The Big Trouble if DC Becomes the 51st State
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ต.ค. 2022
- Watch more than 20 additional RealLifeLore videos in my Modern Conflicts series on Nebula: nebula.tv/modernconflicts
Please Subscribe: / @reallifelore
RealLifeLore on Spotify: spoti.fi/47yMfzp
RealLifeLore on Facebook: / reallifelore
Select video clips courtesy of Getty Images
Select video clips courtesy of the AP Archive
Special thanks to MapTiler / OpenStreetMap Contributors and GEOlayers 3
www.maptiler.com/copyright/
www.openstreetmap.org/copyright
aescripts.com/geolayers/
Could you imagine a president's family and staff being basically the only voters and then said president loses DC? I'm dead just thinking about it.
Not gonna be a fun conversation at the dinner table on Pennsylvania Avenue
I believe that it could set up a serious paradox come election time, especially if there are not enough members of that district who are not holding a public office to be appointed as electors. (This means that the President can not be his own elector.)
There is argument that certain former presidents actually didn't want to win. It was originally set up to scam money.
@@davegreenlaw5654 that’s an excellent point! Though the Constitution doesn’t say the electors of a state or the federal district must be residents of that state or the district. It says the state’s legislatures will choose the method and likewise that Congress will choose the method for the district. Though currently all states have laws that state they must be residents and Congress likewise has established that the electors of the federal district must be residents so it is indeed setting up such a paradox if Congress didn’t change any statutes.
That would give the president and his family more voting power than the Royal Family of many countries.
The president typically is not considered a resident of DC but instead maintains his or her residency from his original state, just like our members of Congress. This is why the sitting president always goes back to their home state to vote.
That being the case, what would happen to DC’s 3 electors?
DC is the most woke city in the US.. Burn it to the ground!
@@loganiushere they would get thrown out likely
If they change their voter registration to DC they're in.
@@loganiushere Good question. The President is also able to change their residency remember Trump entered as a NY resident, but in 2020 voted as a FL resident. That means that the President could choose DC residency.
There would not be 436 representatives. The total is set by law at 435. The allotment would be reapportioned between the 51 states.
at the next census yes, but until the census of 2030, it would be 436.
@@ThornesOddWorldWtf are you talking about?
@@Vortex1988 by law, congressional reapportionment can only happen after a census, however if a new state is admitted to the Union, they must have at least one representative. so the number would temporarily change to 436 to allow for representation then after the next census, go back to 435
@Vortex1988 he's not wrong
There's nothing to say that law has to remain in place. It's a really stupid law, too. It *should* be repealed, and the size of the House of Representatives significantly increased.
it may be easier to remove most of the federal district designation, return the land to Virginia and Maryland, and only have tiny enclave of a few federal buildings under federal control, not an entire city.
Nah. DC should be its own state. If Wyoming can be a state, DC can.
@@patpat8727 but in this context, it's showing that people won't allow it. If I were a resident in DC (I live nearby but not in it) I would want an assurance of full representation now and not a pie-in-the-sky dream of statement that will likely never come in my lifetime. (edit for grammar)
@patpat8727 Wyoming is massive, states are not just based on population its a compromise between land and people with the ultimate aim to placate/prevent secession.
This, except the Virginia land was already returned. It should simply be part of Maryland
no it shouldn't. DC has been administered and governed independently for more than 200 years. There has never been a political state or district just disappeared in this country.@@homuraakemi9556
Fun fact: The Pentagon isn’t located in Washington DC: it’s located in Arlington, Virginia.
Wait you mean not everyone knows that?
Wait, people don’t know that, granted I live in Arlington so
That is technically true, but Pantagon have Washington DC mailing address.
@@bababababababa6124 well yeah not everyone lives in America
that isn't a fun fact. More like an obvious fact
As someone who's lived in DC my whole life, I'm glad you finally covered this topic. However, not being a state doesn't just mean DC residents have no representation in Congress. It also means that the federal government can basically repeal any local law they don't like that we voted for ourselves (This has happened a few times and is pretty fucked up tbh). We also don't have our own state prison system meaning that people who are convicted are moved across the entire country to federal prisons.
you do know that you live on a military base it was federalize during ww2
@@scruf153 that doesn’t change anything they’ve said
Too bad. DC was not meant to be lived in. Allowing DC to be a state opens it up to partisan politics and you don't want the capitol to be influenced by either party
@@oecw124 half of the capital was given to Virginia so idk what you by the capital will be influenced by an individual party if it was split properly like the map in the video showed multiple times; that you obviously did not pay attention to
@@oecw124 ok and? It doesn't matter what it was "intended to be". What matters is how it is now and we have a larger population that 2 states.
If the issue was about representation, the residents of D.C. would be willing to join the State of Maryland or Virginia. There isn't any need for residential areas to be included in D.C. so an easy solution is to make the district smaller.
Facts. No reason for DC to be separated
Then why have any states at all? Just have all states under 1 or two states right? The reality is states are born from a shared history and culture. For centuries now DC has established its own shared history and culture. It deserves a state of its own as much as Indiana or Wyoming do instead of being swallowed up by another state.
Also Republicans would probably oppose any absorption of DC into another state because those states become even more Democratic.
It’s irrational to never let any new state join the union just because you don’t like how they vote.
@@noahjimenez5290 July 2, 1776 the 13 colonies became sovereign nations with the passage of the Lee Resolution. It wasn't until 1788 when the US Constitution was ratified that Washington DC was created to be the seat of the Federal Government. The founding fathers wanted all the States to be equal even those who joined the union after the original 13. If a State also held the seat of the Federal Government then that State would have greater influence over Federal affairs than the other States thus the States would not be Equal. Maryland and Virginia gave up land to be the Seat of the Federal Government so it is reasonable that that land would be returned to the States rather than become a new State.
@@noahjimenez5290 The people who live in New York and California want to have different laws than the people who live in Wyoming and Nebraska. Do you not believe that people have the right to self government and should be able to elect leadership that represents them. The United States is too diverse to have one set of leaders and laws governing all the people thus we need to have States.
Why would DC be part of Virginia? Also, DC has a 230 year history of its own culture, NOT being part of a state. To absorb it into one would be a disservice. Besides, All these Republicans worried about an advantage...they already have a HUGE advantage over Democrats...Two senators, no matter how small the state, the electoral college, which only tilts in their direction. Making DC a state would not only stop the complete disenfranchisement of those American voters, but it would add a TINY amount of fairness to a system that would still be largely slanted in favor of Republicans.
The whole point of a district for Federal activity is that it is not a state, that it is under the firm control of the federal government. It was supposed to house federal institutions and not much else. If it has become too populous to do this, then most of it should be handed back to Maryland. Keep enough to work as it was designed.
A correction. Carl B Stokes was the first elected African American mayor of a major US city in Cleveland. Cleveland at that time had around 800,000 residents.
Wendover makes mistakes in a surprising amount of videos but we still love him
Walter Washington entered office as Mayor-Commissioner of DC on November 7, 1967. Carl B Stokes took office as mayor of Cleveland on November 13 six days later. Both tremendous achievements
@@RealLifeLore hi
@Patrick Hudson
It's a major American city, due to population. It's just not a relevant, popular, or desirable city to live in.
