Loading ...
Global Do...
News & Politics
5
0
Try Now
Log In
Pricing
District of Columbia voting rights Satellite view of the District of Columbia in relation to the states of Maryland and Virginia. Voting rights of citizens in the District of Columbia differ from those of United States citizens in each of the 50 states. D.C. resid- ents do not have voting representation in the United States Senate and only a delegate in the House of Representatives. Also, D.C. is entitled to three electoral votes. The United States Constitution grants con- gressional voting representation to the states, which the District is not. The District is a federal territory ultimately under the complete authority of Congress. The lack of voting representation in Congress for resid- ents of the U.S. capital has been an issue since the foundation of the federal district. Numerous proposals have been introduced to remedy this situation including legislation and constitutional amendments to grant D.C. residents voting representation, returning the District to the state of Maryland and mak- ing the District of Columbia into a new state. All proposals have been met with political or constitutional challenges; therefore, there has been no change in the District’s repres- entation in the Congress. History See also: History of Washington, D.C. and District of Columbia home rule The "District Clause" in Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the U.S. Constitution states: [The Congress shall have Power] To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, be- come the seat of the government of the United States. The land on which the District is formed was ceded by the state of Maryland in 1790 fol- lowing the passage of the Residence Act. The Congress did not officially move to the new federal capital until 1800. Shortly thereafter, the Congress passed the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801 and incorporated the new federal District under its sole authority as permitted by the District Clause. Since the District of Columbia was no longer part of any state, the District’s residents lost voting representation.[1] Residents of Washington, D.C. were also originally barred from voting for the Presid- ent of the United States. This changed after the passage of the Twenty-third Amendment in 1961, which grants the District three votes in the Electoral College. This right has been exercised by D.C. citizens since the presiden- tial election of 1964. The District of Columbia Home Rule Act of 1973 devolved certain congressional powers over the District to a local government ad- ministered by an elected mayor, currently Adrian Fenty, and the thirteen-member Coun- cil of the District of Columbia. However, Con- gress retains the right to review and overturn laws created by the city council and inter- vene in local affairs.[2] Each of the city’s eight wards elects a single member of the From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia District of Columbia voting rights 1 council, and five members, including the chairman, are elected at large.[3] In 1980, District voters approved the call of a constitutional convention to draft a pro- posed state constitution, just as U.S. territor- ies had done prior to their admission as states. The proposed constitution was ratified by District voters in 1982 for a new state to be called "New Columbia". However, the ne- cessary authorization from the Congress has never been granted.[4] Pursuant to that proposed state constitu- tion, the District still selects members of a shadow congressional delegation, consisting of two shadow Senators and a shadow Rep- resentative, to lobby the Congress to grant statehood. These positions are not officially recognized by Congress. Additionally, until May 2008, the Congress prohibited the Dis- trict from spending any funds on lobbying for voting representation or statehood.[5] Arguments for and against A sample Washington, D.C. license plate with "Taxation Without Representation" slogan There is limited evidence of nationwide ap- proval for DC voting rights, however, two loc- al polls indicate that 61 to 82% of Americans believe that D.C. should have voting repres- entation in Congress.[6][7] There are multiple arguments for and against giving the District of Columbia voting representation in Congress. Consent of the governed The basic argument among advocates of vot- ing representation for the District of Columbia is that as citizens living in the Un- ited States, the close to 600,000 inhabitants of Washington, D.C. should have the same right to determine how they are governed as citizens of a state. This argument has been laid forth by many legal scholars; Justice Hugo Black described the right to vote as fundamental in Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1 (1964). He wrote, "No right is more precious in a free country than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the laws under which, as good citizens, we must live. Other rights, even the most basic, are il- lusory if the right to vote is undermined."