On Wednesday we will have a great opportunity to meet with Shadow Senator Michael Brown, representing Washington D.C. To find out more about the pole of Shadow Senator click here. The overall theme this week will be representation, how Americans should be represented in our republic, and how they are represented. We will discuss issues relating to areas of the country or particular groups who are over or under represented in Congress and why this is the case. We will also talk about different types of representation and what you want from the person who is supposed to represent you in Congress. As you know, the founding of this country was based, in large part, to a feeling of a distinct lack of representation in Parliament (see the license plate above). Some then find it ironic that those living in our nation's capital cannot vote for Congress and have no one to represent them there because Washington D.C. is not a state. Senator Brown is fighting to change that. Historically, the location of D.C. outside of any state was a very conscious decision in order to avoid giving preference to the needs of any particular state. There are very strong arguments for and against voting rights for D.C. What do you think about voting rights in D.C.? More generally, what should be the ideal form of representation in our representative democracy? Should things be changed or stay the way they are today? How could things be improved? Please come to class on Wednesday with at least once question prepared for the Shadow Senator. And in the mean time, I hope you enjoy your holiday weekend.
Friday, May 24, 2013
For class on 5/29: Preparing for the Shadow Senator's visit.
On Wednesday we will have a great opportunity to meet with Shadow Senator Michael Brown, representing Washington D.C. To find out more about the pole of Shadow Senator click here. The overall theme this week will be representation, how Americans should be represented in our republic, and how they are represented. We will discuss issues relating to areas of the country or particular groups who are over or under represented in Congress and why this is the case. We will also talk about different types of representation and what you want from the person who is supposed to represent you in Congress. As you know, the founding of this country was based, in large part, to a feeling of a distinct lack of representation in Parliament (see the license plate above). Some then find it ironic that those living in our nation's capital cannot vote for Congress and have no one to represent them there because Washington D.C. is not a state. Senator Brown is fighting to change that. Historically, the location of D.C. outside of any state was a very conscious decision in order to avoid giving preference to the needs of any particular state. There are very strong arguments for and against voting rights for D.C. What do you think about voting rights in D.C.? More generally, what should be the ideal form of representation in our representative democracy? Should things be changed or stay the way they are today? How could things be improved? Please come to class on Wednesday with at least once question prepared for the Shadow Senator. And in the mean time, I hope you enjoy your holiday weekend.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The debates on the voting rights of the District of Columbia are interesting. It's definitely fitting that the argument for voting rights in that particular area boils down to the constitution in its literal translation versus the rights of the populace, a debate forum that seems to dominate today's political landscape. Although I understand and have read the article referencing the voting rights of DC, I think its literaln translation is a bit rigid. Its 2013, and there are over 600,000 US citizens living in that area, and they have every right to be represented in a congressional matter. A vote is a vote, I just thin it may have to be done in a more calculated way in such a sensitive area i.e. every politician clamoring to get a foothold of the District of Columbia. Overall I think representation for the collective people of America is one of the major problems facing our future as a nation. Its a grudgingly accepted fact that our Congress is one of the least productive bodies in decades, arguably even over a century. The intense polarization belies that fact that our two dominant political parties simply do not represent a large portion of the United States populace. There are differences between Democrats and Republicans, that's ovvious, but the differences are far fewer than many would like. The diversity of political opinions and even the political landscape for that matter is sorely, sorely lacking, and that poses a huge problem for the future as the western world progresses in every facet faster than ever, Basic Republican and Democrat policies, which clearly do very little on either side (and that's coming from a liberal. In honest if new parties aren't brought into the fold in the near future I forsee little, if any change. This stagnation cannot continue of we hope to maintain our superpower status, or any status of positive growth.
ReplyDeleteI agree that voting rights in the District of Columbia are not something that can be easily fixed or changed. However, I do think that there needs to be some representation in DC. Every citizen has a right to be represented and those living in the nation's capital are no different.
ReplyDeleteThe people of DC are surrounded by politics which could cause them to be some of the most well informed voters. The citizens of DC could be the model citizens in terms of our civic duty to vote with the knowledge of each candidate and their stances on important issues. I believe that the District of Columbia should be granted representation in Congress in a way that would allow the citizens' voices, even if it disturbs the current Congressional system. I think that a change could be healthy and maybe help create some progress in Congress.
I agree with Courtney, i think that most of the people that live in DC will be those who are much more surrounded by politics and political thought than most of the remaining population of the country. For this reason, i believe we should work to improve voting rights for the DC area. Because of their more impressive knowledge of politics, we should work to a system that provides rights to those people even if the balance of the system is slightly disrupted.
