what do you guys think

7/9/2023 9:00:38 AM

I think DC sums the issue up quite nicely on their license plates.

7/9/2023 11:56:22 AM

the funny solution would be to abolish income tax in DC

7/10/2023 9:15:35 PM

the best thing would be to ban people from living in dc. problem solved.

7/11/2023 6:09:34 PM

There is no valid reason to oppose DC statehood. All opposition to it boils down to, "We don't want Democrats to get more Senators," and "It would be difficult." Bullshit.

7/12/2023 8:20:47 AM

I think the only rational counter argument I've seen is to roll DC into VA or MD. I thought theduke or somebody on here said it, but I can't find a post.

7/12/2023 9:13:31 AM

Well, VA already took their chunk of land back so they could sell slaves...

7/12/2023 10:12:10 AM

VA doesn't want DC. MD doesn't want DC. DC wants to be a state. So "roll them into VA or MD" is a solution that pleases exactly nobody except for republicans who want to limit the franchise of 700,000 people so they can continue attempting to rule by minority government.

7/12/2023 1:42:36 PM

If we added DC as a 51st state, we'd have to add Puerto Rico or somewhere else as a 52nd state. Otherwise the regular season schedule and playoff seeding will be off.

7/12/2023 6:28:46 PM

I didn't know about the VA retrocession. That explains the weird shape.

7/12/2023 7:19:28 PM

^^^im not endorsing it, just that it makes slightly more sense than "give them NO representation"

^^

7/12/2023 7:38:59 PM

Quote :

"There is no valid reason to oppose DC statehood. All opposition to it boils down to, "We don't want Democrats to get more Senators," and "It would be difficult." Bullshit."

Not really. DC is unarguably in all ways centered around... the federal government. It has the highest percentage of its residents working for the government *directly*, and most other jobs are probably second degree to that. Be it white collar stuff or lobbyists or all the people servicing and interacting with them. That amount of influence it has on the government shouldn't be understated. In WW2, DC's population swung up to 900,000 with huge fluctuations changing things up. Then it went back down. If DC was a state, who knows how that would affect or conflict with the needs of the federal government. I think congressional power to overrule is important.
It is, frankly, just one city. I don't think it should be a state, whether it had republicans or democrats or freakin' anarchists as the majority.

It isn't like I have a perfect solution, but that is my concern on the matter of statehood specifically.

7/13/2023 3:17:06 AM

Eh...

Many federal agencies and contractors who support the federal government are headquarters in NoVa or MD currently. And it's true that the federal government is a large employer, about 1 in 10 people for the entire DMV region. But there are also large populations of people that are employed by the leisure and hospitality sector, education, and local government.

The most recently proposals for DC statehood, if I'm not mistaken, involved creating the Douglas Commonwealth which exuded the small portion of DC that includes federal buildings.


Regardless, an American's employer is a shitty reason to deny them representation while still collecting tax revenue from them.

7/13/2023 6:44:21 AM

^My point wasn't strictly about 'their employer', it is about how at the end of the day the whole place revolves around what it is - a federal district. That is the greater point. I also did point out how other jobs are probably second degree, including the stuff you mentioned.

Having an entire state surround some federal buildings (Douglas Commonwealth) isn't a very good idea in my book.

Quote :

"That amount of influence it has on the government shouldn't be understated. In WW2, DC's population swung up to 900,000 with huge fluctuations changing things up. Then it went back down. If DC was a state, who knows how that would affect or conflict with the needs of the federal government. I think congressional power to overrule is important."

Read this again^

I'm all for solutions to fix the discrepancy, but making DC *a state* is not sensible. The main issue here is the 'taxation without representation', making it a state outright is a crude way of doing so.

[Edited on July 14, 2023 at 12:44 AM. Reason : -]

7/14/2023 12:42:32 AM

I mean, we all read what you wrote. It doesn't make any more sense now than the first time you posted it. Yes, it is true that the population of DC (as well as the greater DMV) has changed significantly over the years. If anything, your take away from that should be that what once was created as a federal district for the purposes of the government is no longer that. And you mischaracterize the city and it's residents by describing it as place built around a few federal buildings.

You have close to a million people just inside of the district. Some work for the federal government, and some have nothing to do with the federal government. What you haven't shown is how residents of the district have any influence over the federal government, or would stand to gain any influence over the federal government assuming the federal buildings remain their own entity outside of Douglas Commonwealth.

As it stands, the district has:
No senators
1 non-voting representative
No independent control over their finances or legislation
Notably, could not even send the police to help during January 6th
Notably did not have a national guard to send during January 6th
Notably cannot set up recreational sales of marijuana, due to a rider congress keeps in effect
Yet somehow, because some residents work for the federal government, the district has some sort of outsized influence?

Lockheed, Boeing, Amazon, Brinks, SAIC, Hilton....these huge companies all have large footprints in the DMV area, but are not in Washington, DC. It is not necessary to be located in the district to work there, lobby there, or contribute to the local economy, or to otherwise have an outsized influence over the federal government.

