Washington DC could be VERY close to gainning a House seat.

[LimpingLib]

Apparantly there is a GOP compromise that would give Democrats a voting House seat in WASHINGTON DC but the catch is that it would also give Utah a 4th seat.

It would raise the total house membership to 437 voting members. It would also seem to give the GOP an additional electoral vote for President, thus ending potetial 269-269 ties.The Presidential change wont hurt us because we already loose 269-269 ties (GOP almost always has the majority in states congressional delegations,and I think always will) so loosing 270-269 will be no change.

As far as the House go's, Utah would already be getting a 4th seat (they missed it by literally dozens of residents to North Carolina)by 2012 so it would seem we are making the only guranteed gain,being heavily Democratic DC.

Also , who knows.... it could be a Democratic state that would loose out that last seat (sort of like the last soldier to die), I know the last time that it was a Democratic North Carolina seat that would have not been created as NC just barely made it over Utah.

Overall , Ill take the change and it has a good shot of passing.

www.mydd.com tells about it.

[demnan]

1. Yipppeeeeee!

It's about damn time. I'd like to live in the city, but with no representation, who wants to?

[SaveElmer]

4. So for one vote in the house...

You would give up any hope of Senate representation...

And you would be negating one of your electoral votes

[LimpingLib]

5. The way the population is , I doubt it makes any difference.

I think DC used to have nearly 1 million and that would have been worth 2 seats in past times.

Now the population is down I think (I should know as I live so darn close lol, but dont know)about 600,000-700,000.

The average congressional seat will be about 700,000 by 2012 and was just 570,000 as late as 2000.

At least now,with the population of DC shrinking or staying the same , and the nations population increasing , the DC residents not only will get 1 voting congressperson but there wont be any left over "wasted votes" that Virginia or MD could use.

Small consolation I know.

Now the only wasted votes will be all the statewide Maryland and Virginia races that could use the vote.

O well, at least DC gets us extra electoral votes in a close election.1+2. The 2 extra votes we wouldnt get if it were part of Maryland. Granted the DC residents could help swing Virginia for Presidential elections , but it in history was mostly from Maryland.We win both Senate seats from Maryland usually anyway.

[AllegroRondo]

2. Wouldnt this require a constitutional amendment?

An amendment was required to limit the house to 436 member, so I assume it would take another one to increase it. Which could take years.

[LimpingLib]

11. I would think so actually but that helps us if so.

It would delay Utah getting its extra seat plus gurantee us DC for sure.

The Utah seat is only good till 2012.

All the change gurantees is that there are 437 House members and 539 electoral votes.

By 2012 Utah would have its 4th seat so it could be a Democratic state that is saved from loosing a seat/EV.

[SaveElmer]

3. Never pass

DC Delegate Norton is opposed last I heard...would quash any statehood momentum (if there is any)...and like you said give Utah another electoral vote which I think is unacceptable!

[LimpingLib]

6. Utah gets one in 2012 anyway.

Do you think 2008 will be THAT close?

Has any Presidential election been that close?

She is foolish to oppose this.

All it gurantees on the House side is that DC gets an extra seat plus SOME OTHER STATE. Utah is just temporary.

[SaveElmer]

7. It'll go to a Republican state

2000 Election was 270-266...I wouldn't want to give up1/3 of my Presidential voting power in exchange for one measly rep...and give up any hope of statehood and/or full representation

[LimpingLib]

9. 271-266 (should have been 267) and it could be an extra Democrat vote2012

The GOP always has the majority in most states house delegations , so its very unlikly that Democrats would loose a 270-269 election that they wouldnt already loose in a 269-269 situation.

You dont even know if its a Republican states that will benefit the extra electoral vote after 2012,2022,2032,etc.

Also , what are the chances of a 269-269 tie in 2008 and even if it does happen,GOP still wins.

What the hell do you think your chances are for full state rights? Give me a break. You are worried about a possibility that we can have enough House seats to break a 269-269 tie in our favor in time for 2008? Fine but you are dreaming a trillio times more if you think there will ever be votes for full state rights for DC.

[SaveElmer]

14. DC Could get full voting rights without statehood

Not an impossible prospect, either by Constitutional amendment or by joining with Maryland. Either way, that possiblity will be forestalled by this. Congress will simply say they have given DC representation and that will be it. They will throw away 1/3 or their electoral power for 2008, and face the excellent possibility of losing it all together after that. The fact is most of the fastest growing states are Red.

[borg5575]

8. I would oppose that compromise.

One more vote in the House won't help much at this point. I realize that the additional Utah seat would not necessarily be an automatic rethug seat because Utah does on occasion elect Democrats, however, we have to hold out for full representation including two Senate seats.

[LimpingLib]

10. I wouldnt even agree to hold my bladder for just 1 minute for that chance

Id refuse laying down 1 buck verses your grand over that possibility.

The risk isnt worth even the most minor of consequences.

[Laughing Mirror]

12. Bill reintroduced by House Gov't Reform Chairman Tom Davis (R-VA)

No thank you Chairman Davis. You can keep your condescending patronage on the other side of the Potomac. The District of Columbia doesn't need you.

[LimpingLib]

13. People here remind me of the scence in Empire Strikes Back.

Where Chewey is choking Lando.

Anybody care to explain what I mean.

Or am I the only C-3PO or sane one here?

[liberalpragmatist]

15. I agree with you

Personally, I think DC should be made a state. The "federal district" should be redefined to be a narrow strip of land containing the White House, the Capitol, The Supreme Court, and The Mall. The rest of the area should be given statehood (although I think the name "District of Columbia" should remain b/c it's always been called that - besides, Virginia is actually the "Commmonwealth of Virginia").

However, I'm realistic that it's not going to happen for some time. In the meantime, give DC a voting rep in the House. This does VERY LITTLE damage.

Also, pass a law that says that for purposes of electing senators, DC should be considered part of Maryland. Hence, the constituency of Maryland senators would be Maryland + DC. Maybe Barbara Mikuluski for instance, would be styled "Sen. Mikulski, D-MD/DC".

It's not an ideal circumstance. But better half-a-loaf than a no loaf at all.