Why the Democrats Fight For D.C Statehood Is Unconstitutional


The House Oversight Committee recently voted 25-19 on Bill H.2. 51, without any Republican votes, to create D.C statehood and will advance the bill to the House of Representatives on Tuesday to decide whether or not Washington D.C. will become the 51st state in the union. The bill, also known as ‘Washington, DC Admission Act,’ would grant the District of Columbia citizens full authority over local issues and grant them full representation in Congress. The Senate would need 60 votes, including 10 from Republicans, in order to pass.

Democrats have called Bill H.2 51 a “way of fixing systemic inequality” and that it is critical to achieving racial justice and full voting representation. GOP lawmakers have argued that it a quick power grab to pack Congress and is, above all else, unconstitutional. You’d have to make a constitutional amendment to the 23rd amendment before proposing D.C’s statehood and that’s exactly what the radical left is trying to do. Rid and rewrite the Constitution to expand their Senate majority.

According to Bill H.2 51, the 51st state would be called “Washington, Douglass Commonwealth” and consist of 66 of the 68 square miles of the present-day federal district. The two square miles around the White House, Capitol, Supreme Court, and National Mall would be named the “Capital” and act as a reduced federal district.

Oversight Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney argued that the D.C capital currently denies both voting rights in the national legislature and local self-government to the people itself. Despite having a greater population size than Wyoming, D.C currently has no representation in Congress.

Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs, however, has argued against turning Washington D.C into a state and says that Democrats have become so greedy that they are willing to tilt the political balance of power in their favor with a laughable D.C statehood proposal that would give a few hundred residents in the shrunken district a great deal of power during presidential elections.

He argues that the nation’s capital was always meant to be unique and that the Founding Fathers wanted it to be a federal district. He adds that in the “plain command” of the 23rd Amendment itself, it says that D.C is not to be a state and should be represented by “the whole congress” not specific representatives.

“For one thing, it is a terrible idea to create a tiny new ‘capital district’ no larger than a city park that would be completely surrounded by an entirely new state. What is the government of ‘Washington, Douglass Commonwealth’ doesn’t want to ensure the security of the new capital district? Or to help supply its electricity or plumbing? How could a territory no larger than a few city blocks avoid being coerced into submission,” Biggs asked.

Rep. Andrew Clyde also adds that it’s very obvious that Democrats want D.C statehood because it would come with two extra senators that would tip the balance of the Senate on behalf of the democrats.

Democrats would only be cutting corners and ignoring the Constitution if they tried to transition D.C into a state in order to claim ownership of the Capitol. Democrats don’t care as long as they get extra votes out of it and they’ll do just about anything for more power – and how to keep it for the long run.