Posted on 03/08/2019 6:55:14 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
Elections have consequences, and for Democrats, the consequences of failing to win enough seats in the past three congressional elections to have control of the Senate have been enormous.
Not only has the Republican-led Senate approved significant tax reform legislation and repealed the Obamacare individual mandate, it has also confirmed 31 federal appeals court judges and two Supreme Court justices, leaving what will likely be a decades-long mark on the judicial branch. And after recapturing the Senate in the 2018 elections, Republicans are guaranteed at least two more years of controlling who is appointed and confirmed to the judiciary, which is particularly important considering that the Supreme Court’s two oldest justices—Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 85, and Stephen Breyer, 80—lean heavily to the left.
However, despite Democrats’ recent failures to retake the Senate, Democrats’ success in 2018 House races could be a sign the tides are shifting in their favor. If they do, Democrats have a plan to significantly reduce Republicans’ influence in the Senate, or perhaps even allow them to keep control of the Senate for many years to come: grant statehood to Washington, D.C.
The vast majority of House Democrats are promoting statehood for Washington, D.C., by backing House Resolution 51, which “provides for admission into the United States of the state of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, composed of most of the territory of the District of Columbia. The commonwealth shall be admitted to the Union on an equal footing with the other states.”
As of February 22, H.R. 51 has 198 cosponsors, all of whom are Democrats. Among the most notable are far-left freshman congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., and Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass, and establishment Democrats Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Fla., and Maxine Waters, Calif.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
I did a search and that one didn’t show up.
There must be some slight difference in the titles. I wouldn’t have posted had I found the previous one.
I see. The first one has singular possessive Democrat’s and mine has plural possessive Democrats.’
Two more new Dem states thanks to Pelosi and AOC:
1) The State of Confusion
2) The state of total mind numbing stupidity
There has to be some sort of legal problem with making the District of Corruption a state. The District of Corruption is run entirely on taxpayer dollars. I see a problem with a little turd state being supported by the taxpayers in the other 50 states.
aint dc very specifically set up in the constitution?
Its a federal district, not a state. For a very specific reason. Its the nations capital. It never was set up to be a state.
Outside of DC becoming a state, creating new states out of existing states would be quite difficult.
“New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.”
ARTICLE IV, SECTION 3, CLAUSE 1
Poor Democrats, they don’t have a blue state end-run scheme to get around the Senate like they’ve been trying and failing to do with the Electoral College.
As spelled out in the Constitution. It will take an amendment to change that.
and then there is http://loyolaphoenix.com/2019/02/the-windy-state-illinois-state-rep-proposes-a-51st-state-chicago-usa/
And they also want to make Puerto Rico a state. Between that and DC will give 4 more Democrats to the Senate and probably another 6-8 seats to House.
And there is already talk of stacking the Supreme Court by adding seats as soon as they have the opportunity to do so.
And don’t count on the GOP doing anything to stop them. The Republicans have no problem with new Democratic voters flooding over the border.
well then we know it aint going anywhere this session.
That Constitution thingy is like so old fashioned.
DC is set up in the Constitution. I think this business of making it a state is trying to change the boundaries of DC. Under plans I’ve heard, DC would still exist as a small area around the Capitol ,White House, memorials, and National Mall. The Democrats think that changing the borders of DC like this, and admitting the rest of it as a state, would be legal and constitutional. If they try this, a court challenge could decide whether they can do this without a constitutional amendment.
Actually, I took some time to look this up. There is a reason this wasn’t done when O was Pres and the dems controlled everything. D.C. as a Federal enclave is expressly provided for in Art 1 of the Const. So, it would probably take an amendment. Congress can create a state if Maryland asks for “its” land back that was used to create D.C. in the first place. VA did just that. All but the Federal buildings would be part of Maryland, and they already have two senators.
Expect ANYTHING from these power-mad, America-hating totalitarians. And where are the Repubs? Hiding under their desks as usual?
Something the Dems have been doing is winning gerrymandering cases and redistricting in their favor. They make the maps better looking, but they’re drawing the districts to give them an edge. They’re also not doing squat to see that blue states have some GOP representation.
There needs to be some serious talk about growing the House of Representatives. Having 435 people represent almost 350M is ridiculous. It costs almost nothing to corrupt only 220 people these days. More Reps also means less gerrymandering .
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.