Jump to content
270soft Forum
vcczar

Washington DC Statehood Poll and other polls

Washington DC Statehood Poll  

20 members have voted

  1. 1. DC already gets to vote in presidential elections like a state, it is more populous than two current states, it would virtually guarantee two African-American Democratic senators and a US Rep. Should DC be granted statehood?

    • Yes, DC should be the 51st US State
    • No, but DC should be annexed to Maryland, which would at least give them a real representation in Congress with a US Rep, but will removed the electoral votes.
    • No, but DC should be annexed to Virginia, which would at least give them a real representation in Congress with a US Rep, but will removed the electoral votes. Doing this would also guarantee Virginia's blue state status for years.
      0
    • No, DC is basically just a city (well, two cities merged into each other), and they don't deserve two Senators who will just pack the Senate for Democrats.
    • Other *For Patine*
  2. 2. On a similar note, should Puerto RIco, which would be the 31st largest state, be granted statehood? This would also result in two Democratic Senators and likely 4 Dem US Reps

    • Yes, they have been US citizens for about 100 years and they have more people than 19 current US states.
    • No, primarily because it stacks Congress for the Democrats
    • No, primarily because their Culture is more Latin American than European-American
      0
    • No, because we'd have to change the US Flag and add seats and tables to the congressional chambers.
    • Other *For Patine*
  3. 3. Should any of the following state creations or state reductions occur?

    • California should be broken up into two or three states
    • Texas should be broken up into three or more states
    • North Dakota and South Dakota should merge
    • Wyoming, Montana and Idaho should merge
    • West Virginia should be restored to Virginia
    • NYC should be its own state
    • Long Island should be its own state
    • Staten Island should be transferred from NYC to New Jersey
    • East Connecticut should secede and join New York
    • Maine should return to Massachusetts
      0
    • Florida should be split into two states
    • All states should be fragmented into their counties, creating thousands of states. (Congress would be held via the internet.)
    • States should merge into about 7 Super States (Regions)
      0
    • Abolish states. Mayors will be regulated by regional governors elected by the region but who have no real executive authority besides oversight and appointing delegates to Congress. US Senate is abolished. House delegates are appointed by regional governors. The number of delegates are determined by that region's % of national population, giving a standard of 100 delegates to Congress total at all times. Federal government overrides all local or regional laws at any time.
      0
    • No changes.
    • Other *For Patine*
  4. 4. Who would you at least slightly prefer more as President?

    • Trump
    • Biden
    • They are 100% equally great, mediocre, or terrible. It is impossible to choose one over the other based on evidence of their political history and rhetoric. *For Patine*
  5. 5. How do you identify ideologically, whether you are Democrat, Republican, or Independent? Pick whichever closest fits you.

    • Progressive (think Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, AOC)
    • Liberal (think Biden, Obama, Pelosi, Hillary Clinton)
    • Moderate Left (think Sinema, Manchin, Pres-era. Bill Clinton, VP-era Al Gore, Steve Bullock, Jim Webb)
    • Moderate Right (Colin Powell, Trump-era John Kasich and Mitt Romney, Jon Huntsman, Charlie Baker, Larry Hogan, late John McCain)
    • Conservative (Marco Rubio, Mitch McConnell, John Thune)
    • Traditionalist (Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Rand Paul, Dan Crenshaw, Mike Pence)
    • Populist Nationalist (Donald Trump, Steve Bannon, Kris Kobach, Steve King)
      0
    • None of this remotely capture me ideologically, so there isn't a "closest that fits me." *For Patine*


Recommended Posts

New poll

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read up on the reasoning behind D.C. not being a state.

https://time.com/4296175/washington-dc-statehood-history/

Madison argued 

“The indispensable necessity of complete authority at the seat of government, carries its own evidence with it… Without it, not only the public authority might be insulted and its proceedings interrupted with impunity; but a dependence of the members of the general government on the State comprehending the seat of the government, for protection in the exercise of their duty, might bring on the national councils an imputation of awe or influence, equally dishonorable to the government and dissatisfactory to the other members of the Confederacy.”

Sounds right to me. The issue of how Senators are allocated is a broader problem. If it got 2 Senators, it would go from having under-representation in the Senate to have over-representation, on a per capita basis. Either is in some sense unfair. Basically, if someone decides to live in D.C., I think having an exceptional arrangement in terms of the polity is part of the bargain, and the lack of Senators is a minor issue. Want to have Senators? Move to VA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Just read up on the reasoning behind D.C. not being a state.

https://time.com/4296175/washington-dc-statehood-history/

Madison argued 

“The indispensable necessity of complete authority at the seat of government, carries its own evidence with it… Without it, not only the public authority might be insulted and its proceedings interrupted with impunity; but a dependence of the members of the general government on the State comprehending the seat of the government, for protection in the exercise of their duty, might bring on the national councils an imputation of awe or influence, equally dishonorable to the government and dissatisfactory to the other members of the Confederacy.”

