WiNK
On D.C. Statehood
(Image Credit: American University Radio)
When I was driving to school on Tuesday morning, I saw a bumper sticker that said, "taxation without representation" with the proposed District of Columbia (or D.C.) state flag (pictured above) emblazoned on the top. This is the motto of statehood advocates who believe the residents of D.C. have been unfairly treated and unrepresented in Congress. Statehood has long been debated for the capital. The district currently ranks above both Vermont and Wyoming in total population but has no congressional representation. Residents of D.C. live in a sort of limbo where they are in fact American citizens, but they aren't guaranteed some of the same electoral rights. People who live in the district pay higher federal and local taxes, but they don't have a real say about how and where their tax dollars are spent, and no vote on issues such as foreign policy, healthcare, and Social Security. If a hypothetical statehood bill were to be passed, D.C. residents would get true representation in both houses of Congress. In a Democrat-controlled Congress, it seems like something like this could pass.
Statehood advocates have been muscled out in the past due to heavy Republican pushback. This makes sense because the district is already heavily Democratic, with about 76% voters registered as Democrats and only 6% as Republicans with remaining eligible voters falling under Libertarian, Independent, or Green. If D.C. achieves statehood, it would gain one congressional seat with another state losing a seat, and by default, two senatorial seats. Additionally, every new flag in the U.S. would be redesigned to accommodate the new state as the 51st star. Given the previous statistics, it seems likely that all of those representatives would be Democrats. Those particular gains would allow Democrats to expand their majority in both houses of Congress which would put the Republicans at an even bigger disadvantage.
Personally, I think the motivations behind statehood are not without merit. I agree that D.C. isn't being adequately represented in our Democracy and the phrase "taxation without representation" is an accurate statement on the current status of the district. However, The Republicans do have a point in labeling this as a purely political move by the Democrats. The numbers don't lie, the Democrats would have an obvious advantage in this deal. I find it hard to believe that Democratic leadership is only pushing this statehood bill through Congress to help the "underserved" residents of Washington D.C. get their representation. Certainly, there's a small element of that, but I'd argue that their current philosophy is not one motivated by so-called "good intentions." Politics is a numbers game, votes matter, states matter, people matter. And if D.C. were to become a state, it would be just another number on the board for them.
I want to see a bipartisan compromise or at the very least, a deal that takes into account the actual concerns of these people when it comes to statehood. Frankly, it's an embarrassment that they didn't have representation in the first place. In a land that espouses life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, we haven't exactly done a great job for Washington D.C. And ironically, our nation's capital is supposed to be the center of our democracy. What does it say about us that not even our nation's capital has equal voting rights to the rest of the country? It's unfortunate that the possibility of statehood for the district has been reduced to party politics and petty squabbling. Republicans have just as much blame as the Democrats in this situation by being unwilling to compromise. D.C. Statehood is long overdue, we need to create a solution that prioritizes the rights, interests, and liberties of Washington D.C.'s residents without getting caught up in the numbers or simple semantics. Whether a statehood bill gains traction remains to be seen. I for one, am looking forward to seeing if a solution can be reached for this divisive issue.
Thank you for reading my article.
- Cole Breen
Sources: