NV03 Update: Susie Lee should heed the words of her Governor Steve Sisolak, Don’t Erase Nevada’s Voice
When Nevada Governor Steve Sisolak Vetoed the National Popular Vote Compact – his words were quite clear:
“Once effective, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact could diminish the role of smaller states like Nevada in national electoral contests and force Nevada’s electors to side with whoever wins the nationwide popular vote, rather than the candidate Nevadans choose.”
One of the primary arguments against Washington DC Statehood is that it will disenfranchise Small States – by diluting their representation in the US Senate.
Here is another and it is devastating. Washington D.C.’s entire economy is the care and feeding of Government:
Supporters of D.C. statehood argue that the District’s population exceeds two states, Vermont and Wyoming (Paunescu, 2019). However, John S. Baker, Jr., a visiting professor at Georgetown Law School, establishes the important distinction between cities and states. “The District of Columbia lacks the status of statehood … because it is a city. The United States, unlike medieval Europe, does not have city-states” (Baker J. S., 2020)
Through a larger geographic footprint, states represent a multiplicity of interests. Historian John Steele Gordon says: “Every large state has a multiplicity of interests that must be balanced: agricultural, mining, fishing, banking, insurance, etc. But the District of Columbia has only one interest: the care and feeding of the federal government. It is the ultimate company town.” (Jacoby, 2019)
A city-state basically violates the constitution.
Then the scheme of making Washington DC a City-State further shreds the voice of small states like Nevada by creating supervoters. The scheme would effectively shrink Washington DC to a tiny area with a few thousand voters that still have their 3 electoral votes.
Democrats’ plan for D.C. statehood would create severe inequities in electoral representation with the creation of “super voters.” In order to bypass the U.S. Constitution, H.R. 51 preserves a capital district of just two miles (Lefrak, 2016). However, this district – under the 23rd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution— would retain its 3 electoral votes (Hewitt, 1993).
“As long as the 23rd Amendment is in force, the District of Columbia is guaranteed at least three votes in the Electoral College,” points out columnist Jeff Jacoby. “Under the House bill, those votes would be controlled by the microscopic population of the drastically shrunken district, making them far and away the most influential voters in the nation. Such an outcome would obviously be absurd, yet it would be unavoidable unless the 23rd Amendment were repealed” (Jacoby, The Constitution says no to DC statehood, 2020).
Constitutional amendments are a lengthy and cumbersome process requiring BOTH a two-thirds approval of both houses of Congress AND ratification by three-fourths of the states (Erickson, 2017). Therefore, if or until such an amendment was approved, voters within this two square mile area would hold tremendous control over the selection of the U.S. President.
IT seems amazing that a Congresswoman from an R-Leaning District is considering gutting the voice of her own state. But this is the state of politics in 2021. Please contact Susie Lee and ask her to stay away from the DC Statehood.