🤔@@MarvinPowell1tell me you've never been to Cleveland without saying it, oh wait, you just did
Yes, the whole point of D.C. was so no state would host the nation's capital. Few people, aside from federally elected representatives and staff, were ever expected to live there.
Most capitals in the Eastern US followed the same principle of not being a major economic center and therefore not the largest city.
@@Jtzkb yeah, I really don't get it. This is the obvious solution... you want representation? Go to a place where you get representation!
I did see a comment that said that this idea was stupid because they don't want to be part of those states, but I really don't understand that perspective. If you see the solution, but don't take the solution, you can't get mad when you don't get what you want. Thats like saying that you want a sand castle, but when I hand you a shovel and bucket you throw a tantrum.
@@Jtzkb it also is the headquarters for many, many large organizations. If you're a large ngo, you have a DC office. If you're a large labor organization, you have a DC office. Religious group? DC office. Etc etc. It's definitely not just federal employees based there, a lot of other bodies have to be based there to help with federal partnerships and other functions.
And beyond that, you still need all the usual things associated with a city. There's a ton of arts and culture organizations here, food and hospitality, etc. Plus blue collar workers of all occupations to keep the lights on.
A lot of the folks coming in with hot takes about DC clearly have never visited or only spent like two days here as a tourist. Stripping it down to "just federal employees and a few grocery stores" is ridiculous when the bulk of residents are not fed employees to begin with.
@@roflcopterIII It's only 10 miles squared. I board the DC metro at freaking Vienna. My Dad boards the VRE at Manassas. You can work in DC without living in DC.
People can move if they want to solve the problem. Or, they can stop wanting to have their cake and eat it too and join Maryland.
They're stuck in an awkward position, but they don't want a solution. They want to exploit it for political power.
@@Jtzkb “let’s move 700,000 people from their homes and leave an entire city abandoned to rot away, that’s a good idea”.
The biggest issue with a state of Columbia is that it would mess up the nice even number of 50 states
Yes, we would have to carve out an evenly proportioned conservative state from the east of California.
51 is a prime number though. United, indivisable with liberty and justice for all yada yada.
@@erkl8823Or the liberal sections of every state?
@@huy1k995 Do you even know what prime number means? Apparently not.
We would need new flags. A lot of new flags.
The proposed area of the state of Douglas should just be given back to Maryland. All problems solved, all people should now be represented, and political parties maintain their "balance".
Interesting fact, Guam, U.S. Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands also all have non-voting Representatives in Congress and Puerto Rico has Congressional representation through a position called a Resident Commissioner who also does not have voting rights.
That's correct. Although the non-vote Resident Commissioner and the non-voting Delegates can vote in Committee meetings if they're a member of said committee.
they're effectively colonies
I heard was very pro Trump. So unlikely they will be ever allowed to vote.
Those areas are all colonized by the us.
Important fact is that they dont pay taxes
⚠️ CORRECTION - With all due respect to Walter Washington, the first African American mayor of a major US city was Carl Stokes, elected in Cleveland in 1967.
I don’t think Cleveland is a major city in most people’s eyes.
Which Cleveland are you talking about?
@@ChrisAn5 They had roughly the same number of people as DC did in 67
@@ChrisAn5 trade on Lake Erie and had canals and railways
@@ChrisAn5 Uhmm...ok.
"One State to rule them all, one State to find them, one State to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them; In the Land of DC where the shadows lie."
LOL
It would be funny asl if DC lost statehood again
Why not make the federal district smaller like in the plan at 17:00, and merge the rest back into Maryland and Virginia?
Virginia already had their land returned to them.
@@JamesRea2so only Maryland would be gaining then. That wouldn’t be such an issue. The fact that Maryland wants nothing to do with absorbing DC residents tells you all you need to know about those who live in DC. There’s no reason a single city needs 3 electoral votes in a presidential election.
Citizens of Washington D.C. get to vote for mayor for the first time, and they immediately vote in a guy named Washington
EDIT: For the people saying that this is incorrect, 9:48 in the video blatantly explains DC residents were able to vote on mayor and elected Walter Washington.
Great observation!
That wasn’t how it worked bud 💀
Washington in Washington!
President Johnson forced mayor Washington on the city
@@CopyandPaste101 its called a meme ☠️☠️☠️☠️💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀
I'm not american so correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the whole point in DC not being a state was cause it was meant to be the neutral/apolitical administration area
Exactly. Yet it has become a bastion of leftist ideology.
Correct. You know more about American civics than most Americans
Yes, however the population was never expected to be as large as it is.
There you go understanding history and stuff.
@@ohari1 What's your point?
Thanks for the video. You obviously did lots of research! As a resident of Washington d.c. I think it sucks that I don't have representation in Congress! I had no idea that stayed had actually got so close to passing in Congress! I am a Democrat, but I can totally see why Republicans are not interested in having two Democratic senators added to the Senate. Having Maryland take back the land they gave for DC seems to make the most sense to me, but it sounds like they are not interested.
This has been super cool to learn about as someone new to the DC area. The Maryland option occurred to me years ago as the best choice, but I hadn't considered MD might refuse to take DC back. It has a precedence given how VA handled their half and still feels like the best option. Given that the overall number of congress/senate members won't change, this seems to be the least intrusive option. Balance and compromise will be the only thing that can sell this (if it is even possible). DC as a state feels impossible with all the Red states that would need to ratify the amendment.
It would be interesting to see a similar video for Puerto Rico becoming a state too! Nice video as always :)
I hear both republican FL senators support their statehood just so they won’t have to continue their ongoing exodus to Miami
Tbh, I've always wondered WHY we never made Puerto Rico the 51st state. I would definitely be interested in seeing a similar video about Puerto Rico as this one about Wash DC.
@SteamCat Thank you for the clarification and explanation. I appreciate it 👍🏻
Puerto Rico has way too many issues to become a state. Corruption is off the charts. My favorite story is the warehouse of equipment locked up for one of their hurricanes to make Trump look bad. Let them become their own country if they want.
Puerto Rico is one of 7 US territories, including Guam, Mariana Islands, Virgin Islands, etc
This story skips over some of the history as to how DC became a “federal enclave.” During a meeting of the founders, a riot broke out outside the meeting. Fearing in the future that if a state was mad at the federal government, they would refuse to send police aid to assist, the founders wanted a way for the federal government to self-sustain. Hence, making DC not subject to any state.
EDIT: a typo fixed and wanted to tell yall in the comments to be nice to each other! :)
Ironic that this stance one day facilitated the president preventing military assistance on January 6th
@@ClementWilliamstheoneandonly Actually, it was the Speaker of the House that prevented the military assistance.
@@ninmastnunyabiz9404 odd considering only the president can deploy the national guard
@@Gavin79746 Yes, and he offered, but the speaker has the right to refuse, the same way as any governor. In this case, Nancy Pelosi refused the offer of military assistance.
