• My Tweats

    • Flickr Photos

    DC Vote in the House: Clearly Unconstitutional

    In the Washington Post:

    The research arm of Congress says that legislation to give the District a vote in the House of Representatives is probably unconstitutional, a finding that could jeopardize its chances of passage, officials and analysts said yesterday.

    Duh.

    What are they talking about?

    The D.C. vote bill seeks to gain bipartisan support by increasing the size of the House from 435 to 437 seats. One new seat would go to the District, which is overwhelmingly Democratic; the other would go to Utah, the state next in line to increase its delegation according to Census returns and a Republican stronghold.

    If this passed the house and the senate, the president should veto it to protect the constitution and save the court costs.

    17 Responses

    1. The District Clause resembles nothing so much as the Declaratory Act of 1766. In each, a national legislature attempts to arrogate to itself Absolute Power “in all cases whatsoever” over and unrepresented minority population of the nation. This violates the fundamental first principle of democracy that “just power derives from the consent of the governed.” Power NOT so derived is, by extension, unjust and illegitimate.

      Fundamental first principles are the bedrock upon which the Constitution is based. If certain specific provisions of the Constitution are in violation of such principles, the basic principles must eventually prevail, not the specific provisions. The Founders recommended that we make “frequent recurrence to fundamental principles” to guide our decisions.

      We have corrected the provision in the original Constitution that provided for counting non-whites as three-fifths of a person (1820); we have corrected the provisions that denied black men the vote (1870); we have corrected the provisions that denied women the vote (1920); and we have corrected the provisions that denied 18-20 year old adults the right to vote (1970). In the interests of removing further contradictions between fundamental principles and Constitutional provisions, we ought to strive to provide for universal suffrage (2020), in the spirit of the fundamantal principles asexpressed in the Virginia Bill of Rights, June, 1776 (below):

      “6. That elections of members to serve as representatives of the people, in assembly, ought to be free; and that all men, having sufficient evidence of permanent common interest with, and attachment to, the community, have the right of suffrage, and cannot be taxed or deprived of their property for publick uses without their own consent, or that of their representatives so elected, nor bound by any law to which they have not, in like manner, assented, for the publick good.”

      Virginia Bill of Rights, June, 1776

      Washington DC has been “Governed Without Consent” since 1801

      Each citizen of the fifty states elects and is represented by one Congressional representative and two Senators.

      Equality, Nothing More. Equality, Nothing Less.

    2. Cit, each of the corrections you cite required a constitutional amendment.

      I am not sure what the founder the founders would have made of Washington city as it grew into an urban area of government employees. Nothing is the size and scope of USGOV was ever pondered by them.

      Personally, I am not comfortable with government employees having even more influence on policy and elections. The federally district was never meant to be a state by the founders.

      The best way to handle this, is to not have a vast majority of USGOV functions in DC, but to spread them out across the country.

      The easiest way to handle this, is to turn most of DC back to the original states (Maryland, correct).

    3. Washington DC has been “Governed Without Consent” since 1801

      97% of DC voted for Obama.

      I think government bureaucrats and politicians have enough power without having their own little personal fiefdom added to the rolls as well.

    4. Historically it has always been the frontier provinces that have been hurt from that “not being represented” deal. It was always the capital, such as Rome, that suffered only after letting the frontiers go to waste decades ago.

      This is due to the fact that when power is centralized, the ones out on the fringe start becoming expendable and not worth listening to.

      To then turn the argument around and say that the capital is not represented… only can exist in our day of decadence and prosperous decay.

    5. Also, I would caution our more socially liberal friends not to set a precedent for creating any new states, such as Washington DC.

      Do you really want America to have the legal justification to create new states from such as… Kurdistan, Afghanistan, and Poland for that matter?

    6. I definitely don’t think DC should be be a state.

      I agree that a politically over-strong captial is a bad thing.

      I am okay with new states being brought into the union.

      I think Mexico’s 38 states should be brought into the USA under USA Constitution, laws, institutions, and systems (not some EU-style North Mexican Union).

      It makes sense for California to break into 2 or more states.

    7. I am okay with new states being brought into the union.

      I am as well, but I suspect citizenw would not agree.