[8] The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Ab- sentee Voting Act allows U.S. citizens to vote for the Congress from anywhere else in the world, except the District of Columbia. If a U.S. citizen were to move to the District, he would lose his ability to vote for a member of Congress. This is in contrast to citizens who have permanently left the United States, but are still permitted to vote for Congress in their home state.[8][9] Constitutional provisions The primary objection to legislative proposals to grant the District voting rights is that some provisions of the Constitution suggest that such an action would be unconstitution- al.[10] How the House of Representatives is to be comprised is described in Article I, Sec- tion 2: The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualific- ations requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature. No Person shall be a Representative ... who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen. Representatives ... shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their re- spective Numbers[.] Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment reaf- firms Article I, Section 2 in that regard when it says: Representatives shall be appor- tioned among the several States ac- cording to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of per- sons in each State, excluding Indi- ans not taxed. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia District of Columbia voting rights 2 In addition, the Seventeenth Amendment cor- respondingly describes the election of "two Senators from each State". Those who be- lieve D.C. voting rights legislation would be unconstitutional point out that the District of Columbia is not a U.S. state.[11] Advocates of voting rights legislation claim that Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 (the District Clause), which grants Congress "exclusive" legislative authority over the District, also allows the Congress to pass legislation that would grant D.C. voting representation in the Congress.[8] The District is entitled to three electors in the Electoral College, pursuant to the Twenty-third Amendment which says the Dis- trict is to have: A number of electors equal to the whole number of Senators and Rep- resentatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State[.][12] The constitutional argument about whether Congress can assign a voting member from the House of Representatives to the District of Columbia, but not a voting member from the Senate, is heavily debated on each side. In Hepburn v. Ellzey (1805), the Supreme Court held that the right of residents of the District to sue residents of other states is not explicitly stated in Article III, Section 2.[13] In National Mutual Insurance Co. v. Tidewater Transfer Co., Inc, 337 U.S. 582 (1949), the Supreme Court held that Congress could grant residents of the District of Columbia a right to sue residents of other states.[14] However, opponents of the constitutionality of the legislation to grant D.C. voting rights point out that seven of the nine Justices in Tidewater rejected the view that the District is a “state” for other constitutional pur- poses.[15] Opponents have also pointed out that if the power of Congress to "exercise ex- clusive legislation" over the District is used to supersede other sections of the Constitu- tion, then the powers granted to Congress could potentially be unlimited.[16] On January 24, 2007, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) issued a report on this subject. According to the CRS, "it would appear likely that the Congress does not have authority to grant voting representation in the House of Representatives to the Dis- trict."[17] Tax arguments Unlike residents of U.S. territories such as Puerto Rico or Guam, which also have non- voting delegates, citizens of the District of Columbia are subject to all U.S. federal taxes.[18] In the financial year 2007, D.C. res- idents and businesses paid $20.4 billion in federal taxes; more than the taxes collected from 19 states and the highest federal taxes per capita.[19] This situation has given rise to the use of the phrase "Taxation Without Rep- resentation" by those in favor of granting D.C. voting representation in the Congress. The slogan currently appears on the city’s vehicle license plates. The issue of taxation without representation in the District of Columbia is not new. For example, in Lough- borough v. Blake 18 U.S. 317 (1820), the Su- preme Court said: The difference between requiring a continent, with an immense popula- tion, to submit to be taxed by a gov- ernment having no common interest with it, separated from it by a vast ocean, restrained by no principle of apportionment, and associated with it by no common feelings; and per- mitting the representatives of the American people, under the restric- tions of our constitution, to tax a part of the society...which has volun- tarily relinquished the right of rep- resentation, and has adopted the whole body of Congress for its legit- imate government, as is the case with the district, is too obvious not to present itself to the minds of all. Although in theory it might be more congenial to the spirit of our institu- tions to admit a representative from the district, it may be doubted whether, in fact, its interests would be rendered thereby the more se- cure; and certainly the constitution does not consider their want of a representative in Congress as ex- empting it from equal taxation.[20] Opponents of D.C. voting rights point out that Congress appropriates money directly to the D.C. government to help offset some of the city’s costs.[21] However, proponents of a tax-centric view against D.C. representation do not apply the same logic to the 32 states From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia District of Columbia voting rights 3 that received more money from the federal government in 2005 than they paid in taxes.[22] Additionally, the federal govern- ment is exempt from paying city property taxes and the Congress prohibits the District from imposing a commuter tax on non-resid- ents who work in the city. Limiting these rev- enue sources strains the local government’s finances.[21] Like the 50 states, D.C. receives federal grants for assistance programs such as Medicare, accounting for approximately 26% of the city’s total revenue. Congress also appropriates money to the District’s govern- ment to help offset some of the city’s security costs; these funds totaled $38 million in 2007, approximately 0.5% of the District’s budget.[23] In addition to those funds, the U.S. government provides other services. For example, the federal government operates the District’s court system, which had a budget of $272 million in 2008.[24] Addition- ally, all federal law enforcement agencies, such as the U.S. Park Police, have jurisdic- tion in the city and help provide security.[25] In total, the federal government provided about 33% of the District’s general reven- ue.[26] On average, federal funds formed about 30% the states’ general revenues in 2007.[27] Political considerations Opponents of D.C. voting rights have also contended that the city is too small to war- rant representation in the Senate. However, sponsors of voting rights legislation point out that Wyoming has a smaller population than the District of Columbia, yet has the same number of Senators as California, the most populous state. Additionally, opponents argue that District residents have chosen to live in the city and are therefore fully aware of the political situation in the capital; however, voting rights advocates claim that the major- ity of Washingtonians have lived in the Dis- trict for 20 or more years.[21] Conservatives in the United States have also made the case that the District of Columbia should not re- ceive voting representation in the Congress because the city government is dominated by the Democratic Party and any new Repres- entatives or Senators would likely be Demo- crats as well, potentially shifting the balance of power in Congress towards the Demo- crats.[16] Proposed reforms Advocates for D.C. voting rights have pro- posed several, competing reforms to increase the District’s representation in the Congress. These proposals generally involve either treating D.C. more like a state or allowing the state of Maryland to take back the land it ceded to form the District. Legislation Several bills have been introduced in Con- gress to grant the District of Columbia voting representation in one or both houses of Con- gress. As detailed above, the primary issue with all legislative proposals is whether the Congress has the constitutional authority to grant the District voting representation. Members of Congress in support of the bills claim that constitutional concerns should not prohibit the legislation’s passage, but rather should be left to the courts.[28][29] A second- ary criticism of a legislative remedy is that any law granting representation to the Dis- trict could be undone in the future. Addition- ally, recent legislative proposals deal with granting representation in the House of Rep- resentatives only, which would still leave the issue of Senate representation for District residents unresolved.