@@ninmastnunyabiz9404 No such right exists. Stop getting your information from right-wing propaganda. The President is the commander-in-chief of the US Military. The Speaker has no rank
The rest of us pay taxes without representation too
Bro “No Taxation Without Representation” coming back 💀
Except that neither the President, nor the VP, nor any member of Congress is a resident of Washington, DC. They are legally residents of their states of origin, and must maintain their residences in those states.
I know! why can't people understand this concept?
Did they not learn this in school? Let me guess no one learns anything about government in modern school
Washington DC was borrowed from two separate states.
The concept of the United States being 50 individual states is lost in the 2020s
@@bananafoneable It's a failure of our educational system that people don't know about such a niche and inconsequential fact.
I'm trying to figure out your point.
@@Kozvickinconsequential as much as hearing about this every year for the last 100 years. No one's going to do anything about it. But it does drive voters. 🙄🤷♂️
We don't need a president nor congress or much Of any of that totalitarian, authoritarian bullsheet.
In retrospect it would’ve solved a lot of issues if they made it way smaller than the max 10x10 miles
Very much so. Goes to show that the founding fathers of the Constitution were far from infallible. At the time it was probably fine since so few people lived there and it was built from the ground up. If someone decided to move to DC then they knew what they were in for. In addition, voting was only for land-owning white men anyways. Senators originally couldn't even represent their own states.
Like, 100x100 feet would've been nice(r)...
It's like the framers got some stuff wrong (a lot of stuff wrong) and we should fix it. But we don't fix any of it bc they made a lot of it very hard to fix without breaking the whole system (which is what we should do).
@@patpat8727 If any of what you said happened it would spell a hundred dictatorships consuming what was once the Us like what happened to the soviet union after they fell. it would be overall negative for you and everyone who has to actually live here
@@juwebles4352 literally none of what you said makes sense.
Why doesn't Congress pass an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that creates a new form of "capital district"?
This “capital district” could be treated as a full state without being called a state and would avoid the problem created by the 23rd Amendment.
When consideration was being given to the admissions of Hawai'i and Alaska to the Union, the issue was supported because an equal number of Senators (2) and Representatives (1, each) - would be added to Congress - 2 Senators and a Representative from a Republican-leaning state, 2 Senators and a Representative from a Democratic Party-leaning state. In a burst of historical irony, Alaska was the Democratic Party leaning state, Hawai'i a Republican Party-leaning state - both of which have switched in the past 60 years.
@18:06 Since the House is capped to 435 members, another state would have to lose a Representative in the addition of one from D.C.
Brazil took inspiration on the US concept of a federal district, however the Federal District of Brazil has representation in both houses of Congress, a governor elected by the district's voters, its own legislative assembly and the combined political and legal powers of both a state and a municipality. Plus, the Union is constitutionally obligated to fund many of the district's services, like the police force, which is really well equipped and well paid by Brazilian standards. So, here the controversy is about the privileged position of Brasilia when compared to the rest of the country.
That’s fascinating.
Yeah I don't get why the US finds it so hard. Aus has the same thing; Canberra is in the Australian Capital Territory, which isn't a state. They still vote. You don't need to become a fully fledged state to be able to vote, at the very least federally.
@@hashbrown777 you can vote federally in DC. If by federally you mean for president
I see DC having that same issue if it becomes a state. Perhaps we can cut off the city from Federal funds apart from the fed government buildings in exchange for it becoming a state.
@@hashbrown777 making DC a state is the right and fair thing to do. Everybody knows this, but the problem is politics. As he showed us on the charts, granting DC statehood is a very partisan issue. I predict it will only happen when and if Democrats have enough of a majority in Congress to pass the bill and avoid a Republican filibuster. There would also need to be a Democratic president so that the bill was not vetoed.
The filibuster really is a confusing thing.
A vote, to see if you should even vote, that doesnt have the same requirements, but harsher ones than the final vote.
Originally the vote to pass a law was the same as a filibuster but during the 1st Obama term this was changed to a simple majority
@@jetheotaku Wish they had kept it that way, but never had the filibuster.
If anything, one would have expected the filibuster to be an easier bar to entry, not hard, or the same.
It makes a little sense tbh. What is to stop a senator from talking non-stop thereby preventing legislation from coming to a vote? What if everyone in the Senate wanted to hear what he has to say?
Its because the US is a republic, it has democratic elements but they are used in conjunction with three diffent branches of government with checks and balances to secure individual rights of it citizens, some of which is the idea of minority rights so a slim majority can't oppress a slim minority
@@wissamkadamaniIreland had a lad who did that back in the 19th century Charles Stewart Parnell had a seat in the house of commons in England as England was dismissive of his attempts to secure home rule for Ireland he just spent days opening up random books and reading them for hours aloud and nobody could stop him.
Fascinating and informative!
Great video but I'm a bit disappointed that you didn't mention that much of it is an endorheic basin. That kind of goes along with it being dry and aired and desert, but I think it kind of adds another level as to why a lot of it can't be farmed or inhabited.
There are over 700k people. What are you talking about.
@@mrbrainbob5320he lives in 10th century
I think he meant to comment on another video but auto play messed it up.
DC residents: There are 700,000 people here who have no real representation in Congress!
Puertorricans with 3.9 million people being a US colony since 1898: First time?
Last I heard, Puerto Rico wasn't a state and probably the only place in the entire world an American can live and not pay Federal income taxes.
puerto rico has voted no on statehood, thus they were offered representation and rejected it, D.C refused to return to maryland
see? they don't want representation, they consent to this
@@jds1275 what drugs are you on you imperialist?
@@jds1275 It is weird you can live in a US territory and not pay taxes, but go to another country and you must still pay US taxes (unless they have an agreement with the other country)
Puerto Rico hasn't ever voted in majority approval to apply for statehood until 2020. Though let's be honest there... Puerto Rico would face even more opposition in congress to statehood than DC. Partially due to racism, but even more would be the same partisanship. Not only would Puerto Rico be another strongly Democratic state, adding two more Democratic senators, but it would also have a higher population than 20 existing state, would would add several more Democratic representatives to The House.
But if it can be processed through the House if/when the filibuster issue can be addressed (possibly even after the middterms this year) its admission could make it even easier for DC to be admitted, or vice versa.
Interesting to hear about the failed amendment that would have given DC voting representatives in Congress without making it a state. I always wondered why that option wasn't really part of the conversation, not realizing it had been tried once and failed. It's kind of a weird quirk of our system that adding DC as a state is probably the easier route.
Yeah, except that is a terrible idea.
@@calvinhobbes6646 Agreed. This country is already divided enough as is. If this was truly about representation then becoming part of Maryland is a solution but no...they want to tip the scales democrat, that is the goal. NOT representation.
@@Psycho-go5yr If you cared about representation you'd get rid of of the electoral college.
Don't pretend like you care about democracy. You care about winning.
@@sickrantorum693 your absolutely right I don't care about the democracy. I care about the Republic as the founders intended. People should have their say but mob rule is just as awful a prospect as an absolute dictatorship. People can be fooled into making absolutely terrible decisions in mass. World War II should be a clear example of that. The scary mustached man was voted in. As for losing, I absolutely can take a lose as long as it came about fairly. This crap about packing the courts, and adding new states to get more senators, and repealing the electoral college because it doesn't serve your needs is all about winning. Stop projecting your flaws onto me.