Just admit it man. The reason that DC statehood has such opposition is because like most metropolitan areas, DC bleeds blue. Republicans are not in any rush to add two democratic senators, or more democratic representives.

7/14/2023 8:09:13 AM

I wish it was a state so dems could get 2 more senators

7/14/2023 8:13:10 PM

^^

Quote :

"Just admit it man. The reason that DC statehood has such opposition is because like most metropolitan areas, DC bleeds blue. Republicans are not in any rush to add two democratic senators, or more democratic representives."

When did I say anything against that, that's rather obvious.
Just how it would be the opposite had DC ended up being Republican somehow.
You could also say, in context of congressional dems:
The reason that DC statehood has such support is because like most metropolitan areas, DC bleeds blue.

Quote :

"Lockheed, Boeing, Amazon, Brinks, SAIC, Hilton....these huge companies all have large footprints in the DMV area, but are not in Washington, DC. It is not necessary to be located in the district to work there, lobby there, or contribute to the local economy, or to otherwise have an outsized influence over the federal government."

I don't really see a point here. Yeah, and imagine the role and influence of those within. Many lobbyists and organizations have centers there because it is the capital -- which relates to my point about how making it a state doesn't make sense. I don't see how you could argue that DC is not super dependent on the federal government even if some people within it don't realize it. That's like saying we don't need trade with china right now cause I have nothing to do with China.

Quote :

"Some work for the federal government, and some have nothing to do with the federal government."

Again, by second degree, most would be related in some way. Think of all the lobbyists, companies working with the government in the area, etc. This is super obvious
It is literally just a city lmao, that itself is a point

Quote :

"What you haven't shown is how residents of the district have any influence over the federal government, or would stand to gain any influence over the federal government assuming the federal buildings remain their own entity outside of Douglas Commonwealth."

It is rather obvious, you're surrounding a some buildings with an entire state lmao. This could be easily be used to manipulate or affect the needs of the federal government in the area. It is already a highly political place in its own right, in times of high tensions or anything going on, congress needs to have jurisdiction over the area. States are, compared to the rest of the world at least, sovereign in many ways in the US. If DC doesn't like the federal government in some future, they could easily work well to put strain on the operations of the federal government, with the federal govt. being very hindered in controlling what's going on due to issues with jurisdiction and whatever.

Of course, the current situation isn't perfect as I'm describing it -- people can still influence DC like you said by living outside of it and near it in the DMV -- but making it a state cranks that to eleven.

Quote :

"As it stands, the district has: No senators 1 non-voting representative No independent control over their finances or legislation Notably, could not even send the police to help during January 6th Notably did not have a national guard to send during January 6th Notably cannot set up recreational sales of marijuana, due to a rider congress keeps in effect Yet somehow, because some residents work for the federal government, the district has some sort of outsized influence?"

Covered this question already. But to add a bit, yeah, significant on the ground influence.
Your point about the police doesn't make much sense, this could also, if DC became a state, cause the issues about jurisdiction and hindering the govt that I said above. Congress has power, they could solve these issues about Jan. 6 by creating whatever special force is needed or whatever.

And yes, DC has outsized soft power on national politics. It is the freakin' capital
Them having to follow federal laws isn't an argument against that


Either way, I don't see how it is possible for DC to ever become a state. I do feel for them, having to be governed by congress sounds kind of depressing given what they are. They definitely needs to be some sort of special session of congress or something to restructure and hear the needs of DC to cut out whatever bureaucracy is preventing them from being developed so that parties don't use it as a way to just set is as an example of their beliefs. Develop some precedent and tradition for that
And I agree, making it their own state would fix a lot of those things

But wanting to change our nation's capital into an independent state doesn't sit well with me. And that is an unfortunate reality

7/15/2023 4:52:49 AM

Quote :

"If DC was a state, who knows how that would affect or conflict with the needs of the federal government."

What in the sweet blue fuck is this? "Sorry, 700,000 people. You don't get to live as equal citizens because if you did you'd maybe be able to do some unspecified things like...well, I don't know, really, but I bet they'd be really bad."

Sorry bro, you want to disenfranchise a Wyoming and a half worth of people, you're gonna have to do better than "who knows."

Quote :

"Having an entire state surround some federal buildings (Douglas Commonwealth) isn't a very good idea in my book."

There are Federal buildings in every state in the union. Maryland and Virginia house all our intelligence apparatus and the headquarters of the United States military and nobody bats an eye. I don't know that you're an idiot, but this thing you said, it is idiotic.

Quote :

"It is literally just a city lmao, that itself is a point"

And both Dakotas are just empty fields, yet somehow they get four senators between them. Given the choice between a city getting to vote and a prairie getting to vote, I'm going to go with the city where people actually live.

