Just a little detail called the Constitution...

Democrats in Congress are at it again. A bill, HR 492, the "District of Columbia Voting Rights Restoration Act of 2007," is expected to come before the House for a vote this week. It proposes that DC residents be allowed to vote in US House races in Maryland. Sounds pretty innocuous, right? After all, DC famously decries "taxation without representation" on its license plates; others claim that opposition to giving DC a voice is a matter of racism. The District is, after all, 60% black and went 89% for Kerry in 2004 (off the top of my head, I think San Francisco went "only" 85% for him).

Well uh, actually folks, there's a pretty damn good reason why DC votes. Little thing called the Constitution - you may have heard of it? There's a lot of people in Congress who seem to believe they're recommendations. Or to quote Pirates of the Caribbean, Democrats often seem to say "Hang the code, and hang the rules. They're more like guidelines anyway. " Unnecessary pop culture references aside, that musty old document proclaims in Section 8 that

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 modern English - DC's not a state, Congress has jurisdiction over it and it doesn't get its own representation. I've always wondered if this was because they never really intended DC to be a place of residence, merely one for the bureaucrats?

Now for the pragmatism: if Congress is going to force this sort of BS down our throats, this is relatively tame. After all, Maryland abutting the district is bright blue - throwing in DC isn't going to change anything. However questions need to be asked: is this going to cause a reapportionment of seats after the next census? If so, who's losing a seat? (Based on recent historical trends I'd have to guess another coastal state). If nothing then this is pretty much tame.

Why am I willing to not scream absolute bloody murder? Because this is a lot more palatable than making DC its own state (God forbid). The Constitution clearly didn't intend that to happen. And again on a pragmatic level, we really don't need two more Democratic loons in the Senate (51 is plenty, thanks) or any more kooks in the House. It's not racism folks, it's pure party politics.

...Unless of course they're willing to consider my other idea: separate Illinois into two states: Chicago and another part (they can keep Illinois or call it Corn or Soy - their pick), while ceding East St. Louis to Missouri. It'll give us two more Republicans in the Senate, a few in the House we can give Dick Durbin to Missouri (I almost feel bad doing that), and downstaters will no longer have to pay for Chicago's screwed up schools/Chicagoans will no longer have to pay for farm bailouts. Everyone wins. Except Missouri. Sorry guys.