tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6762928.post1131836112017389929..comments2024-01-03T05:23:36.046-08:00Comments on The Citizens: Taxation with some RepresentationUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6762928.post-77546413629340841692009-02-24T20:24:00.000-08:002009-02-24T20:24:00.000-08:00I have actually been persuaded of the opposite. T...I have actually been persuaded of the opposite. The federal district was ceded to the federal govt by states. If Congress had agreed with the states in 1801, when this was done, that the residents would retain voting rights, nobody would have blinked an eye. Remember that Virginia even clawed back its portion (Alexandria) with no fuss. <BR/><BR/>So I don't find "done and done" very convincing as to the ability to extend voting rights to DC for the House. The Senate is obviously different, and I mean obviously.The Law Talking Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17886791396468512490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6762928.post-59833354431138578652009-02-24T18:08:00.000-08:002009-02-24T18:08:00.000-08:00While I am impressed by the list that LTG compiles...While I am impressed by the list that LTG compiles of situations where DC is treated like a state, the "Done and done" argument still seems pretty strong to me. There is clear language in the constitution that DC is not to be treated like a state when it comes to selecting Senators and Representatives. In particular the 23rd Amendment hammers home the point when it gives DC electors equal to the number of, "Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State." (But to which the District obviously is <B>not</B> entitled, as it is <B>not</B> a state.)Dr. Strangelovehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14407042105777411150noreply@blogger.com