1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Statehood for New Columbia

Discussion in 'History Forum' started by Dr. Bob, Oct 30, 2004.

Top Posters
  1. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Liberals are whining about the need for statehood for Washington DC. Its 700k citizens are 80% Democrat, assuring 2 more liberal Senators and 1 more liberal Representative.

    Why were folks allowed to reside in a Federal District? Why shouldn't this area be 100% government buildings, hotels, etc? MOST who live in the DC area live outside the small boundaries of the Federal District itself.

    It's like people who buy cheap land around an airport, build homes, then whine about the noise. They opt to reside there; live with it.
     
    #1 Dr. Bob, Oct 30, 2004
  2. CoachC

    CoachC New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2003
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    It was designed by the founding fathers that the District not be a part of any state. We should maintain their design.
     
    #2 CoachC, Oct 30, 2004
  3. Stacie

    Stacie New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with both poster above.

    Stacie
     
    #3 Stacie, Oct 31, 2004
  4. mioque

    mioque New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why aren't the citizens of D.C. allowed to participate in the election of one of the surrounding states? That ought to make everybody happy.
     
    #4 mioque, Oct 31, 2004
  5. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    2
    Just what we need is a new state which is 98% democrat and 98% on welfare.
     
    #5 billwald, Oct 31, 2004
  6. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,122
    Likes Received:
    19
    98% on welfare?
    Have you ever been to Georgetown? They aren't on welfare there. As a matter of fact, they are EXTREMELY wealthy. The National Cathedral is (roughly) on the corner of Massachusetts & Wisconsin. Have you seen the homes up there? WOW. I was just up there for a week on a business trip, and I was staying at the Wyndham over by George Washington University (highly recommend the hotel, by the way). That is a VERY nice part of town.

    What gets my proverbial goat is the license plate for the District of Columbia. On it is the slogan "Taxation Without Representation." I say give them statehood. But if that is done, then all federal subsidies will cease. Let them get their money from the citizens of their state, not the rest of us. They will find that they receive VASTLY more money than they pay.
     
    #6 Baptist in Richmond, Nov 7, 2004
  7. Turpius

    Turpius New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Messages:
    407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don't they already have 3 electors in the Electoral College for President? I'm pretty sure they also have a non-voting rep. in Congress that lobbies for them too. That's enough. If we let them have statehood then we should make Puerto Rico, US Virgin Is., and Guam states too.
     
    #7 Turpius, Nov 28, 2004
  8. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Yep, and every single elected official is on the public dole, WELFARE. We pay their salaries. They sponge off of we the taxpayers and do little, if anything, in the interest of the American people, in return for our benevolence.
     
    #8 LadyEagle, Nov 28, 2004
  9. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    2
    Elected officials are not residents of Washington, DC.
     
    #9 billwald, Nov 29, 2004
  10. rsr

    rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    11,852
    Likes Received:
    1,085
    Faith:
    Baptist
    mioque said:

    "Why aren't the citizens of D.C. allowed to participate in the election of one of the surrounding states? That ought to make everybody happy."

    In fact, it would make no one happy; the District still would not have its own representatives (except perhaps a congressman) and the surrounding states are not keen on adopting a whole slew of new voters that could skew state elections.
     
    #10 rsr, Nov 29, 2004
  11. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    The intent of the founding fathers was to have a federal area that does not have the ability to have its own constitution or state laws for federal agencies and offices to deal with.

    The fact that people are allowed to live in DC probably dates back to the days before automobiles; today it is probably a mistake, but one that would be hard to correct.

    No, DC should never be a state, otherwise, one state could become more powerful than others from a federal level.
     
    #11 Phillip, Nov 30, 2004
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...