2.1    2 months ago

Still the lowest in population ( vermont ALMOST had fewer people in the last census) and highest in elevation( so Alan Simpson use to claim).

 if the weather doesnt drive you out , the elevation will( thinner air ) not a place for someone with breathing problems , then there is the general independence thing going on known as self sufficiency , the solitude is not for everyone either , might be nice to visit to low landers , but few think they could actually live here, but that may be changing as well .

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
1.3  Tacos!  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @1    2 months ago

Is there any constitutional reason for D.C. to not be granted statehood?

I would think so. Article I, Section 8 defines the District, including its purpose and who has jurisdiction over it.

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, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings

So the District is supposed to be the seat of government and Congress has exclusive jurisdiction over it. That means it’s not supposed to be a state. How could it exercise rights reserved to the states when it’s a federal territory? And according the Constitution, as the seat of government, it’s supposed to be federal territory.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.1  Texan1211  replied to  Tacos! @1.3    2 months ago

Maybe they were just kidding when they wrote that, and what we can plainly read really means something else altogether?

Nothing more, really, than Democrats trying to improve on their minute majority.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
2  Ender    2 months ago

A couple of things I didn't get. First off, Washington? Here I thought we already had a Washington state...

Second, there would still have to be government areas carved out. It seems to me it would hinder the US capitol of any growth.

There is all the government run facilities, the museums, parks...

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Principal
3  Hallux    2 months ago

I've been to DC many times, it's a state of mind if anything.

 
 
 
charger 383
PhD Quiet
4  charger 383    2 months ago

NO! It is way too small and would dilute the other States

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
4.1  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  charger 383 @4    2 months ago

Clear me up on what you mean by dilute charger?  I'm not getting it.

 
 
 
devangelical
PhD Principal
4.1.1  devangelical  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @4.1    2 months ago

too many democrats....... (the darker kind)

 
 
 
charger 383
PhD Quiet
4.1.2  charger 383  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @4.1    2 months ago

Making a City equal to a State hurts the States 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.1.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  charger 383 @4.1.2    2 months ago

700,000 residents have no say in their government while Wyoming with its slightly more than 400,000 residents have at least one representative and 2 senators. Same with Alaska. That sounds uneven to me

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
4.1.4  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  charger 383 @4.1.2    2 months ago

Got it..... 

 
 
 
charger 383
PhD Quiet
4.1.5  charger 383  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.1.3    2 months ago

An area not quite 69 square miles should not be equal to a state 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.1.6  Trout Giggles  replied to  charger 383 @4.1.5    2 months ago

I don't think the geographical size should be a consideration.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
4.1.7  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  charger 383 @4.1.5    2 months ago

Not to be difficult, but it's not the square miles that should be counting.... If it were, would you give Alaska at 665,384sq miles, more political clout than say South Carolina at 32,020sq miles?  Keep in mind SC has a population of 5.1 million, while Alaska is a mere 732K.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
4.1.8  Ozzwald  replied to  charger 383 @4.1.5    2 months ago
An area not quite 69 square miles should not be equal to a state

If Vatican City can be a country, DC should be able to be a state.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
4.1.9  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Ozzwald @4.1.8    2 months ago

DC covers more land mass than seven countries measured by the same.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.10  Tessylo  replied to  charger 383 @4.1.2    2 months ago
Making a City equal to a State hurts the States 

How?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
4.1.11  Ozzwald  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.10    2 months ago
How?

They have to pay for updated flags?

 
 
 
MrFrost
PhD Principal
4.1.12  MrFrost  replied to  charger 383 @4.1.5    2 months ago

An area not quite 69 square miles should not be equal to a state 

RI. isn't much bigger. 

Also, geographical size counts for exactly dick. 

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
4.2  bbl-1  replied to  charger 383 @4    2 months ago

Yeah.  And D.C. only has two car dealerships too.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
5  Trout Giggles    2 months ago

Moving it back to Maryland isn't a bad idea. They would still have representation. Maryland might have to add another congress critter

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
5.1  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Trout Giggles @5    2 months ago

That's a thought, but back in 1993 in the last vote, 4 out of the 5 house of representative members from Maryland voted against statehood.  

 
 
 
zuksam
Sophomore Silent
5.1.1  zuksam  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @5.1    2 months ago
That's a thought, but back in 1993 in the last vote, 4 out of the 5 house of representative members from Maryland voted against statehood.

I think DC was the Murder Capitol of the USA back then so they were a bit of a Liability.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.2  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @5    2 months ago

I'm all for it!  Being a Marylander myself.  