ReplyDeleteCourtney and Matt make an interesting point about citizens in DC being more politically knowledgeable, however I dont think that should matter anyway. People have a right to be represented, and seeing as our country was founded partially as a reaction to the lack of representation this is a big issue. However I do understand that it is not as simple or easily fixed as it may appear at first. This also isn't the only issue surrounding representation. As we talked about previously in class, in the presidential election it can be said that people living in small states votes' count more than people living in more populous states. Again this also doesn't have a simple solution.
DeleteI think having the federal government reside in a state, be it D.C. or any other state, would be as James Madison said in Federalist 43 “too great a public pledge to be left in the hands of a single State.” A solution that would allow residents of D.C to be able to vote but not making D.C. a state could be having their votes be counted in their last state of residence. This would work exactly as an absentee ballot or American citizens voting who currently live in foreign countries. The issue with this is that people who have only resided in D.C. would not be able to vote. I do think that something should be done so residents of D.C. are represented but I do not think that D.C. should be a state.
ReplyDeleteI believe that voting rights in Washington D.C. are underrepresented; however, a viable remedy to this issue is complex and difficult to achieve. The issues pertaining to residents of Washington D.C. are equally salient to the issues of the rest of the nation. To that end, it is unjust to neglect the concerns of the residents of Washington D.C. by the absence of politicians. The rule of Virginia Senators is supreme when deciding issues pertaining to Washington D.C. because the Senators of Virginia will only make policy that pleases the majority of Virginia residents. The Senators of Virginia work in accordance with what the residents of Virginia wants because the influence of Washington D.C. residents is irrelevant. I acknowledge the constitutional precedent this decision was founded on; however, I am a firm believer in viewing the constitution as a “living document” evolving with time, which leads me to disagree with the status quo. From what I have read, Washington D.C. has one representative in the House, but he is barred from voting. This non-voting representative still has the power to sit in on committees, engage in debates, and introduce legislation. I agree with Courtney that the residents of Washington D.C. are more likely than the majority of the nation’s population to be cognizant of pertinent political issues, which gives further cause to implementing change in D.C.
ReplyDeleteIf we want to talk about a representation of the people there is a greater issue than if DC is represented, and that is Gerrymandering. The practice of packing and making safe districts is a mockery of the democratic process. More So the First-Past-the-Post system makes it so their are naturally 2 big parties the "government" and the "opposition". We can end both by implementing proportional representation. We make the state representatives be voted on by the entire state and the house seats will be divided up based on the percentages of the vote. This would effectively stop Gerrymandering as the borders are set to that of the state borders and it would help break up the big party coalitions that we have and encourage multiple parties to emerge and so it becomes less of a lesser of two evils and a choice on who is the best.
ReplyDeleteHowever such a dramatic shift is unlikely so a proposal that actually has the possibility to pass is currently implemented in the state of California. By allowing the general election to have two members of the same party, that are chosen in an open primary. This way we have two members who still have to compete for the general population and will have to moderate their views in the face of their opponent. This might lead to such problems such as voter depression for being neglected in an election as well as making it so the general election not moderating the views of either member and two radicals on the same wing would be voted for. Still it has some promise and we can wait and see how California deals with it.
Oh and on the Issue of DC representation. They deserve representation of the smallest state in the union, Wyoming, with one Representative and two senators.
DeleteI believe it's very odd that D.C. does not have the same representation as a state in anything other than the presidential elections. I understand that making D.C. a state would be more than simply adding another star to the flag, past arguments against statehood aren't really relevant anymore. Yes, it was specifically referenced by Madison in the Federalist papers, but the capitol wasn't the same as it is now. I don't believe that many people would view it any different than it is viewed now. Of course the argument could be made that Washington D.C. should receive extra funding or grants because it's the "most important" but that wouldn't hold up with the entire public, nor do I believe anyone would try to pull something like that. Giving Washington D.C. equal representation is something that needs to be considered carefully but implemented nonetheless. We don't want to give too much power to a state that acts as the capitol's housing, but in the current situation, they are too underrepresented.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Courtney and Matt in that the residents of D.C. are surrounded by politics more than the rest of the country and that could cause them to be the most politically informed. This is why I believe they should be represented more in Congress. I also agree with Courtney in that the citizens of D.C. would be a model for the rest of the country; to follow in terms of civic duty to vote with knowledge of who they are voting for. I think they should have more than one representative in Congress in order for their constituents to have better voting rights. I believe they should have the same voting rights as every other citizen in this country. I also think the District of Columbia should have more than 3 electoral votes, by increasing their number of representatives in the house. Ultimately the citizens of D.C. should be represented the same as the rest of the country.
ReplyDeleteWashington D.C.'s status with regards to voting and representation is incredibly intriguing. On one hand, we pride ourselves as a nation where we all have a say as to how we should be governed. Every individual has the ability to input their own opinions as to what they think is best for our nation, and then those opinions clash in the political arena. However, in order to give D.C. the right to offer representation in this matter, we would have to deal with the issue of statehood. We basically have a struggle between our nation's ideology and the laws that govern our nation. It almost forms a sort of logical fallacy, as the laws which govern our nation are created by representatives we choose to create laws. How can D.C. be represented when the laws created by those chosen to represent us in Congress essentially prevent them from doing so?