@@Psycho-go5yr If the only thing that mattered was the position taken by the national Democratic Party then yes, it would be about political power. But the actual people of D.C want their own state. They just happen to lean Democrat. If it was the other way around, the Republican Party would support statehood while Democrats would oppose it. Because of this, to create a logical solution, the political implications should be ignored and D.C should become its own state simply because the voters want it and there's no moral justification to keep the status quo while the residents pay federal taxes. Unless you want to exempt D.C taxpayers from paying federal taxes, which is another discussion.
The issue of statehood should be prioritized to Puerto Rico over the much smaller DC
I think there has been a slight slip-up in RealLifeLore's selection of images. At 11:11, a still is visible where I actually recognise 3 of the politicians! They are, however, not from the US. From the left, sitting behind the table, those are: Frans Andriessen, Prime Minister Dries van Agt, and Deputy Prime Minister Hans Wiegel, of the Netherlands! Their cabinet, Van Agt I, is however contemporary to US president Jimmy Carter's term. Quite a weird choice in the context of this video...
Minor correction: Detroit got a black mayor before DC, in 1974. And Cleveland got one all the way back in 1967.
That's right....
Most videos like this have many mistakes.
@David Bishop Yes, and comments are there to help provide corrections or additional information.
One person can only give one perspective with so much knowledge. Thousands to Millions of people coming to a video provide many perspectives in the comments with even more information
Cleveland shouldn't count. We set a river on fire.
@@samreddig8819 😂
@@samreddig8819
A fellow Reddig, we are a rare breed my friend
I think this is hilarious, because as Marylander, I often forget DC isn't just part of our state. Honestly the only way to tell that you're entering DC is that the roads get worse 😂
D.C. is a real shit hole...
In terms of drivers, DC and MD are indistinguishable.
lol well I'm sure their Dem mayor and Dem city council are working hard to make the peoples lives better :P
@@MrBoneFishie Doing their best with Republicans in Congress and sometimes a Republican president getting in the way. Did you watch the video?
That’s how I tell when I’m entering Michigan from Ohio 😂
5:18 Did you know that the TH-cam Mobile loading wheel is situated just about perfectly center of this square diagram you put here when not zoomed in?
15:44 Promising to veto something isn't neutrality in the slightest! It's direct opposition!
I believe you are wrong about it increasing the number of representatives in the House. I believe the House is statutorily limited to 435. So one of the larger states would lose one representative and DC would gain one.
I believe the house changes seats and districts according to population often. Senators however stay static at two per state.
@@nickbrown4696No, he’s right. It happened when Hawaii and Alaska became states. The overall number of representatives grew by 2 for a single term, and then after that two larger states gave up a seat for hawaii and alaska to have it. tye number of representatives wouldn’t change
@@kennynava7441 This is all true but, to be fair, the Congressional seat limit isn't actually Constitutional law, so it would be theoretically simple to amend. If you're going to convince enough of Congress to give statehood to DC, it's probably trivial to convince them to expand Congress by some token amount, comparatively speaking.
(Which is to say, it probably won't happen in any of our lifetimes, but it's still more likely than getting everyone on the same page regarding DC representation/statehood.)
@@nickbrown4696 you are wrong.
@@DieselRamcharger nope you are. Senators are 2 per state. And 50 states. 2 per state..
Hey! One thing I noticed is when you said 41% of the residents are African American it’s actually not a majority but a plurality, A majority has to be at least 50% while a plurality is simply the most represented group. Great videos, keep up the good work!
A relative majority then. the effect is still the same.
I think the percentage is actually 44.5%. I guess the right term would be largest demographic.
Unless the other half is not a solid single group too, like percentages of other ethnic groups.
One point it was over 80%
🤓
The federal district was carved out of Maryland and Virginia originally. The part across the river was given back to Virginia. If anything, the residents within the district should be considered citizens of Maryland as far as representation goes. Were out Capitol to ever move, it would be given back to Maryland and 10 miles square carved out of whatever state it was moved to.
There's no provision to create a state out of what in essence belongs to Maryland. So no, it cannot ever be a state.
How do I see the show notes? I want to check out that 80,000 hours site
I thought you made a mistake by omitting Rhode Island, but I was shocked to find that RI has about 2000,000 more people in it.
Yeah, there's way too many people in that tiny state. A large portion of my family is from the Westerly/Pawcatuck area, and I'm always amazed at how built up it is there.
Wyoming may be big in area but it is very sparsely populated.
We are the second most dense state only behind New Jersey
Population density in the NE is crazy. Something like a quarter of the country lives in the NE but is split up by states in a weird way.
@@swimmingmide And there's going to be more as the west dries out.
41% of African American living in D.C. would make them the plurality instead of the majority. I can understand why you used majority since it’s more familiar than the term plurality, which is the largest group among three or more groups. Majority is traditionally defined as more than half.
literally 🤓
🤓
🤓
Yall are losers, this dude offered a fact that is both correct and interesting, i definitely learned something because of it. The nerd isnt him, its you guys
nobody gives a shit
So long story short, a bunch of loopholes are the biggest problem in America, and it's the loopholes that create loopholes in trying to close them. And they'll never be closed ever.
You could also add Washington DC to Maryland.
Great video, but just FYI the number of House members would not increase to 436. The House seats would be reapportioned between the states, and some other state would lose a seat (because the statuatory limit is 435).
Edit: My mistake. Apparently the DC Admission Act increases the House to 436 members.
Correct
This was due to something in 1929 no?
This needs to change.
@@DrBeauHightower Your content is an absolute bruh moment.
Meant to say that it would temporarily increase to 436 until the 2030 census, where the seats would then be re-apportioned
Slight correction: Under the Reappointment Act, the House of Representatives is capped at 435 members. Unless an amendment to that law was to be enacted, a state would have to give up a seat. However, when Hawaii and Alaska were added, two additional seats were added until the next session, where it was reverted back to 435, so 436 may be possible until the next Congressional cycle after DC's admission.
DC isn't getting admitted to anything. There would need to be a whole lot of "fortification" of states that otherwise have fair, first world elections. And plus, the powers that be don't want blood in the streets because a civil war is hard to have such power over as they enjoy today.
The DC admission act proposes more seats on the cap
@@St0ckwell Honestly expanding the seats in the House is long overdue. The House is supposed to be closer to the people, it's hard to do that when House districts now have more than 700,000 people.
@@St0ckwell based
@@1C3CR34M, oh, neat. Thanks!
It wouldn't permanently change the size of the House of Representatives to 436, because it's set by law to 435. It was temporarily increased to 437 following the admission of Hawaii and Alaska, but was brought back to 435 in the 1963 reapportionment following the 1960 census.
Of course, this law could be changed (and really ought to, the number of constituents per Representative is frankly ridiculous, at over 700k, which is about the total population of the most populous state in 1790, Virginia, including the slaves) with a simple Act of Congress, since it's a regular law and not an amendment.
I think the main issue of DC being it's own state is one of conflict of interest. It'd essentially give the federal government the power of a state as well.