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
5.2.1  bbl-1  replied to  Tessylo @5.2    2 months ago

And No to you too.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
5.3  bbl-1  replied to  Trout Giggles @5    2 months ago

NO.

 
 
 
zuksam
Sophomore Silent
5.3.1  zuksam  replied to  bbl-1 @5.3    2 months ago

Maryland donated 69 sq miles of Land via the Residence Act of 1790 so they should get it back. Virginia also donated 31 sq miles to DC but it was across the river so it was given back to Virginia through The Alexandria Retrocession of 1846. Since all that is DC today came from Maryland and because of the precedence set by The Alexandria Retrocession of 1846 if Congress should relinquish control of any part of DC it should be given back to it's original state which is Maryland.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6  Ender    2 months ago

I think we should worry more about places like Puerto Rico. Imo the only reason places like that are not given statehood would be some are afraid or don't want to have to give them all the social services.

All about money.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
6.1  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Ender @6    2 months ago

There is a report coming out today about why Puerto Rico didn't get the disaster funds they needed after the hurricane flattened them.  Preliminary indications are most definitely political.  I'm sure you can take it from there.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
6.1.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @6.1    2 months ago

I don't need to read between the lines on that one

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6.1.2  Ender  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.1.1    2 months ago

Just throw some paper towels...

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
6.1.3  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @6.1    2 months ago

He came out and straight up said he was going to withhold disaster funds because the mayor said some less than euphoric things about him to the media.  

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
6.1.4  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @6.1.3    2 months ago

More to it than just that...... wait for the report Sister.

Somebody here on NT will post it, and it should be a rocking good time with the commentary...!

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
6.2  expatingb  replied to  Ender @6    2 months ago
I think we should worry more about places like Puerto Rico. Imo the only reason places like that are not given statehood would be some are afraid or don't want to have to give them all the social services.

The people of Puerto Rico have consistently voted to not join the union.  Doing so would require them to do the one thing that they don't now.  Pay federal income taxes.  They enjoy the perks and benefits without the burden, with the exception of some government workers who do pay fed taxes.

All about money.

Yes it is.  The people of Puerto Rico like to keep what they earn in their own pocket.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6.2.1  Ender  replied to  expatingb @6.2    2 months ago

The republican party in PR supported it.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
6.2.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Ender @6.2.1    2 months ago

Republicans like paying taxes now???? Will wonders ever cease?

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
6.2.3  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  expatingb @6.2    2 months ago

8NOV20: 

At Tuesday’s plebiscite, residents narrowly favored statehood with 52% of the vote while about 47% of voters were against it,  according to the  election  commission's website.

This was actually the sixth time Puerto Ricans had a choice to make on statehood.

Pretty close to even.... I'd say that it should be closer to a 60:40 vote to carry statehood, but that's just my opinion.

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
6.2.4  expatingb  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @6.2.3    2 months ago
Pretty close to even.... I'd say that it should be closer to a 60:40 vote to carry statehood, but that's just my opinion.

I believe all of the previous polling type votes have indicated pretty much the same.  Then when they find that they would be responsible for paying federal taxes, and not get much more than they get now, if anything, the numbers go decidedly against.   It's funny how people like 'free' federal money until they understand that the federal government doesn't have it's own money and survives only on what it gets from the people paying taxes.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6.2.5  Ender  replied to  expatingb @6.2.4    2 months ago

This has a lot of the stats.

ballotpedia.org/Puerto_Rico_Statehood_Referendum_(2020)

I think it is more pride than taxes.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.2.6  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.2.2    2 months ago

"Republicans like paying taxes now???? Will wonders ever cease?"

jrSmiley_87_smiley_image.gif

Lawd A Mercy!

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
6.3  bbl-1  replied to  Ender @6    2 months ago

Or lack of it.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
PhD Guide
7  Paula Bartholomew    2 months ago

It is my understanding that the White House is in DC so that no one state can lay claim to it.   It is The People's House, not MD's, not VT's, not MA's, etc.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
7.1  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @7    2 months ago

That's the way it was taught to me in school... which made sense up until you hit that part of taxation without representation....

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
7.2  bbl-1  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @7    2 months ago

Except times have changed greatly since those times.  We now have submarines with nuclear weapons, the internet and even The Kardashians. 

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
8  expatingb    2 months ago
Backers call the bill a civil-rights priority,
Of course they would.  Much like they call America a racist country.
but critics cast it as a Democratic power grab.
It is that.  Have they ever actually read the US Constitution?  The seat of the Federal government is actually identified in that document and it is apparent that the founders want it to be a unique and distinct location.
If the people wanting this were serious about it, they would propose receding the residential areas of DC back to Maryland.   The Virginia portion of DC was receded to Virginia in 1847, so it's a precedent that has already been set.
That would permit the residents to vote for Senators and have representation in the Senate and not just in the House. 
 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
8.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  expatingb @8    2 months ago

America as a country may not be racist (some doubt on that tho) but it is definitely full of racists.

