« Dust In The Wind. All We Are Is Dust In The Wind... | Main | I'll Give Him That »

February 27, 2009

Constitution? What Constitution?

All that matters is what the Democrats want.


The Senate passed a bill yesterday that would give the District a voting seat in the House of Representatives, but lawmakers attached language strongly opposed by city leaders that strips most local gun-control laws.

The gun amendment complicates the D.C. vote bill's passage into law, because the legislation will have to be reconciled with a companion bill in the House with no gun provisions that is expected to be approved next week. Some D.C. officials said it was ironic that the Senate bill granted the city full representation in the House while also overruling the District's decisions on a key local issue.

Well, actually, what "complicates" this bill is a little thing called the US Constitution. Only Representatives from States are members and may vote. DC is not a state, last time I checked. For DC to get voting rights requires a constitutional amendment; acts of Congress simply are not sufficient. Let's not forget, if DC gets a vote for its one Representative, how can it be denied TWO Senators by this rogue Congress?

As Ann Althouse says


I don't know how even to articulate an argument that it's constitutional to give a vote to a D.C. representative in the House.
Shredding the Constitution. It's not just for the Bush administration anymore.

Pure, naked power grab.


Posted by Mr. Bingley at February 27, 2009 09:22 AM

Comments

So much for "bipartisanship". Ever again.

Posted by: JeffS at February 27, 2009 09:41 AM

Waiting for flying spittle-laden Keith Olbermann rant about the Democrats' collective disregard for the Constitution. Yessiree, any time now.

Posted by: Eric at February 27, 2009 10:28 AM

It will quickly be declared unconstitutional by the supreme court, but the democrats will get their brownie points for trying.

Posted by: Skyler at February 27, 2009 11:01 AM

True enough Skyler. It's the spectacle of the Dhimmicrats openly wiping their a$$e$ with the Constitution that's so nauseating.

Posted by: JeffS at February 27, 2009 11:10 AM

What a freaking waste of time. Not to mention scary.

Posted by: Kate P at February 27, 2009 11:27 AM

Skyler and Jeff, the problem in getting a court to declare this statute unconstitutional is the question of who has standing to sue. The federal courts, as courts of limited jurisdiction, only hear live controversies brought by parties that are actually injured by the harms they allege. I would contend that can't really happen here unless and until Congress passes some other legislation by just one vote in the House, and someone takes issue with THAT statute, alleging it's a legal nullity because Congress can't statutorily expand its voting membership to include representatives of non-states like DC.

If DC residents want congressional representation--not just in the House but two Senators, too--the easy constitutional way to provide for that is to retrocede most of the District to Maryland (just as Arlington and Alexandria were returned to Virginia). As others have noted, I would think it incumbent on the Maryland congressional delegation to explain why exactly that's not OK but this somehow is.

Posted by: Dave J at February 27, 2009 10:56 PM

What is this Constitution of which you speak?

Posted by: Jim - PRS at February 28, 2009 12:24 AM