So! It looks like D.C. is inching ever closer to getting a voting representative in the House. Clearly this is good news for fans of democracy and Eleanor Holmes Norton.
But last night I got to thinking. What exactly happens if/when the voting rights bill gets passed? Does Congress have the power to just give Delegate Norton a real vote and call it a day? It seems more likely that the District would hold an election for the seat, but weren’t the Shadow Representative and Senator positions originally conceived so that we’d have people ready to head to the Hill in the event that we got the vote? What will happen to Mike Panetta!?
Well, my curiosity lead me to the Library of Congress Google to search for some answers. This City Paper article sums up the issues in a reasonably clear manner. Yes, there will definitely be an election to fill the seat. But, there first needs to be a change in the D.C. laws to get rid of the delegate and Shadow Representative positions. And, it’s not clear if Congress can nix these laws in the voting rights bill or if the D.C. Council will have to make the changes. Also, in the meantime the Council can maybe appoint the delegate to the seat or maybe the Mayor can appoint whoever he wants. And this is also before we take the inevitable constitutional challenges to the bill into account.
PHEW.
So it seems like this whole representation thing could get pretty confusing and drawn out. Eventually, though, people are going to start campaigning for the seat. And that brings us to the question on everybody’s mind: who will this blog endorse?
While I definitely appreciate all that Eleanor Holmes Norton has done for the city in her time as delegate (since 1991!), I can’t deny a strong affinity for Mike Panetta ascending to the House. The reason being, of course, that Mr. Panetta has commented on District, Schmistrict. You see, even in these difficult days, I’d have a hard time supporting a candidate that didn’t read my blog regularly (I’m pretty sure Barack does!)
So what I’m saying is, Delegate Holmes Norton, please leave a comment on this post outlining the reasons you would be best to represent the District of Columbia in the House of Representatives. I look forward to hearing from you and having you as a reader!
Photo from Flickr.
everyone who reads why i hate dc (and your site and you yourselves brought them so much more traffic) knows your the people posting as anonymous with daves address, license, and personal photos. yeah its all stuff found on the internet that he put up there but you take stalking to a whole new level. the most he has done to you 2 is say you ripped off a contest (true) your blog sucks (kinda true) and you gave marion barry a kidney (not true).
so your aware he knows where you live, where you used to live, where your parents live, where your sister lives, your emails, phone numbers, and personal photos of your wedding using tractors which looks like you 2 got married at a future farmers of america ralley.
dave was too nice to post these yesterday even tho his firends kept egging him on. dont press your luck.
Well, for what it’s worth, we’re not actually the ones who posted those photos…or any of the anonymous comments. The only comments from either of us have Noah’s name attached to them. Honestly.
For what it’s also worth, I think we look damn cool in our wedding photo driving off on a Gator. Don’t knock it until you’ve tried it!
i’d really hafta agree with the people who say this is going to come up against some difficult constitutional barriers… I’m in no way a constitutional expert and won’t even pretend to be but I imagine that there will be some sort of issue with the fact that it says “the house of representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states, and the electors in each state shall have…” then it goes on to say that the representatives must be an “inhabitant of that state in which he shall be chosen” meaning that by having a house representative, congress is implying that DC is a state. but it’s not. i mean, it could because Congress has the power to admit new states to the union (art 4 sec 3 cl 1) however, this is an issue because DC is supposed to be federal grounds (additional question: is maryland a “state[] concerned” thus requiring consent?). plus, there’s a section that basically says that congress has exclusive legislating rights over any district that is the seat of government. if DC becomes a state then that section has been invalidated and from what i can tell, you need an amendment to do that. amendments take a whole lotta support (approving an amendment of course being a difficult process). soooo, yeah. it’ll be interesting to see how it plays out!
Man, Brianna, I think you may be a little too intellectual for District, Schmistrict…
But I definitely understand that there is constitutional controversy over the “states” language. I’m very much not equipped to argue against this language myself, so I just take solace in the fact that there are many constitutional lawyers and law-makers who seem to think that the DC vote wouldn’t be unconstitutional (obviously there are plenty on the other side as well.)
As for Congress having exclusive legistlating rights over the District, I would think that our Home Rule provisions (however limited) would seem to discount (or maybe invalidate) this exclusivity. Even though Congress still has a lot of say over DC, they’re clearly not the exclusive legistators anymore because the District government can and does make a lot of their own local laws.
But anyway, as you say it’ll definitely be interesting to see how things go down.
well, to get back to what you guys wanted to talk about, i’d definitely endorse mike panetta for the seat! i’ve met him in person, he’s a great guy, and i think we could use a change in leadership. not that EHN has done anything wrong, but she’s had the seat for almost 20 years, and it’s someone else’s turn…