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
8.1.1  expatingb  replied to  Trout Giggles @8.1    2 months ago
America as a country may not be racist (some doubt on that tho) but it is definitely full of racists.

It sure is.

There are white racists.

There are black racists.

There are Asian racists.

There are Hispanic racists.

And on and on.

Racism has always and will always exist.  America has I believe accomplished the task of eliminating 'official' or systemic racism, but there is no government or private organization that will ever be able to eliminate the way some people feel towards others.  To believe otherwise is simply irrational.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
8.1.2  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  expatingb @8.1.1    2 months ago

We won't be able to eliminate it.... But it is a goal worthy of our best effort don't you think?

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
8.1.3  expatingb  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @8.1.2    2 months ago
We won't be able to eliminate it.... 

Since it's been around since our species started, likely not.

But it is a goal worthy of our best effort don't you think?

It would likely be a whole lot easier if some people would stop calling others racist, especially when they know nothing of the other person.  If you call someone something often enough, even when wrong, the other will very often say, 'shit on it' think what you want and "prove" the racism by ignoring and avoiding the antagonist.

From a personal perspective, I know both sides of that coin.  I was the pale skinned freckle faced red headed kid that spoke with an accent when I cam to America and got the Drunk Irishman or Limey name calling while I got my ass kicked by the olive skinned last name ending in an O or I punks in the neighborhood my dad moved us to.  Later in life, I married my late first wife who I've noted before would make Halle Berry or Alicia Keys look like junkyard dogs.   And my current wife is actually a naturalized citizen like me, but she comes from Columbia, and her ex-husband who is the father of my step daughters and son is of Mexican decent.   So, yeah, I know there are individuals that are racist, but I'll also note that none of us have ever had experience with any kind of "systemic racism".   Both of my kids are quite successful.  My son has his PhD and is working for the feds in cyber security, and my daughter is a Pediatrician in Tennessee.  If they've ever encountered blatant racism, they've never indicated it to me.  But then they were raised by two parents who demanded respect and accountability from each of them.  They were taught not only self respect, but respect for others, even those they disagreed with.  It's funny how when one gives respect to others, one gets it in return.

Those people who were totally abhorrent to me, I did one of two things.  If possible, I entirely ignored and avoided them.  If on a professional level and ignoring was impossible, I only engaged if and when absolutely necessary.   

It's not all that hard.  Accept people for who and what they are and if they accept you the same, engage them.  Otherwise avoid and ignore them.  You'll never be able to make anyone not hate others for (fill in the blank), unless they themselves want to.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
8.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @8.1    2 months ago
"America as a country may not be racist (some doubt on that tho) but it is definitely full of racists."

You have that correct my dear!  It is chock-full- a-racists!  You can 'nary swing a dead cat without hitting one of 'em in certain necks of the woods!  Tarnation!

It's absolutely astonishing to me how many that have been found, that have 'come out of hiding ', since whatshisname was 'president' 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
8.1.5  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tessylo @8.1.4    2 months ago

He made it fashionable to be a racist again

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
8.2  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  expatingb @8    2 months ago

Would you be good enough to post those constitutional details about "unique and distinct location."  I'm not trying to be flip here. The request is strictly informational so we can all read and evaluate the same thing.

Thanks..... The Mgmt.

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
8.2.1  expatingb  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @8.2    2 months ago
Would you be good enough to post those constitutional details about "unique and distinct location."  I'm not trying to be flip here. The request is strictly informational so we can all read and evaluate the same thing. Thanks..... The Mgmt.

Seek and ye shall find....

Clause 17

Clause 17. 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 Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
8.2.2  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  expatingb @8.2.1    2 months ago

Can we please have one of our legal types interpret what expatingb was good enough to post in English.  As an engineer, legalese gives me the galloping-trots.

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
8.2.3  expatingb  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @8.2.2    2 months ago
Can we please have one of our legal types interpret what expatingb was good enough to post in English

Actually, if you go to the Cornell Law site linked, they pretty much do just that.   I have an EE and legalese is just that much gibberish to me also.

PS:  What did you do in the Navy?  Pilot, Flight engineer, Weapons officer?  I did 28 in the Army and retired as an O-6, then worked in a civilian agency for another career.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
8.2.4  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  expatingb @8.2.3    2 months ago

Enlisted puke, but spent a bunch of as a sonar operator of the Lockheed S-3A Viking.  Did two carrier cruises listening to shrimp fart and Russians banging on their submarines to get them to work in the 1980s.