    8. There was I post I highlighted concerning South Africa.

      Link

      It is of particular interest due to the fact that they really did see America in this light before September 11.

      A lot of it seemed anachronistic to me, but that was because I was looking at it from the present, not the past.

      The article postulates and predicts that America will bow down and accept multiculturalism. I believe if the imperial and Jacksonian cliques in America ever gain real political dominance, that there are extremely simple and legally justified solutions to the problem of multiculturalism and ethnic strife. The US military will play a predominant goal in this aspect, but as seen in Iraq, they are not the ones that finally cracked the case. It was the recruiting of local militias and binding them to the United States, and NOT to their local governments which they refused to trust or to work with.

      Mexico’s current state of affairs is looking more and more like the Sunni Triange and Basra under the heel of the British. If you can call the Brits staying inside their base and letting the death squads do whatever they want a “heel”.

      Take a look at this video concerning Mexico, Purple.

      Kind of familiar, eh

    9. Most of the people LIVING in DC have no government connection, or at least none of any influence – like cafeteria workers, for example. The overwhelming majority of influential government workers live in Virginia or Maryland, and they COMMUTE into DC. They VOTE in Virginia or Maryland. About 580,000 ordinary people LIVE in DC, and about 410,000 government workers commute in every day (by FAR the highest ratio of commuters to residents of any US city).
      I am perfectly ok with DC being retroceded to Maryland, but Maryland is opposed. If it takes a Constitutional amendment, fine, but DC residents are outnumbered by other Americans 600-1, so YOU residents of the fifty states need to initiate and implement the effort. The bottom line is that half-a million ordinary people, citizens of the country like all the rest, are being Governed Without Consent “in all cases whatsoever”, which is an illegitimate tyranny, a raw exercise of corrupt Absolute Power, “because we can”, unrelated to any guise of participatory government. That is simply wrong. It is an American sham, and an American shame.

    10. BTW, I am also fine with the fifty states taking the capital to, say, Saint Louis, and carving out a 10-mile square from the heart of Saint Louis, and taking those folks vote away. Good Luck with that….

      OR, go to the geographical center of the states, in northwest South Dakota, and grab a 10-mile square of uninhabited land out there. That way you can prohibit any permanent edifices, and Congress can camp there in splendiferous and depopulated isolation while in session. If that’s what suits. But nearly 600,000 denizens/citizens of this nation, living in DC, have the same inalienable (innate, inherent, intrinsic) right to participate fully in their government as any other American, and it is far past time those rights were recognized and respected by the rest of America.

    11. The bottom line is that half-a million ordinary people, citizens of the country like all the rest, are being Governed Without Consent “in all cases whatsoever”, which is an illegitimate tyranny, a raw exercise of corrupt Absolute Power, “because we can”, unrelated to any guise of participatory government. That is simply wrong. It is an American sham, and an American shame.

      The citizens of the capital are not and where never meant to have a say in federal policy.

      While they are ar enot all USGOV employees, the other are there to support USGOV employees (that
      s the DC economy).

      But I understand your PoV on the people not having representation.

      If the country really agreed, there could be a constitutional amendment to treat DC like a state (2 Senators and X reps by pop), or state-like (2 senators and 1 Rep), or to further define the special status of the capital by giving district 1 rep.

      All of the above would be constitutional.

      The proposal at the beginning of this post (which is apparently moving forward) is not. I oppsoe it for that reason alone.

      If it passes and 2 new reps and a senator are magically created, my intent is to sue Congress myself or join in an existing law suit.

      It won’t pass constitutional muster,so it won’t come to that.

      Personally, I think 2 things should be done regarding the capital area:

      1) as much of the area as possible should be handed back to Maryland

      2) The USGOV bureaucracy should be distributed throughout out the US…is should not be concentrated in the DC Metro area.

    12. 97% of people in DC voted for Obama. If you claim that those outside, part of the government, would vote more for Obama due to his promise to expand government powers (and thus jobs for government favor entrenched bureaucrats) then I’m pretty sure you are going to have problems meeting Saddam Hussein’s 99% proof “vote” test.

    13. DC still runs on the favor system. Meaning, you have to know somebody to get a job as police or any other such position.

      So don’t give me the BS about people in DC not being part of government. Government is about owning people as cogs and tools, and the government owns DC.

