• Gun fear
• Why legislators don't worry about Constitutionality
• Hoping for Failure
• Halting the Tea Party
• The Crisis of Credit Visualized
• Intellectualism vs gimmick
• "Stop talking about it."
• "Obama Cartoon": It's all about the framing...
• Open Fields Doctrine
• But in here it's so delightful - thoughts on Obama and the weather
• Protectionism: Everybody stimulate yourself!
• I like the pictures
• Mandela, King, Gandhi... Blagojevich
• Shovels are so 1933
• The cutting edge is nipping at its own tail

• March 2009
• February 2009
• January 2009
• December 2008
• November 2008
• October 2008
• September 2008
• August 2008
• July 2008
• June 2008
• May 2008
• April 2008
• March 2008
• February 2008
• January 2008
• November 2007
• October 2007
• September 2007
• August 2007
• July 2007
• June 2007
• May 2007
• April 2007
• March 2007
• February 2007
• January 2007
• December 2006
• November 2006
• October 2006
• September 2006
• August 2006
• July 2006
• June 2006
• May 2006
• April 2006
• March 2006
• February 2006
• January 2006
• December 2005
• November 2005
• October 2005
• September 2005
• August 2005
• July 2005
• June 2005

« Hoping for Failure | Main | Gun fear »

Why legislators don't worry about Constitutionality

Last week, the Senate rejected a proposal that would have given residents of the District of Columbia full representation in Congress (retrocession to Maryland), instead favoring the proposal to give full voting status to the DC delegate in the House [District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act (S. 160)]. Under this arrangement, the District would be the only place in America to have a vote in the House but not in the Senate.

I did write to my senators (Webb and Warner) on the issue, encouraging retrocession. I also wrote my Representative (Eric Cantor), for good measure. I pointed out to them that allowing DC to be the only non-state to have a voting member is not in accordance with the Constitution. I also pointed out to them that it sets a precedent that I do not support. Any territory or district that wants full representation should attempt to attain statehood, as has always been the case.

That's what I told them.

I haven't yet heard from the offices of Cantor or Webb, but today I did receive an email from the office of Senator Mark Warner, and I thought I'd share with you all exactly what it said:

I believe that the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act takes a fair and balanced approach to granting District of Columbia residents the representation enjoyed by other citizens of the United States. In addition, we have received assurances that the bill will not open the door to any commuter tax or otherwise infringe on the rights of Virginians. I understand that some have raised concerns about the constitutionality of this legislation. While I appreciate these concerns, in my view, that matter is better left to the courts to address.

(Emphasis added.)

That's your plan?

I realize that legislators often pass laws that don't make sense and/or require a torturously loose interpretation of the text of the Constitution. But it seems to me that it cheapens the process to say Well, it might be constitutional and it might not... let's pass it and wait for somebody to file a suit and let it work its way through the courts and eventually see what SCOTUS says.

That's not what we Virginians sent you there to do, Mr. Warner.