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
8.2.5  expatingb  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @8.2.4    2 months ago
Enlisted puke,

Or as us ground pounders lovingly referred to you guys.....  squid!  (All inclusive)   

I knew an RAF pilot that used to be a sub hunter.  I believe he said he flew P3 Orions (?).   But he bitched about freezing his balls off in the north Atlantic theatre of operations.  Plus some cool stories about landing (sliding from the description really) in Greenland on the ice in winter.  

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
8.2.6  Trout Giggles  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @8.2.4    2 months ago
listening to shrimp fart and Russians banging on their submarines to get them to work in the 1980s.

hehehe

 
 
 
charger 383
PhD Quiet
9  charger 383    2 months ago

Virginia and Maryland gave land to form Washington. DC and the land Virginia gave was returned to Virginia

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
9.1  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  charger 383 @9    2 months ago

Any problem with returning the DC land..... improvements and all back to Maryland?

 
 
 
charger 383
PhD Quiet
9.1.1  charger 383  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @9.1    2 months ago

I like that idea

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Principal
10  Hallux    2 months ago

Annex North Dakota to South Dakota, give DC statehood ... presto, same amount of senators and y'all won't have to change the flag.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
10.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Hallux @10    2 months ago

Why not? Or just let Alaska secede from the Union and problem solved

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
10.1.1  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Trout Giggles @10.1    2 months ago

Russians would want Alaska back..... Improvements and all.  Bet they'd even pay more than the original $7million we paid them for it.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
10.1.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @10.1.1    2 months ago

Then, no. Let's keep Alaska unless Canada wants it

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Principal
10.1.3  Hallux  replied to  Trout Giggles @10.1.2    2 months ago

Canada would go bankrupt building enough kayaks to protect the new shores.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
10.1.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  Hallux @10.1.3    2 months ago

Just set up a defense line of bull moose or cows with calves.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
10.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @10.1.4    2 months ago

jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif They would both be formidable defenses!

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
10.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @10.1.5    2 months ago

They'd work cheap too!  All the hay they can eat!

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
10.1.7  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tessylo @10.1.6    2 months ago

And all the bad people they can charge and stomp!

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
10.1.8  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @10.1.7    2 months ago

jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif You silly goose.  You're really giving me the giggles today.  Thank you dear!

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
10.1.9  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tessylo @10.1.8    2 months ago

You're welcome

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
10.1.10  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  FLYNAVY1 @10.1.1    2 months ago

oil up there would be enticing , they still kicking themselves for selling cheap what they thought was tundra and worthless.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Masters Guide
10.2  Thrawn 31  replied to  Hallux @10    2 months ago

Agreed, zero point in having 2 dakotas. FFS my little town would be the biggest city in either of them.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
10.2.1  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Thrawn 31 @10.2    2 months ago

lol the dakotas might have something to say about that since they both already have statehood.

 
 
 
charger 383
PhD Quiet
11  charger 383    2 months ago

What level of taxes would Washington, DC have to charge to provide all the services expected of a State?  

Would they have to move their prison at Lorton, Va into their own borders?

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
11.1  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  charger 383 @11    2 months ago

All good questions charger.....

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
11.2  Dulay  replied to  charger 383 @11    2 months ago
What level of taxes would Washington, DC have to charge to provide all the services expected of a State?  

DC residents already pay income, property, sales and automotive taxes. 

DC already provides all of the services expected of a state, except of course federal representation...

So why assume that they'd have to raise taxes? 

Would they have to move their prison at Lorton, Va into their own borders?

Which prison is that? 

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
11.2.1  expatingb  replied to  Dulay @11.2    2 months ago
Which prison is that? 

Lorton, the former correctional institution, which was I just discovered closed in 2001.

It had a pretty bad history, but that's for another time.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
11.2.2  Dulay  replied to  expatingb @11.2.1    2 months ago

Ya they made it into condos or some such...

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
11.2.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Dulay @11.2.2    2 months ago

I bet there's a ghost story or two about that place

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
12  Ender    2 months ago

I wonder if people just like the number 50. Don't want it to go up or down and be an odd number.

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
12.1  expatingb  replied to  Ender @12    2 months ago
I wonder if people just like the number 50. Don't want it to go up or down and be an odd number.