[15] Thus far, no bill granting the District voting representation has successfully passed both houses of Con- gress. A summary of legislation proposed over the last few years is provided below. Proposals during administration of George W. Bush The Justice Department during the adminis- tration of President George W. Bush took the position that “explicit provisions of the Con- stitution do not permit Congress to grant congressional representation to the District through legislation.”[30] Various such propos- als were considered by the Congress during Bush’s tenure: • The No Taxation Without Representation Act of 2003 (H.R. 1285 and S. 617) would have treated D.C. as if it were a state for the purposes of voting representation in the Congress, including the addition of two new senators; however, the bill never made it out of committee.[31] • The District of Columbia Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act of 2006 (H.R. 5388) would have granted the From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia District of Columbia voting rights 4 District of Columbia voting representation in the House of Representatives only. This bill never made it out of committee either.[32] • The District of Columbia Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act of 2007 (H.R. 328) was the first to propose granting the District of Columbia voting representation in the House of Representatives while also temporarily adding an extra seat to Republican- leaning Utah to increase the membership of the House by two. The addition of an extra seat for Utah was meant to entice conservative lawmakers into voting for the bill by balancing the addition of a likely- Democratic representative from the District. The bill still did not make it out of committee.[33] • The District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2007 (H.R. 1433) was essentially the same bill as H.R. 328 introduced previously in the same Congress. This bill would still have added two additional seats to the House of Representatives, one for the District of Columbia and a second for Utah. The bill passed two committee hearings before finally being incorporated into a second bill of the same name.[34] The new bill (H.R. 1905) passed the full House of Representatives in a vote of 214 to 177.[35] The bill was then referred to the Senate (S. 1257) where it passed in committee. However, the bill could only get 57 of the 60 votes needed to break a Republican filibuster and consequently failed on the floor of the Senate.[36] Following the defeated 2007 bill, voting rights advocates were hopeful that Democratic Party gains in both the House of Representatives and the Senate during the November 2008 elections would help pass the bill during the 111th Congress.[37] Barack Obama, a Senate co- sponsor of the 2007 bill, said during his presidential campaign that he would sign such a bill if it were passed by the Congress while he was President.[38] Proposal during administration of Barack Obama On January 6, 2009, Senators Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, and D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton in the House, introduced the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009 (H.R. 157 and S. 160). On February 26, 2009, the Senate passed S. 160 by a vote of 61-37.[39] However on February 25, Senator John Ensign proposed an amendment to the bill, the Second Amendment Enforcement Act, that would remove the authority of the District of Columbia to prohibit or "unduly burden" its residents from possessing guns in their homes, on their properties, or at their places of businesses.[40] That amendment to the bill would also repeal District legislation requiring gun registration, repeal the Dis- trict’s ban on semiautomatic weapons, and repeal the District’s criminal penalties for possession of an unregistered handgun.[40] The amendment to the bill passed by a vote of 62-36 on February 26.[41] Following the Senate’s passage of the bill, as amended, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said that a House vote on the bill had been postponed by him for at least a week on March 4.[42][43] On March 5, Hoyer said that, because there are not enough votes to bring the bill to the floor without any amendments, the bill is stalled for the time being.[44] On March 11, Hoyer said "[w]e know the [gun] amendment enjoys majority support before the House of Representatives" and so efforts were under way to get supporters of that amendment to agree to propose it as separate legislation rather than as an amendment to this bill.