Comments on: DC Statehood Advocate Running for Green Party Presidential Nomination

by: Fred C.

Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:58:29 +0000

G in B – I agree the situation is unfair and needs to be corrected, I just don’t think that giving DC statehood – and thus, more represenation than the residents of much larger metropolitan centers – is the right solution. Attaching it to a neighboring state requires no ammendment and doesn’t create a new imbalance in power. 200 years of unfairness doesn’t entitle anyone to special status in the future.

Will: McKinney has some name recognition to her, and a record to point back at. Ball has neither as far as I can tell. I think having him at the top of the Green ticket would do no better than David Cobb – even if Nader isn’t running a competing ticket this time. As a VP candidate, at least he’d draw some attention to the DC affiliate and it’s work.

by: will

Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:40:34 +0000

weve kinda got off topic, i like this guy, but i want to know what people think, do you think this guy is better suited to but the greens over the 5% mark or do you think Mckinney is. i think this Ball would make a good VP.

by: will

Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:40:34 +0000

by: Green in Brooklyn

Tue, 04 Dec 2007 22:51:47 +0000

Fred C.

Statehood or not – DC has no voting representatives in the Senate or the House, and has their budget approved/mandated by congress. Taxation without representation was one of the battle cries of the Revolution 230 years ago, and yet in 2007 it still exists. We need a constitutional amendment to correct more than two centuries of injustice.

To some of the other comments, I don’t believe Jared Ball is a racist, although his choice of words in desribing the situation in DC might have been poor. I have met the man, and he is incredibly intelligent, full of energy and ideas, and exactly the kind of politician we in the Green Party so desperately need more of. Whether I decide to back him over Cynthia McKinney is too soon to tell, but the self proclaimed first ‘hip-hop candidate’ for president deserves to be heard.

by: Fred C.

Tue, 04 Dec 2007 17:27:50 +0000

G.E. – I’m aware of the the low pops of those two, but that’s the way the pieces fell. I would never argue for diminishing the status of a state, and if DC did get its statehood I wouldn’t argue for it to revert. I just don’t think we should be creating more states of that size unless we’re willing to take it all the way and get a union of around 100 small states. If that’s a program we’re prepared to start up, I’ll be there on day one to help found the Los Angeles Statehood Party. If it isn’t going down that way, then I say give DC to Maryland and let the borders of our capitol city cover the actual seats of government and maybe a few of the monuments.

by: Paul Wayne Snyder, PhD

Tue, 04 Dec 2007 17:20:04 +0000

Size? Wyoming? Oh, population maybe?

by: G.E.

Tue, 04 Dec 2007 16:38:17 +0000

Fred – If size is your argument, then Vermont and Wyoming should be stripped of their statehood.

by: Carl

Tue, 04 Dec 2007 16:01:30 +0000

DC, except perhaps the Mall area, could go back to Maryland. There is ample precedent. Arlington County VA used to be part of DC. This Virginia county is the home of the Pentagon. I have never heard a complaint that Virginia has power over the Pentagon because it is in Virginia.

by: Tom the Trotskyist

Tue, 04 Dec 2007 03:07:42 +0000

Pat, I would not include that Nazi party in the coalition. Fascism and stalinism are bureaucratic collectivist deviations perpetuated by various nationalists and anarcho-capitalist globalist elements.

by: Stephen Gordon

Tue, 04 Dec 2007 02:20:48 +0000

For the record (as a two time District resident), I support DC statehood, but only through constitutional means.

by: Rev. Pat Robertson

Tue, 04 Dec 2007 01:22:57 +0000

Maybe we could sell DC to a wealthy foreigner? There would be many advantages to having be outside the US, and it would help solve the debt problem.

by: Fred C.

Tue, 04 Dec 2007 01:07:31 +0000

While I respect that residents of DC are in a disadvantaged position compared to the rest of us, I cannot support giving them full statehood while there are 24 larger cities in this country that no one wants to give this status to. Give it to Maryland and let them get representation on the same terms as the rest of us, or else give LA, NYC, Chicago etc their own 2 senators and 3+ electoral votes as well.

by: Mike Indiana

Tue, 04 Dec 2007 00:12:33 +0000

Washington D.C. and Puerto Rico have representation in the form of (Delegates to Congress)

From 1907 to 1945 The Philippines also sent a non-voting Resident Commissioner (Delegate) to the House

Delegates are able to serve on and vote with committees, as well as speak from the House floor. However, they are not permitted to vote on final passage of legislation.

by: Mike Indiana

Tue, 04 Dec 2007 00:06:31 +0000

Trent
D.C. does have Representation in Congress
Eleanor Holmes Norton – non-voting delegate in the house

D.C. also has “sort of” senate rep.
Michael Brown/Paul Strauss Shadow Senators – recognized as equivalent to U.S. Senators by the District of Columbia, but who are not actually recognized by the U.S. government as senators

I never argued that D.C. was a state and yes D.C. even though it is not a state has a federal representative in the house (they just don’t get to vote)

by: G.E.

Mon, 03 Dec 2007 23:45:24 +0000

I agree that the citizens of D.C. are subjects to taxation without representation and the seat of government described in the Constitution was never intended to consist of 500,000 people. I am largely supportive of D.C. statehood. I am not supportive of racial collectivism.