It was odd for a number of years when there were 49 states.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
12.1.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  expatingb @12.1    2 months ago

Hawaii was made a state the same year Alaska was. 1959

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
12.1.2  Kavika   replied to  Trout Giggles @12.1.1    2 months ago

Alaska in January and Hawaii in August of 1959.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
12.1.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Kavika @12.1.2    2 months ago

exactly! And in 1958 there were    48      states

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
12.1.4  expatingb  replied to  Trout Giggles @12.1.1    2 months ago

My bad.  The memory of us old farts admittedly has holes in it.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
12.1.5  Trout Giggles  replied to  expatingb @12.1.4    2 months ago

I'm almost 60 and remembered it

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
12.1.6  expatingb  replied to  Trout Giggles @12.1.5    2 months ago
I'm almost 60 and remembered it

Damn, you're a youngster!!   Let's just say 70+.  Besides I had other things on my mind then, like my first crush, first church dance, and all those good times as a kid.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
12.2  Snuffy  replied to  Ender @12    2 months ago

I don't think it's the number 50, i think it's more partisan politics.  If the DC area normally voted Republican then I think the players would reverse their stand on the issue.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
12.2.1  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Snuffy @12.2    2 months ago

Pretty close to the truth there Snuffy....

That said..... Taxation without representation.  Kind of goes against what we are all about in my opinion.

 
 
 
MonsterMash
Sophomore Participates
12.2.2  MonsterMash  replied to  Snuffy @12.2    2 months ago
If the DC area normally voted Republican then I think the players would reverse their stand on the issue.

If DC normally voted Republican Democrats wouldn't want it to be a state.

DC statehood isn't a civil rights issue, it's a Democrat power grab.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
12.2.3  Texan1211  replied to  MonsterMash @12.2.2    2 months ago

you got that right!!

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
12.2.4  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Texan1211 @12.2.3    2 months ago

Opinions do vary..... I see it as a under representation situation..... Why do 732,000 people not have senators and members of the house to represent them, when lower number of people in Wyoming, and Vermont do?

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
12.2.5  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  FLYNAVY1 @12.2.4    2 months ago

because it is a federal district/reservation just like a military base , the 2 you mentioned have gone through the statehood process and been granted statehood and were (except vermont) territories like guam , PR and a few other places in the world . the only reason DC has a city government is congress allows it at its discretion . 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
13  Tacos!    2 months ago

I don’t have a problem with residents of Washington getting appropriate representation in Congress, but they can have that if they are considered to be citizens and residents of Maryland.

And let’s be honest. Democrats in Washington aren’t worried about the residents of Washington having appropriate representation. They just want two more Democrats in the Senate. This is not a smart way to go about it.

For much of our history, Congress has respected the balance of power issues in the Senate when states are added to the union, and sought compromise. The current action is an effort to change this for one side only.

The reason it’s dumb, is that one day there will be retaliation. Republicans will control the Congress and the White House, and then they’ll set about creating East and West Texas, North and South Alabama, and so on. Just like if Democrats give us 13 SCOTUS justices, then one day, Republicans will make it 19.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
13.1  seeder  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Tacos! @13    2 months ago
I don’t have a problem with residents of Washington getting appropriate representation in Congress, but they can have that if they are considered to be citizens and residents of Maryland.

Problem solved.... Now how do we get from where we are to there?

And I'm assuming that you don't mean the it's dumb that the citizens of DC are taxed without having representation in Congress. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
13.1.1  Tacos!  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @13.1    2 months ago

If they are folded into the state of Maryland, it might be that Maryland gets more reps in the House. Maybe D.C. itself could be a House district (of the state of Maryland) for the people who live there.

As far as taxation and representation go, I'm pretty sure bills covering that kind of the thing are supposed to start in the House anyway, so representation there is arguably more important.

In any event, adding a representative to the House is a more appropriate and proportional response to the problem than suddenly getting two Senators for a city of about 600,000 people. If we're going to start handing out statehood solely based on being a big city, then we should have hundreds of states. Heck, New York City, alone, could be like 14 states.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Masters Quiet
14  Ed-NavDoc    2 months ago

In my own personal opinion, I find it interesting that the seeded article completely fails to mention the name(s) of those responsible for originating the bill. That has to he deliberate on the parts of liberal media and the House Democrats. I wonder why?

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
14.1  Dulay  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @14    2 months ago

The article is from the Wall Street Journal, hardly a bastion of liberal media. 

Perhaps the author felt that those interested in the legislative history of the bill would look it up for themselves. 

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Masters Quiet
14.1.1  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Dulay @14.1    2 months ago

I did after the fact and it was submitted by Delegate Eleanor H. Norton, a Democrat of Washington, DC.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Ender
Raven Wing
JBB
Mark in Wyoming
GregTx
JohnRussell
cjcold
Paula Bartholomew


43 visitors