[45] Stephanie Lundberg, a Hoyer spokeswoman, said Hoyer hopes to bring the bill to the House floor in April, after the House returns from its recess.[46] On April 3, Delegate Nor- ton announced that she "expected" the bill to be passed by the House with the Ensign amendment.[47] However, Norton spokeswo- man Sonsyrea Tate Montgomery issued a statement saying Norton still considers the Ensign amendment to be "totally unaccept- able."[48]. The Justice Department has split over the constitutionality of legislation to give the Dis- trict of Columbia voting representation in the House of Representatives. The Office of Legal Counsel reported to Attorney General Eric Holder that the proposed legislation would be unconstitutional, but Holder overrode that determination and instead obtained an opin- ion from the United States Solicitor General that the legislation could be defended if it were challenged after its enactment.[49] From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia District of Columbia voting rights 5 Retrocession The process of reuniting the District of Columbia with the state of Maryland is re- ferred to as retrocession. The District was originally formed out of parts of both Mary- land and Virginia which they had ceded to the Congress. However, Virginia’s portion was returned to that state in 1846; all the land in present-day D.C. was once part of Maryland.[50] If both the Congress and the Maryland state legislature agreed, jurisdic- tion over the District of Columbia could be returned to Maryland, possibly excluding a small tract of land immediately surrounding the United States Capitol, the White House and the Supreme Court building.[51] If the District were returned to Maryland, citizens in D.C. would gain voting representation in the Congress as residents of Maryland. The main problem with any of the proposals is that the state of Maryland does not currently want to take the District back.[52] Further, retrocession may require a constitutional amendment as the District’s role as the seat of government is mandated by the District Clause of the U.S. Constitution.[52][53] Retro- cession could also alter the idea of a separate national capital as envisioned by the Found- ing Fathers.[54] A related proposal to retrocession was the "District of Columbia Voting Rights Restora- tion Act of 2004" (H.R. 3709), which would have treated the residents of the District as residents of Maryland for the purposes of congressional representation. Maryland’s congressional delegation would then be ap- portioned accordingly to include the popula- tion of the District.[55] Those in favor of such a plan argue that the Congress already has the necessary authority to pass such legisla- tion without the constitutional concerns of other proposed remedies. From the founda- tion of the District in 1790 until the passage of the Organic Act of 1801, citizens living in D.C. continued to vote for members of Con- gress in Maryland or Virginia; legal scholars therefore propose that the Congress has the power to restore those voting rights while maintaining the integrity of the federal dis- trict.[9] The proposed legislation, however, never made it out of committee.[55] Amendment process Given the potential constitutional problems with legislation granting the District voting representation in the Congress, scholars have proposed that amending the U.S. Con- stitution would be the appropriate manner to grant D.C. full representation.[16] District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment In 1978, the Congress proposed the District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment. This amendment would have required that the District of Columbia be "treated as though it were a State" in regards to congressional representation, in presidential elections (to a greater extent than under the Twenty-third Amendment) and the constitutional amend- ment process. It would not have made the District of Columbia a state and had to be ratified within seven years in order to be ad- opted. In 1985, the amendment expired when it was ratified by only 16 states, short of the requisite three-fourths (38) of the states.[17] Current proposal Senator Lisa Murkowski believes the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009 would be unconstitutional if adopted and so has proposed a constitutional amendment (S.J.Res. 11) that would provide one Repres- entative to the District of Columbia.[56] Un- like the District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment, S.J.Res. 11 would not provide the District any Senators or a role in the con- stitutional amendment process. S.J.Res. 11 was referred to the Senate Judiciary Commit- tee.[57] Statehood If the District were to become a state, con- gressional authority over the city would be terminated and residents would have full vot- ing representation in the Congress, including the Senate. However, there are a number of constitutional considerations with any such statehood proposal. Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution gives the Congress power to grant statehood.[4] In 1980, local citizens passed an initiative calling for a constitutional convention for a new state. In 1982, voters ratified the consti- tution of a new state to be called "New Columbia".[58] This campaign for statehood stalled. After the District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment failed ratification in 1985, another constitution for the state of New Columbia was drafted in 1987.[58] The House From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia District of Columbia voting rights 6 of Representatives last voted on D.C. state- hood in November 1993 and the proposal was defeated by a vote of 277 to 153.[4] Fur- ther, like retrocession, it has been argued that D.C. statehood would require a constitu- tional amendment, because it would violate the District Clause of the U.S. Constitution and erode the principle of a separate federal territory as the seat of government.[53] References [1] "Statement on the subject of The District of Columbia Fair and Equal Voting Rights Acts" (PDF). American Bar Association. 2006-09-14. http://www.abanet.org/poladv/letters/ electionlaw/ 060914testimony_dcvoting.pdf. Retrieved on 2008-07-10. [2] "History of Self-Government in the District of Columbia". Council of the District of Columbia. 2008. http://www.dccouncil.washington.dc.us/ history. Retrieved on 2008-12-29. [3] "Elected Officials". Government of the District of Columbia. http://www.grc.dc.gov/grc/cwp/ view,a,1203,q,447121,pm,1,grcnav_gid,1424,,grcNav_GID,0.asp. Retrieved on 2008-06-03. [4] ^ "DC Statehood: a Chronology". DC Statehood Green Party. http://www.dcstatehoodgreen.org/about/ history.php. Retrieved on 2008-12-29. [5] Sheridan, Mary Beth (2008-05-29). "D.C. Seeks to Fund Lobbying Effort for a Voting House Member". The Washington Post: pp. B01. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ content/article/2008/05/28/ AR2008052802976.html. Retrieved on 2008-12-29. [6] "Poll Shows Nationwide Support for DC Voting Rights" (PDF). DC Vote Voice. 2005. http://www.dcvote.org/newsletter/ spring05.pdf. Retrieved on 2008-05-29. [7] "Washington Post Poll: D.C. Voting Rights". The Washington Post. 2007-04-23. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/ politics/polls/postpoll_042307.html. Retrieved on 2008-06-10. [8] ^ "25 Legal Scholars Support Constitutionality of DC Voting Rights". DC Vote. 2007-03-12. http://www.dcvote.org/pdfs/congress/ legalscholarsdcvra03082007.pdf. Retrieved on 2008-12-27. [9] ^ Rohrabacher, Dana (2004-06-23). "Testimony before the Committee on Government Reform". DC Vote. http://www.dcvote.org/pdfs/ drohrabacher062304.pdf. Retrieved on 2008-12-27. [10]von Spakovsky, Hans. “Violating Their Sacred Honor,” National Review (2009-02-23) [11]Fortier, John (2006-05-17). "The D.C. colony". The Hill. http://thehill.com/john- fortier/the-d.c.-colony-2006-05-17.html. Retrieved on 2008-12-28. [12]“A History of the Debate”, The Washington Post (2009-02-25) [13] "Hepburn v. Ellzey". The University of Chicago Press. 1987. http://press- pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/ a1_8_17s12.html. Retrieved on 2008-12-29. [14]Dinh, Viet D.; Adam H. Charnes (November 2004). "The Authority of Congress to Enact Legislation to Provide the District of Columbia with Voting Representation in the House of Representatives". D.C. Vote. http://www.dcvote.org/pdfs/congress/ vietdinh112004.pdf. Retrieved on 2008-12-29. [15]^ Turley, Jonathan (2007-08-20). "D.C. Vote in Congress: House Judiciary Committee". Statement for the Record, Legislative Hearing on H.R. 5388. http://jonathanturley.org/2007/08/20/dc- vote-in-congress-house-judiciary- committee/. Retrieved on 2008-12-28. [16]^ Will, George F. (2007-03-29). "The Seat Congress Can’t Offer". The Washington Post: pp. A19. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ content/article/2007/03/28/ AR2007032801879.html. Retrieved on 2008-12-29. [17]^ Thomas, Kenneth (2007-01-24). "The Constitutionality of Awarding the Delegate for the District of Columbia a Vote in the House of Representatives or the Committee of the Whole". Congressional Research Service. http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/ RL33824_20070124.pdf. Retrieved on 2008-12-29. [18] "Individuals Living or Working in U.S. Possessions". Internal Revenue Service. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia District of Columbia voting rights 7 http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/ international/article/ 0,,id=97321,00.html. Retrieved on 2008-07-24. [19] "Internal Revenue Gross Collections, by Type of Tax and State, Fiscal Year 2007" (XLS). Internal Revenue Service. 2008. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/ 07db05co.xls. Retrieved on 2008-08-20. [20] "Loughborough v. Blake, 18 U.S. 5 Wheat. 317 (1820)". U.S. Supreme Court Center. 2008. http://supreme.justia.com/ us/18/317/case.html. Retrieved on 2008-12-29. [21]^ Richards, Mark David (November 2002). "10 Myths about the District of Columbia". DC Vote. http://www.dcvote.org/pdfs/ 10MythsAboutDC.pdf. Retrieved on 2008-12-27. [22] "Federal Spending Received Per Dollar of Taxes Paid by State, 2005". The Tax Foundation. 2007-10-09. http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/ show/266.html. Retrieved on 2008-12-27. [23] "Introduction to the FY 2007 Budget and Financial Plan" (PDF). Office of the Chief Financial Officer. http://cfo.dc.gov/cfo/ frames.asp?doc=/cfo/lib/cfo/budget/ 2007/DC_Budget-Volume_1b.pdf&open=/ 33210/. Retrieved on 2008-05-31. [24] "About the District of Columbia Courts". District of Columbia Courts. http://www.dccourts.gov/dccourts/about/ index.jsp. Retrieved on 2008-05-31. [25] "U.S. Park Police Authority and Jurisdiction". National Park Service. 2006-03-03. http://www.nps.gov/uspp/ tauthorit.htm. Retrieved on 2008-06-10. [26] "State and Local Government Finances by Level of Government and by State: 2005-06". United States Census Bureau. 2008-07-01. http://www.census.gov/govs/ estimate/0609dcsl_1.html. Retrieved on 2009-01-13. [27] "State Government Finances: 2007". United States Census Bureau. 2008-11-04. http://ftp2.census.gov/govs/ state/07statess.xls. Retrieved on 2009-01-13. [28] "Lieberman Deeply Disappointed By Failure To Secure 60 Votes For Equal Representation For D.C. Citizens". Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. 2007-09-18. http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/ index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressR Retrieved on 2008-12-28. [29] "Senator Collins’ Statement On District Of Columbia Voting Rights Legislation". Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. 2007-06-13. http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/ index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressR Retrieved on 2008-12-28. [30]Elwood, John. “Constitutionality of D.C. Voting Rights Act of 2007,” Testimony to Senate Subcommittee (2007-05-23). [31] "No Taxation Without Representation Act of 2003 (108th Congress, H.R. 1285)". GovTrack. 2003. http://www.govtrack.us/ congress/bill.xpd?bill=h108-1285. Retrieved on 2008-12-28. [32] "District of Columbia Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act of 2006 (109th Congress, H.R. 5388)". GovTrack. 2006. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/ bill.xpd?bill=h109-5388. Retrieved on 2008-12-28. [33] "District of Columbia Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act of 2007 (110th Congress, H.R. 328)". GovTrack. 2007. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/ bill.xpd?bill=h110-328. Retrieved on 2008-12-28. [34] "District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2007". GovTrack. 2007. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/ bill.xpd?bill=h110-1433. Retrieved on 2008-12-28. [35] "District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2007 (110th Congress, H.R. 1905)". GovTrack. 2007. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/ bill.xpd?bill=h110-1905. Retrieved on 2008-12-28. [36] "District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2007 (110th Congress, S. 1257)". GovTrack. 2007. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/ bill.xpd?bill=s110-1257. Retrieved on 2008-12-28. [37]Burr, Thomas (2008-12-15). "D.C. looks to get House vote - with Utah’s help". The Salt Lake Tribune. http://www.sltrib.com/ci_11226437. Retrieved on 2008-12-28. [38] "Two More DC Superdelegates Endorse Barack Obama". Obama for America. 2008-02-26. http://www.barackobama.com/2008/02/ From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia District of Columbia voting rights 8 26/ two_more_dc_superdelegates_end.php. Retrieved on 2008-12-28. [39]Warren, Timothy (February 26, 2009). "Senate votes to give D.C. full House vote". The Washington Times. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/ 2009/feb/26/senate-votes-give-dc-full- house-vote/. Retrieved on 2009-02-26. The Senate roll call is here. [40]^ "S.Amdt.575: Text of the amendment (press "Printer Friendly Display")". United States Senate. Thomas. Library of Congress.. February 25, 2009. http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/ R?r111:FLD001:S02491. [41] "Vote on S.Amdt. 575 to S. 160". U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 111th Congress - 1st Session. United States Senate. February 26, 2009. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/ roll_call_lists/ roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00072. [42]Nakamura, David A. (March 4, 2009). "Rep. Hoyer Wants More Talk on Voting Rights Bill". The Washington Post. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dc/ 2009/03/ rep_hoyer_wants_more_talk_on_v.html. [43]Kossov, Igor (March 4, 2009). "D.C. Vote Bill Stalls In House". CBS News. http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/03/ 04/politics/politicalhotsheet/ entry4842950.shtml. [44]Nakamura, David; Stewart, Nikita (March 5, 2009). "Gun Law Push Puts D.C. Vote Bill on Indefinite Hold". The Washington Post: p. B01. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ content/article/2009/03/04/ AR2009030403802.html. [45]Sheridan, Mary Beth (March 11, 2009). "Leaders Strategize on How to Pass D.C. Vote Bill". The Washington Post. pp. B03. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ content/article/2009/03/10/ AR2009031003486.html. Retrieved on 2009-03-11. [46] "House delays DC vote bill for weeks". Associated Press and The Washington Examiner. March 27, 2009. http://www.examiner.com/ a-1928485~House_delays_DC_vote_bill_for_weeks.html. Retrieved on 2009-03-28. [47]Soraghan, Mike (April 3, 2009). "D.C. voting rights moves a step closer". The Hill. http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/ d.c.-voting-rights-moves-a-step- closer-2009-04-03.html. Retrieved on 2009-04-04. [48]Soraghan, Mike (April 6, 2009). "Norton: D.C. gun measure ’unacceptable’". The Hill. http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/ norton-dc-gun-measure-totally- unacceptable-2009-04-06.html. Retrieved on 2009-04-08. [49] Johnson, Carrie (April 1, 2009). "A Split At Justice On D.C. Vote Bill". The Washington Post. pp. A01. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ content/article/2009/03/31/ AR2009033104426.html?hpid=topnews. Retrieved on 2009-04-01. [50] "Get to know D.C.". The Historical Society of Washington, D.C.. 2004. http://www.historydc.org/gettoknow/ faq.asp. Retrieved on 2008-05-27. [51] "District of Columbia-Maryland Reunion Act (110th Congress, H.R. 1858)". GovTrack. 2007. http://www.govtrack.us/ congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1858. Retrieved on 2008-12-29. [52]^ "Q&A with Rep. Tom Davis". The Washington Post. 1998-03-03. http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp- srv/zforum/levey/bob0303b.htm. Retrieved on 2008-12-29. [53]^ Pate, Hewitt R. (August 27, 1993). "D.C. Statehood: Not Without a Constitutional Amendment". The Heritage Foundation. http://www.heritage.org/research/ politicalphilosophy/hl461.cfm. Retrieved on 2008-12-29. [54]Madison, James (1996-04-30). "The Federalist No. 43". The Independent Journal. Library of Congress. http://thomas.loc.gov/home/fedpapers/ fed_43.html. Retrieved on 2008-05-31. [55]^ "District of Columbia Voting Rights Restoration Act of 2004 (108th Congress, H.R. 3709)". GovTrack. 2004. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/ bill.xpd?bill=h108-3709. Retrieved on 2008-12-29. [56]Office of Senator Lisa Murkowski (February 25, 2009). Sen. Murkowski Introduces D.C. Voting Rights Constitutional Amendment. Press release. http://murkowski.senate.gov/ public/ index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&C From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia District of Columbia voting rights 9 e2d4-b923-d71e-5cb67228a8b8&IsPrint=true. Retrieved on 2009-02-27. [57] "S. J. RES. 11: All Congressional Actions". 111th Congress, 1st Session. United States Senate.. Thomas. Library of Congress. February 25, 2009. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/ z?d111:SJ00011:@@@X. [58]^ "District of Columbia Official Code". Westlaw. 2009. http://government.westlaw.com/ linkedslice/default.asp?SP=DCC-1000. Retrieved on 2009-05-03. External links • D.C. Statehood Green Party • DC Vote • DC Represent • Cityhood for DC • The Founder’s Constitution: Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_voting_rights" Categories: Home rule and voting rights of the District of Columbia, History of voting rights in the United States This page was last modified on 3 May 2009, at 18:17 (UTC). All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.) Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a U.S. registered 501(c)(3) tax- deductible nonprofit charity. Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia District of Columbia voting rights 10