This is not the issue. Every state has federal land, courthouses, fbi etc. The main issue is that it would most certainly be a Dem state(same with Puerto Rico, Dominican Republic, etc) and requires a super majority in both houses and prez. If that ever happened, DC would be a state immediately.
@@quantum_beebdominican republic? 😂
1:27 federal income tax is the same across all states. It is based on income. So saying they pay more income tax than anyone else doesn’t mean they are treated unfair, it means they make more money than anyone else.
I mean, it is unfair because they have no representation. No taxation without represenatation.
Not being able to use money you raise is unfair…
@@TheDCGuitar13 by that logic we need to get rid of income taxes as a whole
They chose to live in DC. You get MASSIVE benefits by living In the nation's capital (higher wages, massive amounts of government jobs, and political influence). If you chose to live in a place they was specifically designed around NOT being a state, them that's your choice.
@@spartanx9293 I don’t even care about being a state tbh. I just wish we didn’t have to tug uncle Sam’s pant legs to be able to do basic city maintenance when we raise more than a big chunk of states. The fed gov has bigger fish to fry and treats as such.
Correction, the House would only be at 436 until the next Census, when, under the House Apportionment Act, it would return to 435.
Oh wow I forgot about the census 🤦♂️, good job on pointing it out!! 😁
Yes at which point either California or New York would have to surrender a seat to the new state. Basically a democratic congressmen subtracted from one and added to the other. So no net gain nor loss for the house. The big difference would be the addition of two senate seats both of which almost certainly would be Democrats which is most likely the biggest reason the Republicans will fight this tooth and nail.
@nunya biznez No, there's no telling what state that Rep would be deducted from. It would be one that was either losing population or gaining population by the smallest amount. Where I live, Michigan, despite gaining a small amount of people, nonetheless lost a Representative for I believe the third straight Census. In 1999, we had 3 more Reps than we have today. The House is mandated to stay at 435. The odds are decent that a Blue State will lose that Rep, but not guarateed.
Or how about we repeal the apportionment act and then just maybe we would actually have a chance of seeing our representative at the local gas station, grocery store or soccer game and wouldn't need to attend a $1000 a plate dinner to redress our grievances. After which maybe we can talk about the 17th amendment while we are at it.
I should add that Congress has generally preferred keeping the membership of the HoR at an odd number so there is no chance of a tie (if every rep. actually votes). They would probably change the number in the event that a new state were added, if that would lead to an even number (and they would probably increase the number of reps. so as to solve the issue of a state loosing at least one rep.)
Preemptively looking at this reasoning with the question: "Is this a valid reason to take away democratic reservation for more people than live on several small states?"
I'm expecting the answer is "No, don't be ridiculous."
The part that Virginia was "given back" is still vastly owned by the Federal government as far as its land is concerned- CIA, Fort Belvoir, National GeoSpatial, Pentagon, and of course Arlington Cemetery, the list keeps going. Also, the presenter is slightly off by his borders of DC- the Potomac River shared with VA is part of DC; as soon as you get to the edge of the river, you aren't in VA anymore and therefore, VA doesn't share a waterway like two states would elsewhere.
Of the things you mentioned, only the Pentagon and Arlington National Cemetery are in the portion of DC that was retroceded to Virginia - that part is now called Arlington County and the City of Alexandria. The land that CIA, Fort Belvoir, and NGA HQ sit on is all in Fairfax County and was never part of the district. There are almost 400,000 people living in those two areas. But you're right about the MD and DC borders extending all the way across the Potomac (to the low tide line on the far side, anyway.)
I've never heard the word 'unprecedented' used so much until I subscribed to this channel.
And such weird emphasis on certain words snd syllables.
And such weird emphasis on certain words snd syllables.
@@DanCooper404 percccCENT
mmmMAssive
You might say his use of the word unprecedented is, unprecedented
@@DanCooper404 CAWN-(griss)
You might note that the map in minute 4 shows the current Alexandria boundaries. When DC was created, it looked a quite bit different.
On the Virginia side, you can definitely see the old borders of DC before the Civil War with how the cities are.
@@kosjeyr The Arlington County line follows the original DC border. The city of Alexandria grew over and obliterated part of that.
Excellent presentation of quite the quagmire!
DC resident here: a lot of good Barack Obama’s “official support” of DC statehood did in 2009 when the Dem party had a House majority and 60 votes (enough to overcome a filibuster threat from the other party). As with many other subjects, the Democratic Party wants the issue to continue for campaign reasons rather than permanent solutions 15:45
I'm Australian. Our national capital - Canberra - sits - like DC in a separate territory - Australian Capital Territory or ACT, which is in the state of New South Wales.
However - unlike DC - the ACT has it's own government with limited autonomy to pass laws. ACT residents vote in federal AND New South Wales state elections and are represented in both parliaments.
once it become very populous and leans in one direction politically it will suddenly "want" statehood
@brian stoll really? Are you one of the predominantly GOP MAGA crowd who sincerely believes left leaning people shouldn't be allowed to vote in an election? Or to be able to have a say about how their home city is managed.
Here in Australia the ACT government is equivalent to the Ipswich City Council or the Brisbane City Council or the Dalrymple Shire Council. Pick an equivalent city or county anywhere in the US. In other words the ACT government is A LOCAL government. Not state or federal.
As I said Canberra residents are represented in both those parliaments as well.
Might I politely suggest you pull you head in and actually use that grey matter God put between your ears for the purpose for which it was intended - THINKING ABOUT STUFF.
@@brianestoll suddenly? Such discussions have been going on politcaly since the late 1800s
Thus the Government ( workers ) gets to vote itself more money and power.. Do I want to give me money?.Yes please.
@Mark Sisto uuum - you do know that NOT everyone who lives in DC or the ACT or whatever the region round Ottawa is called actually work for the national governments - right?
They're in ancillary jobs the serve the needs of the people working in national government jobs. They work in the shops that sell stuff to those people, drive taxis/user, they could be employed by the states of Virginia, NSW & Ontario as teachers & health care staff ( as well as working in those fields privately - private schools, medical practices), work in the tourism/hospitality sector.
Honestly Mericans - you gotta get OFF this "government is the devil incarnate & shouldn't be trusted at all" kick. Government was, is and should be the body that keeps those who would infringe you basic civil and human rights in check via legislation and sanctions, can provide you with civic infrastructure like roads to drive on, public transport to use if you don't have a car/can't drive for whatever reason, bring you water & electricity and get rid of your body waste, provide education & health care, probably put up those early telegraph lines that became telephone lines then fibre optical cables that now also give you access to the internet AND allow you to communicate with peeps in other countries - like me in Australia. ALL this stuff was done either government itself at numerous levels OR by government owned & operated corporations AND designed to benefit ALL. Which - I think, anyway - is your problem - namely that government protects and supports people you don't wanna acknowledge have a right to exist in the first place - the LGBTIQ community, people with disability and their carers and people from non- white, English speaking Christian backgrounds.
My advice to you is please sir - kindly go screw yourself. Thankyou.
The way you solve the presidential voting issue is to have them vote as part of the state that they lived in before taking office. To me that's a no brainer easy fix, as they are not permanent resident of the white house
Too bad the godamn vote doesn't matter. Exampled just today in Arizona for governor seat announced TWELVE DAYS BEFORE ELECTION. And George W. Bush term 2 election - he was inaugurated before the Florida vote was counted, held back by Florida governor, Jeb bush, Little George's brother.