    14. Fundamentally, it is quite a shame that American education prevents people from understanding the fundamental pillars holding their liberties and obscene luxuries up.

      There are so many conflict of interest going on in this system we call America that to call it a shame redefines the meaning of shame. When Ted “Splash” Kennedy, Robert “KKK” Byrd, and plutocrats like Harry Reid are in power for years, decades, and more time than some of us have been alive, the word “shame” is too light to encompass the awful destruction wrought by these “senior” politicians. Senior enough that they have much more power and say on laws and the formation of laws than the “new blood” that supposedly gets sent into Washington DC every election cycle. In truth, the absence of term limits prevents such “new blood” from doing a damned thing.

      They become part of the corrupt system themselves, instead of reforming it.

      If the subject of this particular topic is non-representation of Americans, then that is extremely simple to resolve. Non-representation is when 90% or more of blacks vote for Democrats.

      90% is when people have the right to vote, who are themselves essentially just voting for a share of redistributed wealth so that their Unions get money and others, like secure creditors, get shafted. This is a conflict of interest and it it is a “right to vote” only in the sense that “treason is a right” secured by the US Marines.

      If this is not political exploitation of those with power over those that do not, I do not know what is. And for a foreign example, there is always this.

      In fact, known criminals will be voted into office because of a racial solidarity among the majority that doesn’t exist among the whites. When Ian Smith of the old Rhodesia tried to stand up to the world, white South African politicians were among the Westerners pressuring him to surrender.

      When Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe murders his political opponents, ignores unfavorable court decisions, terrorizes the population and siphons off millions from the state treasury for himself and his friends, South Africa’s new President Thabo Mbeki holds his hand and declares his support. That just happened a few weeks ago.

      Your tax dollars will go to those who don’t earn and don’t pay. In South Africa, organizations that used to have access to state funds such as old age homes, the arts, and veterans’ services, are simply abandoned.

      What will happen is that Western structures in America will be either destroyed from without, or transformed from within, used to suit the goals of the new rulers. And they will reign either through terror, as in Zimbabwe today, or exert other corrupt pressures to obtain, or buy votes. Once power is in the hands of aliens, don’t expect loyalty or devotion to principle from those whose jobs are at stake. One of the most surprising and tragic components of the disaster in South Africa is how many previously anti-ANC whites simply moved to the other side.

      Once you lose social, cultural, and political dominance, there is no getting it back again.

      Unfortunately, your habits and values work against you. You cannot fight terror and street mobs with letters to your Congressmen. You cannot fight accusations of racism with prayer meetings. You cannot appeal to the goodness of your fellow man when the fellow man despises you for your weaknesses and hacks off the arms and legs of his political opponents.

      I am well aware of the tools used to destroy a society from inside out. Things such as calling those in your political path “racists” or evil Republicans trying to “disenfranchise” voters, black or white.

      The reality, of course, is that such movements are inevitably about power. The US Constitution prevents them from acting out their megalomaniac fantasies and so they must acquire enough power to render the US Constitution null and void.

      All these semantic games and pseudo play acts about “equal representation” are just that, a sham to shame the American voters into giving them enough power.

      And I believe the American voters recently did just that. They don’t need your DC “redistribution equality” scheme, you know.

    15. P.S.

      As a concrete solution, something that is not designed to destroy America and draw power to me and mine only, would be a temporary restriction of the vote for ANYONE employed by the government that would personally benefit for voting for any politician.

      This would include unions and politicians anyone else getting a hand out. Getting welfare and national healthcare? Can’t vote until you get off it.

      This would neatly preclude the US military, for voting in someone who is charged to order you to fight and sometimes die, cannot really be considered a “personal benefit”.

      And, of course, it would preclude anybody in DC or any body in any town that is being funded by federal dollars, should they be in part or fully employed by any institution that received a direct infusion of cash from federal sources.

      The details will be hard to iron out, but at least the law will be on the side of the right and not the side of the corrupt for once. And that’s something the people calling for more “right to vote” are not concerned with.

    16. I am open to the idea, but don’t think it would go anywhere.

    Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

    WordPress.com Logo

    You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

    Google photo

    You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

    Connecting to %s

    %d bloggers like this: