DC Statehood?

I maybe wrong on this, but I don't think that it will pass muster in the Senate. It was voted on as a bill, and not as an amendment to the US Constitution.

I’ve been reading up on the various arguments about DC statehood. I’m going to side with the constitutionalists, who say that under the US Constitution, DC statehood could never happen. Even though a DC statehood bill has passed the House, it’s probably doomed in the Senate. Senator Joe Manchin (D, WV), has stated on the record that he is opposed to DC statehood. However, even if such legislation were able to get through the Senate, there would be constitutional challenges;  even though I am not a lawyer who specializes in constitutional legalities, full disclosure, I am not a lawyer, nor would I want to be one, I would bet that the Supreme Court would deem a law making DC the 51st state, unconstitutional.

The Enclave Clause of the US Constitution states in part:  

“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, become the Seat of the Government of the United States.”

In 1788 Maryland ceded land to the Federal Government for the purpose of establishing a federal district. Virginia did the same in 1789. In 1791, the Feds accepted Maryland’s and Virginia’s offer, and the District Of Columbia was formed to be the seat of the federal government, by the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801. In 1846, the Virginia portion retroceded back to Virginia under the Alexandria Retrocession Act, signed into law by President James K. Polk. Under the agreement with Maryland, its land was to be used for a federal district, and not to be used for the creation of another state. That’s why there are groups that are proposing that DC be retroceded back to Maryland. I don’t think that Maryland is going to want to inherit DC’s corruption problems. We have our own. Look at Baltimore. 

There is a viable argument about “Taxation Without Representation.” When the District Of Columbia was formed, there was no federal income tax. That didn’t happen until the 17th Amendment, which was enacted in 1913. DC residents didn’t get the right to vote in national elections until the 23rd Amendment granted that right. The first presidential election that DC residents cast for their three Presidential Electors was the 1964 election, with the incumbent President Lyndon Johnson running against Arizona Senator, Barry Goldwater. DC didn’t get home rule until 1973. Before that, three congressional managers oversaw DC’s doings. Even today, all laws and policies in DC must be approved by Congress. Why? Because, it is a federal district, that was set up as the seat of government, of the United States Of America.

Some constitutional lawyers are calling for the repeal of the 23rd Amendment, stripping DC residents from their right to vote in national elections. That’s not going to happen. Nor do I think that DC will become the 51st state. Retrocession back to Maryland is not going to happen either. I think that there will be some sort of compromise reached between the House and Senate, in which the delegate from DC, currently Eleanor Holmes Norton, would be given voting rights on the House floor. She already chairs one sub-committee, serves on five other sub-committees, and serves on two committees. It’s not like she doesn’t have quite a bit of influence in Congress. The other thing to do, would be to exempt DC residents from having to pay federal income tax. Maybe, that would shut everybody up.