ReplyDeleteAs many other students have expressed, it seems ridiculous to me that there are 600,000 people living in the United States that do not have the same representation rights as other citizens. I understand the desire to have the capital be neutral, but citizens living there should not be punished for it.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the issue of representation is bigger than just D.C. Votes in some states are worth more than votes in other states under the electoral college. It is also possible that the candidate with the most votes will not win the election under the electoral college. I think before we worry about including D.C. in the flawed system as it is, we should fix the representation/electoral college system.
I definitely think DC should have representation, because that's a huge population, especially because that city has some big time problems - in regards to equality and class/race. In regards to our entire system, its extremely problematic and flawed - considered we have such a low congressional approval rating, but the same jerks keep getting voted in because of their money, lobbying, name recognition, etc. I think the citizens need to really push for a complete overhaul and take out the trash, get equal representation for all - not just DC. There are huge groups that are marginalized and not equally represented nationwide, because of random, mostly bureaucratic bs, mostly having to do with how money is the major factor in elections. While there are rare cases where money isn't as big a deal (Jesse Ventura - $300,000 campaign and won governor of Minn), the majority of the time, money is a huge factor.
ReplyDeleteI believe that DC deserves the right for representation. A population of 600,000 is pretty huge. Every person deserves the right of representation, and has the right to express how the want the nation to be governed. For so long, the people of DC have stood back and watched how their money and resources are handled, its time to give them a say. As far as the state of representation in this country, though I do like the “ideal” balance that the House and Senate create for lawmaking, it is a perfect recipe for getting nothing done. We have an unproductive Congress that is more focused on getting re-elected and pleasing the lobbyist that fund them. I think a good way to get Congress to actually do something would be to pay them on a “commission”, or what they get passed and done. If we pay politicians on the number of policies they pass, we can see productivity rise. However, there are some flaws that I have thought about. One for instance, would be pushing laws to get done fast, without properly considering outcomes. I want to see Congress be more productive, and when we have such a split,it is difficult to stay optimistic.
ReplyDeleteThe 618,000 residents of the District should have Congressional representation, but I think the District should be reclaimed by Maryland rather than becoming a separate state. The clause that gives every state two senators, regardless of the state's size, is frustrating to me and many people living in the more populous states. That's a key provision of the Connecticut Compromise of the Constitutional Convention. It gives a disproportionate say in the federal governments actions and laws, but residents of less populous states would say it protects them from being under-representated. Making D.C. a state would further promotes this - in my opinion - unfair balance of power - giving a strong say to a small amount of people. Rejoin D.C. and Maryland instead.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Senator Brown that those living in D.C. should have representation in Congress. In fact, I find it rather ridiculous that it hasn't already happened. I understand that D.C. is not technically a state; however, I believe that enough people live their in order to have some representation. Representation in our government is extremely important. The lack of it can sometimes be concerning. Perhaps one of the reasons Americans feel the government is so out of touch with the American people lies in the lack of representation citizens have. We have a government for the people by the people. However, it sometimes feels like this statement has never rung true in the country. I don't know how to fix the representation issue in America, but I can recognize that it's a problem.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what many others have said in that it is ironic and sad that the residents of DC do not have representation. The very symbolism of DC demands representation. I give Senator Brown serious credit for standing up for the residents of DC in a situation where it seems they are almost taken advantage of - in a situation where playing host to the capital has turned on DC and the capital now mocks them in that despite being hosted by DC, there is no representative of the district.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that everyone agrees; it's unfair that there are American citizens who don't have representation because of where they live. Isn't that what our government is based on: representation? It's definitely a simple problem with a complex solution, but it order to have a fair governing system, the problem needs to be fixed.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Blake in that D.C. should not be its own state. I believe that along with the fact that it doesn't have congressional representation separates it and alienates it from the remainder of the population. I am a believer that the capital of this country should be a city in a state to not separate it at all and make it like a regular city involved in their state's legislature. They also are technically not part of our nation's legislature either because they are unable to vote congressmen into office to make decisions for them. These rights are guaranteed to all Americans and to deny these people these rights simply because they live in our nation's capital is wrong and unconstitutional. They either should be given a congressman and senator to represent them or they should be brought into a state (either Maryland or Virginia) that has that power.