Problem is neither them nor the og states want that and how do you handle it if someone is born in DC
@@Maya-ls3ky I think Pat is specifically talking about the president and other elected officials not the residents of DC
@@KaitouKaiju I think they're talking about if the President was from DC originally. I think in that case they'd just vote in DC - presuming that their residence (prior to becoming President) was DC.
It's always bugged me how like 90% of politicians aren't from the states they represent and sometimes only moved there not long before running for office. I saw an old interview once where among other questions the journalist asked a retired politician "what made you move here?" And the guy said "the last politician was retiring and tapped me as a successor so I moved before his term was up, worked under him, then ran for his office." At the same time they always claim to understand the locals desires and pretend to be just like them even if it's an NYC politician running for the mayor of Houston.
Simple way to deal with this is the government of each state which makes up the district of Columbia get counted by the state that where they reside. Those in Virginia cast votes for Congress in Virginia those whose house would be in Maryland vote in Maryland. Same for residents voting for president. while the rest stays the same other than they vote for the city offices in DC rather than Congress appointments.
I think, the US should look at how other federal republics with a capital under direct federal supervision treat that capital representation-wise.
In Australia, the ACT (Australian Capital Territory) has full representation in the House of Representatives and "half" seat-wise in the Senate with the ACT Representatives and Senators having the same rights as the others (with the difference that the ACT Senators don't have as long as a term and are not elected in two classes). Also, the Northern Territory is likewise represented in the Australian Parliament.
In Nigeria, the Federal Capital Territory of Abuja is represented by two Representatives and one Senator (States are represented by three).
In Brazil, the Federal District (Brasília) is fully represented like a state in both chambers of Congress.
Likewise in Argentina, where the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires is fully represented like a Province.
Likewise in Mexico, where the Distrito Federal is fully represented.
In India, the Union Territory of Delhi is fully represented in Parliament.
Likewise, Berlin is a state of Germany - Bremen and Hamburg are also their own states so the capital isn't a special case in that regard
Australia has a “federal district” for its capital city Canberra.
Except, states in Australia have 12 senators, and territories (like the Australian Capital Territory) get two senators.
So the A.C.T still gets lower house and upper house representation. Just less than the Australian states.
And just for those who don't like that, ACT rules can still be overruled federally eg voluntary euthanasia (for around... 20 years??)
Not "less", because it's not a state. The constitution defines rights that original states have that may be higher than other additions.
If you want to talk about dudded locations, talk about Jervis Bay, which is a much closer analogue to Washington DC
I was going to say this but you beat me to it and you put it much more eloquently as well!
@@AndyViant maybe size but population wise?
The states actually have senators based on population. NSW has far more senators than Tasmania. Iirc TAS has 3 senators
The repeal of the 23rd amendment, should DC become a state or be annexed would be fairly easy to assume. Most states and or congress people would not like the idea of their state's power being undermined that way imo
I have a feeling that whichever party lost an election would demand it be repealed, until they win the next one and they support it while the other party wants to repeal it.
Unless its convenient for your federal party much like the whole support behind it becoming a state anyways.
Unless your party is currently in power. Every election is current climate. Hardly anyone thinks of the future when the other party is in power. Case in point, the nuclear option in Congress that came back to bite the DNC in the ass when the GOP took power.
@@MemeMan42069 Facts!!!!
@@MemeMan42069 Except the Presidency changes party every few years. It wouldn't be something you could count on.
Since the current part of DC came from Maryland, add two districts to the current state of Maryland to represent them. They will also by represented in the Senate by the two Senators that they would help elect. Think this would work.
Unfortunately it can not as Maryland rejected the idea for certain reasons.
@@Darthiya Thank you for sharing that. Hummmm.... and I thought that was my original idea. :)
This is a non-problem. The solution is for Congress to forbid the construction of residential housing within the borders of the District. Over time, as old housing ages out and is demolished, the population will necessarily move to the nearby States, making the matter moot.
And how long is that gonna last?
@@randomperson9732 Indefinitely. The District is so small that there's no real reason for anyone to live there. Those who work there can easily commute.
@@markhagerman3072 But right now you're denying reality. People do indeed live there, and as you said, your plan will last indefinitely, so people will basically live there forever. Without appropriate representation. That's unfair to those people.
@@randomperson9732 Just living that close to the seat of power gives them more "representation" than anyone should have. Here's another alternative; move the national capital to a different city every ten years.
@@markhagerman3072 Lmaoooo, that gives them literally nothing, what is this cope?? And moving the capital city? Do you have a single brain cell?
It seems like the most fair and yet still politically viable option would be to "Vaticanize" the Mall, White House, Courts, and Capitol like in their own proposal and then simply turn over the rest of the territory back to Maryland. The residents would get representation again and the political balance of power wouldn't dramatically shift. If the resident's goal really is representation and not national political influence, this solution would work just fine.
Completely agree. Especially your last sentence - exactly my thoughts.
Exactly.
Tell me you know nothing about DC without telling me you know nothing about DC.
Neither DC or MD want that for good reasons. So that "easy fix" solution is not a real solution.
Plus, the whole "doesn't upset the political balance" argument is literally an argument against democracy and fair representation for DC residents, and is racist too since it purposely excludes many poc voters too.
Yup best take and solution.
@@jmtz3149 there's a teeny tiny problemo dc does not want to apart of Maryland.
@4:20 actually DC residents did retain voting rights in their respective states until the Organic Act of 1801 and it could very easily be returned as was the plan in 2004’s DC voting rights restored act. This would put them into Maryland’s voting scheme while maintaining their independence from Maryland.
They would still have no government of their own as congress could still repeal laws they passes
So would DC have its own representation in Congress, then?
So essentially it shouldn't have been a problem. But it was made a problem
@@patpat8727 It would have representation in Maryland, not a separate delegation.
that's the problem@@ZAUN3694
Washington DC residents really need to support Puerto Rico's cause for statehood and have both go through congress and House of Rep.
I think the Chief of Naval Operations also lives in the Federal District at the Naval Observatory. He would also have a few staff members that live their also.
Isn’t that the VPs Residence?
You missed huge portions of DC History; residents originally were allowed to continue voting in Maryland and Virginia elections (depending on what side they lived on). Georgetown, Alexandria and City of Washington all had elected Mayors until 1807 when all 3 jurisdictions were merged into the "District of Columbia." Between 1807 and 1973 there were several systems of governance including Appointed Territorial Governors, Appointed Commissioners and Appointed Mayors that returned to Elected Mayors with the establishment of the Home Rule Act in 1973. Further you are missing a huge point by calling it "DC City Council" and "local laws" because DC is part of no state; its "Council" (its name is Council of the District of Columbia, not City Council) functions as a de facto state legislature and its laws are the equivalent of state laws. Remember just because DC is not a state; doesn't mean that functions that are normally carried out by a state government cease to exist ( DMV's, Welfare, Insurance/Banking Regulation, Parole/Probation, State Superintendent of Education, etc); thus the Mayor of DC is equivalent to the Governor of any of the States and the Council of DC is equivalent to the State Legislature of any of the States; simply because it is not part of any state and thusly not beholden to state level government like the Mayor and Council of a regular city would be.