Sounds right to me. The issue of how Senators are allocated is a broader problem. If it got 2 Senators, it would go from having under-representation in the Senate to have over-representation, on a per capita basis. Either is in some sense unfair. Basically, if someone decides to live in D.C., I think having an exceptional arrangement in terms of the polity is part of the bargain, and the lack of Senators is a minor issue. Want to have Senators? Move to VA.

I can see this argument. I think Senators should be proportional to population like the US House, but probably on a different scale. Perhaps the state's population as a % of the national population with the guarantee of 1 Senator (to be subtracted from the most populated states if it causes more than 100 Senators). DC, Alaska, Vermont, Wyoming would get like 1 US Senator. California would have 12 US Senators, but because of the previous rule that I meantion, it would be far less. 11 states would have to be granted 1 US Senator out of pity. So the top 5 states or something would have to lose like 2 US Senators or something to allow them to have 1. California would have 10 US Senators, Texas would have 6 US Senators. Florida 4, NY, IL, OH, GA, NC, MI with 3. THe rest with 2 or 1. This would prevent overrepresentation by DC and other overrepresented states like Wyoming and Vermont that have fewer people than DC. Land shouldn't vote, people should. The Senate (for small state representation) was a compromise for 1787 just to get a Federal government going. I'm sure some people would be kicking and screaming, but we wouldn't see secession or violence if it were replaced. In a couple of decades it would be normalized and few people would complain, I think. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Just read up on the reasoning behind D.C. not being a state.

https://time.com/4296175/washington-dc-statehood-history/

Madison argued 

“The indispensable necessity of complete authority at the seat of government, carries its own evidence with it… Without it, not only the public authority might be insulted and its proceedings interrupted with impunity; but a dependence of the members of the general government on the State comprehending the seat of the government, for protection in the exercise of their duty, might bring on the national councils an imputation of awe or influence, equally dishonorable to the government and dissatisfactory to the other members of the Confederacy.”

Sounds right to me. The issue of how Senators are allocated is a broader problem. If it got 2 Senators, it would go from having under-representation in the Senate to have over-representation, on a per capita basis. Either is in some sense unfair. Basically, if someone decides to live in D.C., I think having an exceptional arrangement in terms of the polity is part of the bargain, and the lack of Senators is a minor issue. Want to have Senators? Move to VA.

I used to work in DC and lived to Maryland.

In my mind, despite considering myself to be a Democrat in this Trump world, there is no logical justification to making Washington DC it's own state.  It's just a blue power grab.

I could see giving them a House Representative with full Rep powers, but not the Senators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed the Patine options.  

For ideology, I went with Moderate Democrat because even though I still hold certain Republican ideals, I can't find any actual Republican politicians who share them anymore.  The party has completely sold their soul and I can't see myself ever backing a Republican again.

Even if I find an individual Republican that I like again, it's still safer to vote for a Democrat I don't agree with, because I can be assured that the Democrat will fight against Trump and Trump's successors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, admin_270 said:

Just read up on the reasoning behind D.C. not being a state.

https://time.com/4296175/washington-dc-statehood-history/

Madison argued 

“The indispensable necessity of complete authority at the seat of government, carries its own evidence with it… Without it, not only the public authority might be insulted and its proceedings interrupted with impunity; but a dependence of the members of the general government on the State comprehending the seat of the government, for protection in the exercise of their duty, might bring on the national councils an imputation of awe or influence, equally dishonorable to the government and dissatisfactory to the other members of the Confederacy.”

Sounds right to me. The issue of how Senators are allocated is a broader problem. If it got 2 Senators, it would go from having under-representation in the Senate to have over-representation, on a per capita basis. Either is in some sense unfair. Basically, if someone decides to live in D.C., I think having an exceptional arrangement in terms of the polity is part of the bargain, and the lack of Senators is a minor issue. Want to have Senators? Move to VA.

Madison argued a lot of things that seemed to make sense in his day, when the U.S. Constitution was novel and revolutionary document globally, but are now anachronistic impediments on the United States and it's governance in a modern world and are leading to areas of it lagging behind other First World Nations, with one of the five electoral and partisan systems in the First World with least real electoral choice and, thus, accountability and transparency, and one of the highest rates of corruption, abuse of government power, and de facto lack of respect for human rights and judicial and labour equality in the First World, and the greatest wealth disparity in the First World - so bad, in fact, that even the total GDP of the nation is the highest in the world, and the mathematically divided GDP per capita is one of the 10 highest, the vast majority of Americans live, by income, living standards, realistic opportunities in life, etc, as though they effectively lived in a country where the GDP and GDP per capita were significantly lower (note, before I'm attacked, I qualified all of these low standings as being among FIRST WORLD NATIONS - I didn't even once attempt to compare the U.S. in any of these ways to THIRD WORLD NATIONS - just so we're clear).

And, I didn't choose the "Other, *for Patine*" option on numbers 1 and 3, actually, and my answer on 2 would be one of the standard choices with a simple qualifier - that is, becoming a State would be fine, as long as full, national independence be offered as a full and clear option for the Puerto Rican people first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The city portions of DC should be put in MD. The only parts that should remain in what is considered "DC" is the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court building. Essentially, carve out a portion of Ward 2 to keep it an independent district but give the people that reside in the city representation in Maryland. Similar to when Virginia annexed back Alexandria and Arlington from DC, we can just shrink the district again.

