Washington DC has this little problem, they have no voting rights. That is, they have no representation in the house or the senate, though they have been able to vote for a president since 1961, when the twenty-third amendment passed. Oh, and they get to pay taxes too. I suppose that makes this taxation without representation? Perhaps they should throw a nice Tea Party?
DC has been clamoring for a representative in congress for quite a number of years. They were granted a delegate in 1971, but a delegate cannot cast a full house vote. They can cast a vote as a committee member, but that severely limits their effectiveness.
In 1978, Representative Don Edwards proposed the “District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment,” which would repeal the twenty-third amendment and effectively treat Washington DC as a state. However, the amendment was not ratified by the states and expired in 1985.
In 2007, Representative Tom Davis and Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton proposed the “DC Voting Rights Act,” which would grant representation in congress to Washington DC. The bill was approved by the house, and although there were enough votes in the senate to pass it, it was ultimately defeated by a filibuster initiated by Mitch McConnell. The bill expired at the end of 2008.
In 2009, Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton again proposed the “DC Voting Rights Act,” with hopes that the new administration would see it passed. On the same day, Senators Joe Lieberman and Orrin Hatch introduced the senate version of the “DC Voting Rights Act.” The senate bill was voted on and passed. In the process, however, the bill was amended to include a provision about DC gun laws. The provision would remove gun registration requirements, limit the city’s ability to restrict firearms, and make semi-automatic weapons legal. The amendment also passed the senate.
And that’s where the matter sits at the moment. The house is reluctant to move forward with the bill because of the included gun amendment. The NRA stated that it might “keep score” when the house votes, and that “score” could possibly be used against the representatives in the future. In short, the NRA could claim that those representatives that voted against the bill are not gun supporters, which may hurt chances for re-election.
So now we have a voting bill tied together with a gun rights bill. And all I have to ask is, what the hell? Other than the two of them being intended for Washington DC, what do they have in common? And why the hell do they keep jamming crap like this together? Seriously, it’s CHEATING THE SYSTEM. If the bill cannot stand on its own, and there is nothing else you can tie it to that is similar in nature, then perhaps that bill shouldn’t pass. This is how pay increases, pet projects, tax breaks, and other unnecessary crap makes it through congress.
That isn’t to say that gun rights is not a legitimate issue, but it should not be tied to a voting bill. And now, because the NRA wants to turn this into a pissing match, it seems likely that Washington DC residents will miss out on gaining a representative, yet again. In fact, John Ensign, the Senator from Nevada, stated that he would rather see the voting rights fail and his gun amendment pass. Thank you Senator, it’s nice to see you’re more interested in allowing people to shoot each other than to let them have proper representation. Oh, and since you’re from Nevada, might I ask why the hell you’re poking your nose in the business of Washington DC?
I hope the DC voting rights are eventually passed. I think they need to have a voice in the house, and eventually in the senate. I definitely don’t think it’s right to tack on additional crap to the bill, though, just because it has a high chance of making it through. Yet again, maybe it’s time for line item veto?