ReplyDeleteI think that the citizens of Washington D.C. must somehow necessarily have representation in Congress. However I do not know if I believe it should be its own state. I thought of a few more complicated solutions but I feel like in the end the most natural thing would be to make those citizens technically citizens of the state from which the land originally came, Maryland. Next I would change the laws that allow people to vote based on their home state while residing in a foreign country or another state to include D.C. If this solution wouldn't work, I might say the second best thing in my mind, but which is a lot more "out there," would be to split the votes based on the population (not the area of land itself) between Virginia and Maryland, maybe via a literal random lottery/process each election, so that it could not be said that this group of people would affect the election's outcome via either gerrymandering or the simple fact that the majority voted for democrats in the past. Seeing as how both states, but especially Virginia, go through periods of voting Democrat and Republican, this would give them the representation they want, but at an amount that some people who say "but it's only a small city" would see as fairer, while also allowing the city to have some sway in two states, even though a person would not know exactly which state to take specific issues to. However they could have the choice of either, which they could potentially use to their advantage, so I would hope it would be seen as a positive thing by the citizens, while again, making the majority of the rest of the U.S. complacent with them not really swaying things towards the Democratic Party a ton.
ReplyDeleteI feel like what should happen is Washington DC should be given back to Maryland for all voting purposes, but should still be considered its own separate district and should not actually be governed my Maryland. I think this is the most fair solution because right now those US citizens in DC are not being properly represented, and they deserve more representation. However they should not necessarily got their own state. Giving them to Maryland seems like the best solution.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this stipulation;while giving DC statehood would solve lack of voting presence for the region, it would also be an create an unnecessary need for more infrastructure in such a small region. The historic nature of the district should be adequately preserved by allowing residents to vote for the representation of Maryland.
DeleteRegardless of the discussion of the voting rights of D.C, a topic that I neither see as a major political issue, nor a pressing matter I feel this topic brings up a much more concerning question. That is the fact that currently in our "Democratic" Republic that representation has become a choice between two major incumbent parties with similar economic views. Sure, the American population is granted a choice and thereby is allowed to decide who it is that the Government is composed of, but they do not have a choice in the matter of who runs. That decision is made by money, and those who have lots of it. To continue to call the choice between republicans and democrats "Democracy" is belittling to the concept of Democracy. It may be argued that voter turn out is low enough as it is in the United States without more confusion being added to the system, or that it is impossible to expect these major parties to relinquish their monopoly on the political system, yet does that make it acceptable to continue to discount third party and non-major party candidates? Currently a party must receive around 5% of the vote I believe to qualify for federal funds in the election cycle, yet besides the Green party, or potentially the Tea Party (if it ever decides to stop squatting in the Republican Caucuses) could actually receive such. Democracy should be more than a choice between Coke and Pepsi.
ReplyDeleteI do not think D.C. should be its own separate entity. I do not think it should be incorporated into Virginia or Maryland either. It simply needs to have its own congressional say. This is a no-brainer. With out representation, the choice of the residents of D.C. to live there really means very little, politically.
ReplyDeleteReiterating a lot of what everyone else is saying, D.C. should be allowed the same voting rights as the rest of the nation. One of the main arguments is that Washington, D.C. is a federal district rather than a state so they are not granted voting rights for this reason. However, they're still American and are nonetheless a part of our nation. If they were to drive out a few miles out and end up in Virginia, are they then valid to vote? What makes them any different in legitimacy due to their location. If anything, they would be amongst the most informed voters because they are surrounded by it all. Although the district isn't large, they could have a strong positive impact on politics because they are so familiar with the political happenings.
ReplyDeleteWashington D.C. was founded for a place where a nation can assemble and the economy can flourish. It is still a place where we have the different branches of government located but the economy grew to big for it (wall street). There is no need to keep it from becoming a state except of the large paper work and dealing with a new state. I’m guessing republicans are the ones against it because D.C.’s population is mostly democratic. In article IV of the Constitution it gives congress the right to admit a new state. So it’s up to congress to decide and reading thru clause 1 and 2 it can be a state, so why not.
ReplyDeleteI think things could definitely be improved by giving the people of DC representatives with voting powers. Without that, they aren't being fairly represented - the same goes for the argument of making Puerto Rico a state (although the situations are pretty different). I agree in saying that the people of DC might be some of the most informed citizens in the country, so I don't know why we would continue to disenfranchise them. Some things just don't make sense, but hopefully Sen. Brown can shed some light onto the complexities and voices of the people in DC.
ReplyDeleteA gallup poll conducted found that nearly 40% of WDC residents are Federal workers or civil servants (the highest density in the nation). It is important that these servants of the Federal government get equal representation and voting rights - as they would if they resided in any other part of the nation. I could not think of a more ironic situation then not being adequately represented by the government you serve and are employed by.
ReplyDeleteResidents in D.C should have representation, it's not very democratic to deny their representation. I believer our current representation is fairly decent. It can be updated and we can add a few more members in congress. Our indirect democracy is ideal for our large population to speed up decision making process. Recent news about congress displays that the decision process in congress is slow so changing the process could cause even more gridlocking.
ReplyDelete