Let My People Vote!

“Taxation without representation” was a common war cry during the American Revolution. Over 200 years later, those words still adorn the license plates of many Washington, D.C. residents. Unfortunately, this is more than an archaic historical reference as it expresses the current reality of the 617,996 people who live in D.C. and have never had the privilege of congressional representation. To add insult to injury, D.C. cannot even pass its own budget; the budget must first be approved by Congress. Why is D.C. so dependent on Congress? Why aren’t members of the District afforded the same representational rights that the rest of the country takes for granted?

The easiest answer to the latter question is that, strictly speaking, it’s unconstitutional. When the Constitution refers to senators and representatives, it uses the equivocal noun “state.” For example, “representaties shall be apportioned among the several states” in the 14th amendment, “two senators from each state” in the 17th amendment, etc. Since D.C. is a federal district, not a state, the constitution falls squarely on the side of denying D.C. Congressional representation. However, the constitution is not an unchangeable text. It is malleable, and has been amended 27 separate times when the significance of an issue has outweighed the cost of potentially subjecting our Constitution to arbitrary and capricious change. Thomas Jefferson believed that “no society can make a perpetual constitution or even a perpetual law. The earth always belongs to the living generation. They may manage it then, and what proceeds from it, as they please…Every constitution then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years”. The political realities of D.C. in 1789 are vastly different than today, and maintaining constancy in our Constitution is not reason enough to deny district residents their voting rights.

At the very least, D.C. should have autonomy over its own budget. Instead, the budget is subjected to approval by congressmen who have no accountability for the decisions they make regarding the district. Allowing budget autonomy will let those who live in D.C. – instead of representatives from Alabama, Hawaii, and California – decide how to spend money in an area that pays the most federal tax dollars per capita. This is far from a fringe notion; over 70% of people nationally favor D.C. budget autonomy, with little partisan difference. However, this idea has failed in Congress thus far due to those, like Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), who prefer to keep D.C. disenfranchised in order to promote personal political agendas.

A budget autonomy bill that was expected to have support was pulled last summer after Paul attached amendments that would strengthen the abortion ban in D.C., weaken unions, and increase access to firearms. These three amendments are pet republican issues that the heavily democratic district is strongly against. Paul feels that his continued power over the residents of D.C., with whom he has little to no relationship, is “a good way to call attention to some issues that have national implications.” In other words, the primary role that D.C. plays in Paul’s mind is that of a personal bulletin board for issues that he feels are important; actual governance of the district is secondary.

The district’s democratic character also plays a role in this conversation. Republicans claim that democrats only want D.C. to have representation in order to bolster their Congressional numbers, while democrats fire back that republicans’ sole reason for opposing D.C. representation is their fear of adding another democrat-controlled district. This factor does the most to restrict D.C. representation, yet also has the least basis in principled policymaking. States’ political leanings shift and change as the parties themselves undergo transformations. Until the 1970’s, the South was heavily democratic; in 1964, Texas went to Lyndon Johnson by a margin of almost 30%. Now, the South is a conservative bastion and solidly republican in every cycle. However, there are hints that, due to demographic changes, Texas may soon vote democratic once again. Supporting or opposing a proposal for D.C. based on its current political affiliation is simply myopic. Fortunes change, and majorities can become minorities quickly.Amidst the uncertainties, there is at least one sign of hope for District residents: President Obama recently requested to have the traditional “Taxation without Representation” license plates affixed to his presidential limo, a move President Bush opposed. It can’t hurt to have a President on your side, and through all the political machinations, the unlucky 617,996 will need all the help they can get.