You know, it's pretty ironic how the 23rd Amendment- the thing meant to give D.C. more representation- is now one of the biggest obstacles standing in the way of FULL representation.
How anyone can say they lack representation is beyond me. They are the ones in the chambers!
@@thundershadowthey aren’t.
@@hamburgerhamburgerv2 Give the residential areas back to Maryland. DC itself doesn't produce anything and has no unique history separate from Maryland.
@@openmoviearchives7381 The thing is, Maryland doesn't want them. And so DC is stuck in limbo, not having statehood and also not having any proper representation in the meanwhile.
@@openmoviearchives7381 DC has over 200 years of unique history separate from Maryland. And has a larger economy than most states. It's also unconstitutional to alter a state's borders without approval of that state's legislature, and Maryland flatly rejects being "given" DC. Presumably because if DC were returned ot Maryland, that city with 200 years of separate history from Maryland would become the largest part of Maryland (displacing Baltimore as the largest city).
You're going to be hard-pressed to convince any state that they should absorb a city where none of the residents have any ties to the state nor *want* to have any ties to the state, yet those same residents would instantly become the dominant political faction within the state due to their sheer numbers.
It would be like if the "compromise" to give Puerto Ricans representation in Congress without making PR a state was offered, of instead attaching PR to Florida. Florida would never go for that either.
Went from talking about politics to Beatles #1 single in US and cut me off by a Claritan Clear ad and now I'm putting my phone down go for a walk and question human existence
But the big, important thing would be to make the whole Washington metropolitan area its own state, that's over six million people. It would obviously be a lot more efficient than the current setup.
Honestly, it should either become a state OR the states that donated the land are the ones to represent those people in congress, while the feds still manage it outside of congress. Citizens there could be both DC and Virginia/Maryland citizens (respectively).
Exactly what I said. That would make too much sense and crooked politicians wouldn't be able to use or attempt to use the situation to their advantage as easily.
Since Virginia took back the land it donated, it is only land given by Maryland that exists in DC. Therefore they should all be given Maryland State Citizenship, and be allowed to vote in Maryland's elections, with the understanding that Maryland's Govner has no power in the DC area.
@@deathsheir2035 Problem is they don’t want to be part of Maryland and Maryland citizens don’t want them back
They shouldn’t be forced into being part of a state that they nor the state wants just because Republicans are scared shitless of not having power
@@deathsheir2035 I fully agree
We’re not giving the leftist scum two more senators, never
If they want to MERGE DC into Maryland, fine 🤷🏼♂️
@@deathsheir2035 Problem is that opinion polls have consistently indicated that DC doesn't want to be thrown back into Maryland for representation purposes, and Maryland doesn't want to represent DC. The two places have been culturally and politically distinct for well over two centuries now, and it's frankly not fair to either to ignore that. It would be no different, fundamentally, than telling North and South Carolina that they had to recombine.
And, more to the point, it's not actually legal. You can ignore DC because it's not a state and doesn't have any sovereign rights under the Constitution, but Maryland does. If Maryland doesn't agree to take on DC representation, there is no way for the federal government to force the issue. And there's honestly little reason for Maryland to agree to it even if they were actually getting the land itself, let alone telling them that they have to represent the citizens of DC while not having any power over the area inhabited by them.
Actually, IIRC, the 10 sq. Mile Area didn't become "Washington, D.C.", it just became D.C. Washington was just the name of the County (and a city) on the Maryland side, so until it was returned to Virginia, there were two Counties composing the District of Columbia: Washington D.C. and Arlington D.C. which is also why it has the weird double name to this day. That was my understanding anyways, please correct me if I'm mistaken!
You're right except it wasn't called Arlington County, DC, it was Alexandria County. It wouldn't become Arlington until 1870 when Virginia decided that Alexandria City would separate from the county. Which is pretty common in Virginia. Once a city hits a certain size it separates from the surrounding county.
@@johngolden3714 Wouldn't that by definition mean that a bunch of counties become Democrat due to Progressives overwhelmingly preferring cities
The way I understand it - the District of Columbia was the whole 10 by 10 mile area originally laid out. So, similar to a state, all the sections within it would be referred to as part of the District of Columbia - like we do today (for example, Baltimore, Maryland). The District of Columbia was composed of Washington City (the seat of Government - one of the boundaries was Florida Avenue (then called Boundary Street), Georgetown and Alexandria which were already there as colonial port towns, and the rest of the area was called Washington County on the MD side of the Potomac and Alexandria County on the VA site. There were also a few small villages, settlements within the 10 mile square area. So originally Washington City was naturally called Washington, DC. Over time the VA part was retroceded to VA and the MD side unified as it was settled into one larger city. This means, at time went on they had to change a lot of local street names in places like Georgetown and Anacostia (for example, in Anacostia in about 1908 Harrison Street became Good Hope Road). So the name Washington, DC makes sense as it would be confused with a lot of other places if it was just "Washington" without the "state" designation. Make sense?
@@jameslandolt5835 Yeah, that's correct. Organic Act of 1801 is what created those counties and put DC under Congress's control. The Organic Act of 1871 consolidated Georgetown, Washington City, and Washington County into one entity.
Why would you say "um actually" and then say "I'm not entirely sure"?
I would've thought the whole "DC not having statehood" would make people not want to live there
We used to throw tea into a harbor for less
The reason D.C. pays so much in Federal taxes is that D.C. also has all the Federal jobs that benefit from the Federal taxes from the other states... I live in the DMV area and the 1st and 3rd richest counties in the nation reside in this area. It's not coincidence.
What you said, and all of the local and state taxes the rest of us pay, are actually counted as federal taxes in DC. So while his comment in the video is 100% accurate, it is misleading. A spin game to drive a biased point.
I don't get your point. Yes a huge amount of jobs in DC are federal jobs, but those employees pay the same rates in federal taxes as the rest of us
I'm not even sure what your point is. Federal employees still pay federal taxes. The fact that they have federal jobs (which isn't true for every resident) doesn't change the fact that they're taxed without any say in how much they're taxed and how their tax dollars are spent. A federal job isn't charity.
Most people that live in DC work in the private sector bro.
@@VanceWorldTravel naw, DC residents have to pay local taxes tooo. DC has a local income tax on top of your federal income tax.
Man I already see RealLifeLore's next videos:
How Puerto Rico became the longest running colony in history
Why the Philippines didn't become a US state
How America maintains its maritime empire
Why the United States hasn't passed a US Amendment since 1992 (which was about how Congress gets paid btw)
How the two party system broke America
The ERA for example remains there up for aproval since the 1970s,
This comment should have been pinned😆
+
@@TransportSimulatorNationTSN no it really shouldn't, there's a very good reason none of these things have happened, and they never will... too much power at stake
@@finish_my_projects exactly, republicans would start losing more and they simply won't allow that
There should be NO one living in D.C. who is not a government worker. Reminds me of a SCAM a teacher pull on my 3rd grade school friends. We played ball after school, one day a teacher offered to Umpire games. Three months later we were told we could no longer play because the school could not afford to pay the teacher for the umpiring job. So much for good faith services.
