Wherein I Agree With Joe Lieberman

The District of Columbia clearly should have representation in Congress. More people live in DC than some states, and the Congress makes decisions directly impacting DC all the time, and yet they are without representation. Furthermore, 437 representatives over 435 (the bill would add one more district to Utah to balance things out) makes Congress that much more representative of the people (I'd bump it to 500, myself). Failure to allow DC residents a voice is nothing more than airbrushed racism masked by arcane arguments that aren't even Constitutionally valid.

Critics have also raised the constitutional concern that the District is not a state. Article I of the Constitution says that the House of Representatives shall be composed of members elected by the people of "the several states."

However, Georgetown law professor Viet Dinh, President Bush's assistant attorney general for constitutional issues in his first term, detailed the many ways the Supreme Court has approved congressional action equating the District to a state for constitutional purposes. Whether "commerce among the states," federal lawsuits between "citizens of different states," "direct taxes . . . apportioned among the several states" and more, the court has ruled that the word "states" in various constitutional provisions includes our capital city.

We believe that the Framers, who gave Congress these powers, did not intend to deny Congress the right to grant the vote to the District as well.

No taxation without representation. Give DC a vote.