And before you say "Well ackshully more people live in the Dakotas..." South Dakota has a population density of fewer than 11 people per square mile. It's empty goddamn fields. DC has more than 1,000x the density.

Quote :

"Either way, I don't see how it is possible for DC to ever become a state. I do feel for them, having to be governed by congress sounds kind of depressing given what they are."

Ah, now I know that you're an idiot. Thank you for clarifying.

7/18/2023 8:35:09 AM

a real shocker that someone who created a username referencing Elon Musk would play the part of devils advocate in an extremely dense way

7/18/2023 1:14:14 PM

^^

[deleted the original cause I don't see the value in arguing over the same points]

Quote :

"Sorry bro, you want to disenfranchise a Wyoming and a half worth of people, you're gonna have to do better than "who knows.""

The who knows is more of a rhetorical, but I would recommend reading the article below. I did also indirectly mention some examples earlier about how state policies could indirectly and directly affect the ability of the federal government.
Like how during the war, you had a huge population change (up and down, some temporary during the duration), maybe a lot of people were necessary for something, having control over the local policies of the area is essential for the federal government to ensure smooth operation. you can easily extend this to various other services. a state government is its own entity and can have its own priorities

I don't see much of a value in the arguments which refer to population or density. For one, they are anachronistic in that they ignore the historical basis of those states being established. Historical basis has value, that is how countries and institutions run. Things change a lot in the long run, and I prefer arguments based on principle. If I agreed with DC on that account, I wouldn't care if they had 2000 or 2 million people, I'd be an avid supporter.

If we want to go to the very basis of how we're built, then let's talk reform to the constitution itself, the electoral college, whatever. Hell, let's do a constitutional convention. But patchwork solutions aren't good

We don't have to criticize common sense in that DC being a state will obviously grant them a great deal of direct pressure on Washington, indirect or direct, to agree that there is an issue. I see this a lot across most political issues

(Who knows, maybe in the future we'll have huge tech cities powered by solar in Wyoming lmao! That would be a cool timeline)

I'm gonna ignore the name calling, you're probably at least 30 I assume, do better

https://archive.is/Rp6kt


^ It doesn't have anything to do with Elon Musk, but you saying that is a sign of a chronic internet issue
and having different perspectives on what matters isn't being dense, but thinking that it is is definitely a sign of that

[Edited on July 29, 2023 at 1:07 PM. Reason : --]

7/29/2023 12:44:08 PM

Also, just gonna add that I'm not opposed to DC getting voting rights and proportional apportionment in the House. I think that could be good

I just don't like the idea of statehood

7/29/2023 1:52:59 PM

Quote :

"It doesn't have anything to do with Elon Musk, but you saying that is a sign of a chronic internet issue and having different perspectives on what matters isn't being dense, but thinking that it is is definitely a sign of that"

Don't mind ihatelife3. He sees conspiracy and marginalization in pretty much everything.

7/29/2023 3:57:03 PM

what an absolutely sick burn

7/30/2023 1:34:47 PM

k

7/30/2023 6:05:27 PM

Quote :

"The who knows is more of a rhetorical, but I would recommend reading the article below."

Neither you, nor the column (not an article) go beyond a generalized sense of "maybe a bad thing would happen." The closest that the WSJ piece comes is this:

In 1783, a mutinous band of Continental soldiers drove Congress out of Philadelphia after Pennsylvania’s government refused assistance. The recent protests and riots in Washington’s streets make it easy to imagine a similar clash if the federal government lacked sovereignty over the city.

First of all, DC has its own National Guard - the modern analogue of the "assistance" Pennsylvania would have been providing. So under the status quo, the Federal Government already finds itself in EXACTLY the same position vis-a-vis the state militia in DC that they did in Philadelphia. This was true when the column was written and the editors should be ashamed that they let such hollow nonsense be published.

What hadn't happened yet in 2020, when the WSJ piece was published, was January 6, 2021. At that point, the Federal government again found itself under attack by a "mutinous band." Only this time, they had the DC National Guard ready to move in and defend it, and the President didn't call it in. It turns out that the biggest threat isn't the state surrounding the Capitol. The call is coming from inside the house.

Quote :

"Things change a lot in the long run, and I prefer arguments based on principle."

My principle is that 700,000 people should have representation in their own government. Yours is that having a state near the Capitol is scary for reasons.

8/1/2023 2:42:36 PM

Quote :

"nor the column (not an article)"

<3<3<3

in a nutshell, everything wrong with the internet and cable news forever that people don't understand this simple difference

8/1/2023 4:03:59 PM

I’ve resigned myself to just chuckle anytime I see any right-wing dipshit say something along the lines of, “even the liberal New York Times agrees with me!!-!” when citing an op-ed from a fellow right-wing dipshit

8/1/2023 6:13:26 PM

^^thats why i dislike tom friedman and to a lesser extent krugman

8/7/2023 7:43:23 PM