I think they could become an organized territory. With Electoral votes a representative in the house and a territory government with a governor and a territory congress and judicial branch then also a city government but not a state because it’s unconstitutional. They wouldn’t have senators either as senators are from states.
There’s a higher chance of Russia joining NATO than DC becoming a state 😂😂
@@WoeWoeWoe yes sir. This man is a clown
Russian asked to join NATO in 2000, and it was Putin who asked. Said with no USSR, makes no sense for Russia not to join. The Western powers said 'nah, you are still our enemy."
DC becoming a state is like Kim Jung Un losing weight. 😂
@@pyropulseIXXI it's a joke... chill
@@Brady_Stewart_238 😂😂
To be fair in regards to the whole last five minutes, typically presidents vote in the states that they previously resided in. For example Joe Biden still votes in Delaware and Trump voted in Florida
Yeah I thought that was a bit strange myself considering they are non permanent residence.
Like how Oz can run in Pennsylvania even though he lives in New Jersey
@@blakekaveny that’s it’s own can of worms
Yeah and I also think that congress would be pretty quick to repeal the 23rd if DC became a state since the president having that much power would benefit nobody.
Dont know if its mentioned in the video but there is a part in the constitution (if memory serves correct) that basically states the Capital cannot be a state.. DC becoming a state would mean we'd need to make a new Capital.
Which good luck convincing Congress into changing that specific part of the constitution
Good point, another comment talked about letting them vote for Maryland stuff, and that sounds better than it’s own state
How about a constitutional amendment treating residents of the federal district as if they were residents of the state that ceded the land, but solely for the purpose of choosing electors for president, senators, and representatives? In other words, they would not affect state politics in Maryland, except that the state legislature would draw congressional districts as if DC were a part of it. Heck, if that passed, Virginia theoretically could “retro-retrocede” the 36 square miles it took back in the 1840s.
Would love if you did one of these about Puerto Rico, USA Virgin Islands or Guam becoming a state please 🫶🏽👍🏽
Ngl, plenty of others have covered the topic. Then there is the fact yall have voted on that in PR a few times before.
Yeah somethings def awry
Yes definitely let these territories become states with all the protections that come with it!
@@tunatofu63 nope, last thing I want is to give my political rival more political influence and guaranteed victory spots!
Viva Puerto Rico Libre y Soberana. Long Live Puerto Rico Free from American Imperialism.
Thank you!! I was waiting for someone to comment this
I'm sure that if D.C. statehood were to pass, Congress and the states would very quickly repeal the 23rd amendment, as it would be completely ridiculous at that point.
ah yes, because the US government is known for its competency.
Haha, that's not how congress works. They still need to allow states to legalize marijuana, get rid of daylight savings, and a bunch of other things. They'd probably just choose to ignore the 23rd, like they ignore the marijuana laws.
Sure, because the government is never ridiculous, right?
Nope, gov'ts would let it stand, the states are incompetent and want more power.
More likely it would be dead-letter law and considered moot.
2:20 man is vibing
9:17 I got really confused when the images suddenly switched to 1970s Dutch Parliament. Not sure why that decision was made. 😅
You explained that in the 1993 vote all the house Republicans voted no to DC statehood, which makes sense, but you didn't go into why the Democrats were split. What was the reasoning for the portion of Dems who voted no to statehood?
Because the 51st state would only be a blue state. Every other state switches between republican and Democrat. Back in the 90s democrats were moderate, now they are leftists.
Half of Democrats were still Dixiecrats until the mid to late 90s
People gloss over stuff like that alot. They'll focus on most democrats or most Republicans voting a certain way but gloss over when a party is split. In 93 nearly half the democrats voted against it as well, not just the Republicans. This reasoning really only adds to the partisanship problem in America since the focus is ALWAYS on highly partisan issues and everyone is always making every issue a partisan issue. It's a big reason why the COVID laws were so fucked up, Republicans were focused on opposing rules and relief while democrats were focused on supporting the laws and relief regardless of how they felt individually. Just look at the anti vaxxer issue: before covid became so partisan there was a decent mix of democrats and Republicans being against vaccines with if anything a Democrat majority, then covid happened and Trump became an anti vaxxer so now suddenly the Democrat anti vaxxers shut up or became wholehearted vaccinatera
Probably because it’s still unconstitutional
Wait, did this video actually describe the big trouble if DC becomes the 51st state, or did it just talk about all the issues preventing it from happening?
I feel like I watched the whole video but somehow missed it.
The problem is the president would gain 3 seats, and will be able to vote for himself.
@@HopeRock425 Presidents already vote for themselves because they are not residents of D.C.
@@FMFF_ so what's the problem?
This. Republicans would never allow DC to have electoral votes. They already consistently lose the popular vote. It’s only because of the way electoral votes work that they ever win. DC would be free Electoral votes for the Democratic candidate, virtually ensuring they always win.
@@HopeRock425 That would only be possible if instead of D.C. becoming a state, the land joined back in with Maryland (like the portion of land in Virginia) and then the district would be only that small area of land, the only residents being the president, and the president's family... And they would technically be under sole control of that district. If D.C. became a state that wouldn't happen, D.C. is the district with voting power, just because it gains statehood does not mean that that power that the new federal district has will be the same as D.C. I think they would account for that.
why does it look like south australia in the thumbnail 😂
TLDR; Cant make 51 stars fit evenly
Suggested companion video: the constitutional status of the City of London. No, not London, the City of London, a square mile on the Thames right in the centre of Greater London, where half a million people work but barely anyone lives, which as a result has all sorts of weird anomalies like corporations voting for its local council rather than people, and having a separate police force to the rest of London to specialise in the white-collar crime that is (sadly) pretty rampant in the area.
Considering that the City of London is built roughly where Roman Londinium was, I don't get why it's not just called "Borough of Londinium". We love reusing ancient names in the UK, why not make it less confusing at the same time?
I would love to see that happen. The City of London is a fascinating, enigmatic subject that not enough if us understand, especially here in the US. My thinking is that it's a combination of the Federal Reserve and Wall Street with some extras, including that cool parade. ✌️😎🍀
@@erinmac4750 More or less it's like Wall Street but with more quaint British traditional stuff. Perhaps its most defining characteristic is its unique mixture of old and new - representing the old, there are still a few surviving fragments of Roman walls dotted about; while representing the new, you've got iconic skyscrapers like The Gherkin.
The whole point of D.C was that it shouldn't be a state, but a district of government.
Then the people shouldn't be paying taxes when they don't get a say in congress
I bet you only support that because you are a Republican and know that DC becoming a state would be the end for the Republican party.
@@iamsloth6225 instead of making a 51st state, give that land back to Maryland or just simply make DC residents part of Maryland when it comes to state matters.
@@keinlieb3818
Or do the simplest answer that gives the most people the most rights and make it a state?
@@noahboy7309Making it a state isn't needed at the moment
16:39 that man’s beard is epic haha
Why not give DC back to Maryland? Keep the national mall and government buildings as the capital, and then all the residents have representation.