Tweet
Obviously this is unconstitutional, but why did the Framers want to deny the District representation?
-
-
Rivalry between the new States to have the seat of Federal power in their territory, IIRC.Originally posted by Berzerker
Obviously this is unconstitutional, but why did the Framers want to deny the District representation?I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator RubioComment
-
The District's neutrality isn't compromised by having a rep, Congress has jurisdiction regardless of any representation. I gotta admit this is a peculiarity that needs explanation, the whole "no taxation without representation" argument is ignored when it comes to the District.Comment
-
They neutered the jurisdiction, Berz.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
you mean they let local pols run the city?Comment
-
He means they prevented it from becomely powerful.Comment
-
.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
funny pic I found on Wiki:
Comment
-
maybe you're right, perhaps an unwritten rule or practice. Makes sense because back then pols lived in their own states and met once a year for several weeks. They weren't in much of a position to act as a legislature for the city, so Congress let the locals run things.Comment
-
Wtf are you talking about Berz?
I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
The Constitution gives Congress jurisdiction, how does having the people represented in Congress make "it" powerful? I think Dan means congressional "jurisdiction" has been neutered by giving the locals more control over the city. Maybe he means something else, but as long as Washingtonians have their own city gov't albeit funded by Congress, they can write their own laws more or less.He means they prevented it from becomely powerful.Comment
-
lets start with what you saidWtf are you talking about Berz?
Who is they and what does that mean?They neutered the jurisdictionComment
-
The Framers neutered the jurisdiction of DC. They took away all of its potential power.
Congresscritters have always lived in the DC area for most of the year (not in their states) and have always meddled in the city's affairs. Only recently has DC had home rule and an elected mayor, but still everything must be approved by the congress. DC is congress' *****.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
By "jurisdiction of DC" DanS means the jurisdiction [place] called DC, not the jurisdiction [authority] of DC.Comment
-
I dont think many members of Congress lived in the District 200 years ago, but yes, the Framers clearly gave Congress jurisdiction over the District. My question is: why did the Framers see fit to deny Washingtonians representation in Congress when one of the reasons they fought a revolution was getting taxed and having no say in gov't.Comment
Comment