Also I really couldn't tick any of those ideology boxes, I consider myself a Conservative Libertarian and I'm Anti-Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vcczar said:

I think Senators should be proportional to population like the US House, but probably on a different scale.

I don't understand what the point of the Senate is if that's the case. It's just another House. Better to just get rid of the Senate altogether, IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

I don't understand what the point of the Senate is if that's the case. It's just another House. Better to just get rid of the Senate altogether, IMHO.

Yeah, that would be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Reagan04 said:

The city portions of DC should be put in MD. The only parts that should remain in what is considered "DC" is the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court building. Essentially, carve out a portion of Ward 2 to keep it an independent district but give the people that reside in the city representation in Maryland. Similar to when Virginia annexed back Alexandria and Arlington from DC, we can just shrink the district again.

Also I really couldn't tick any of those ideology boxes, I consider myself a Conservative Libertarian and I'm Anti-Trump.

I will admit that, while the capital of a nation with a Federal style of national-regional government Constitutional system as an integral part of one member Federal subdivision has always worked well in Canada (Ottawa is legally a city and municipality of Ontario for all administrative purposes), it seems to be unique here among nations with a Federal system, and I'm not sure it would really work as well in the political environment of the U.S.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Yeah, that would be better.

How? Sounds like a way to eliminate a whole part of the government, when it seems to have worked just fine thus far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SilentLiberty said:

How? Sounds like a way to eliminate a whole part of the government, when it seems to have worked just fine thus far.

Yes, because one of gridlock's biggest tools - filibusters - really help legislation that's needed to get the country moving and taking care of necessary affairs being constantly blocked up and foiled by being used at every single damned vote now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SilentLiberty said:

How? Sounds like a way to eliminate a whole part of the government, when it seems to have worked just fine thus far.

People from sparsely populated states wouldn't overinfluence legislation. A person in Wyoming has like 30x the influence of someone from California in the Senate. Abolish the Senate and make every American equal. Equality is the key to American. People vote; land does not vote. I also wouldn't say it's worked out fine. Our history has a lot of darkness, mostly caused by social theocratic-nationalistic conservatives and pro-war/pro-CIA intervention foreign policy conservatives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

image.thumb.jpeg.271dca2d17dde05b36f5e67cff16550d.jpeg
;c)

You made the mistake of publicly and proudly putting yourself in this photo - so to speak - when you introduced yourself on this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

You made the mistake of publicly putting yourself in this photo - so to speak - when you introduced yourself on this forum.

Oh, I was here with this username at least as far back as 2007.  We just didn’t actually talk about politics here back then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, vcczar said:

People vote; land does not vote

Well, the idea is that States have interests, no? States have land, but they're not the same thing. The people of a State appoint the Senators, not land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Patine said:

You made the mistake of publicly and proudly putting yourself in this photo - so to speak - when you introduced yourself on this forum.

Ha, I just looked it up — you and I joined this forum exactly one week apart from each other.  Awww, practically twinsies!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

Oh, I was here with this username at least as far back as 2007.  We just didn’t actually talk about politics here back then.

You also said to next to nothing about yourself then. Then there was the "Who Are You People," by @SilentLiberty or @TheMiddlePolitical or - I can't remember the thread starter, but it was started -  thread for RL introductions, and the an older iteration of greatest U.S. Presidents by @vcczar , and that was the "introduction," I refer to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Well, the idea is that States have interests, no? States have land, but they're not the same thing. The people of a State appoint the Senators, not land.

States interests can be done in the US House; No US Senate is necessary. No reason why Wyoming's interests should get tens of times more influence than California's when more Americans like in California. That's inequality. 

Wyoming's land--or borders rather---determines their two senators, and not their people since Senators aren't bound by population. This is what I mean by land votes in the US Senate. It leads to overrepresentation, just as with DC, if they got statehood. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, vcczar said:

This is what I mean by land votes in the US Senate.

Ya, but it's not the *land*. It's the State. States with very little land have just as many Senators as States with lots of land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically, it seems you're arguing that States in themselves ought not to matter very much in influencing Federal policy. Totally coherent view, but it's not *land*.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, admin_270 said:

Basically, it seems you're arguing that States in themselves ought not to matter very much in influencing Federal policy. Totally coherent view, but it's not *land*.

I think you're arguing for the political status quo because if it did get seriously reformed, you'd have to completely remake your American game engines. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Patine said:

I think you're arguing for the political status quo because if it did get seriously reformed, you'd have to completely remake your American game engines. :P

Busted. 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Patine said:

You also said to next to nothing about yourself then. Then there was the "Who Are You People," by @SilentLiberty or @TheMiddlePolitical or - I can't remember the thread starter, but it was started -  thread for RL introductions, and the an older iteration of greatest U.S. Presidents by @vcczar , and that was the "introduction," I refer to.

Ha.  Now I wonder what I said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...