Amazon.com Widgets
  • No it should not be a state

    Because its way to small and it will cause more money and nobody wants to lose money well its true trust me Washington dc is already state and how come Miami cant be a state it isn't fair too other states so read this and suggest your argument and say no

  • It is big enough

    Do it beahdfbadf efniafjnaef wefaoefaef efiuefnaewf aeofijaleiufb weafioaef ofjnaowef eofno off efnaueifa legvaie efapiue heuoefhaeuifhqe ifapue aeuof h aefu eoef ahefauefhae ee uehf a fe uihef perrpheri eior erh iper he hrfhp efh peifh aeipf eif efh aeiopff efo aeopif pe ffoie fioef ieiof efoi eofi jaef jaeiofa efoi ji jef

  • Yes. DC should be a state

    The GSP of DC is higher than 16 states and it is unconstitutional to not give DC representation in congress. The government needs to decide whether to give DC taxes or no representation in Congress. They can't have both. If other states have more representation just based on size, the government needs to notice population, not actual land size.

  • It should become a state right away.

    Why let every American citizen vote, except DC citizens? Ponder that. And who in the USA cares if we have 51 states? An uneven number doesn't matter. What matters is the American citizen's right to vote. And what do we call the new state formed from DC? Why, the State of Colombia, of course.

  • Obviously DC Should Be a State

    The District has a population that is greater than states receiving representation in congress such as Vermont. It is unconstitutional for DC to be denied voting rights in congress. DC also cannot at the moment do anything with the city's budget without Congress's approval. This system is ineffective at best. DC is currently not a state because it was founded to be a government-controlled town to avoid riots. This logic is no longer applicable because DC is now far more than merely a meeting place for congress. The only real arguments against it becoming a state are that the name would have to change and so would the flag. These minor inconveniences do not rival the basic right of representation is congress.

  • Dc should be a state

    There is no way a rep from Idaho should have say over a diverse group of citizens they have no relationship with. DC's GSP is also greater than SIXTEEN states. It was a good idea in 1789 when no one lived in DC. If you really want a government district only government officials should be able to live and work there. Does it really matter if there are 51 states rather than 50? In all the other 50 states no one's life would change much if DC was state, other than a change in the 50 states song. It is no longer the 18th century. Paris, London, Rome, Tokyo, and many other country capitals are in states and they are successful! The large group of diverse citizens in Dc should have a say in their government.

  • Dc should be a state

    There is no way a rep from Idaho should have say over a diverse group of citizens they have no relationship with. DC's GSP is also greater than SIXTEEN states. It was a good idea in 1789 when no one lived in DC. If you really want a government district only government officials should be able to live and work there. Does it really matter if there are 51 states rather than 50? In all the other 50 states no one's life would change much if DC was state, other than a change in the 50 states song. It is no longer the 18th century. Paris, London, Rome, Tokyo, and many other country capitals are in states and they are successful! The large group of diverse citizens in Dc should have a say in their government.

  • DC should be a state

    There is no reason why Congressmen from all over the nation should have control over a group of people they do not even know. DC also has a GSP higher than 16 states. The entire rest of world has capitals that are actual cities, and it works ok for them. If you want a secluded capital, then only Government people should be allowed to live or work in that area. Who cares if the flag has 51 states rather than 50? I am sure that someone in DC could come up with a name or simply call it "Columbia". Even if Dc statehood is impossible, Congress' power over the people should be reduced. There is no way a rep from Idaho should have say over a large group of people he has no relationship with.

  • Yes is should

    The Constitution grants the Congress exclusive jurisdiction over the District in "all cases whatsoever." which is total B S. Why should the people in our nations capital not get full voting rights? You tell me. DC has more residents than wyoming so size isn't an argument. Stop being stupid america.

  • N m m

    Ll l k jm j j j jj j j jj j j j j jj j j j j jj j j j j j jj j j j jj j j j j j jj j tots agree with oder yes y y y y y y y

  • Absolutely not.

    No, Washington D.C. should not become a state. What benefits would there be in doing so? D.C is part of Virginia and Maryland, and their citizens can get representation through those states. There is absolutely no need to add them as a state. A question here would also be, what would they be called? We already have a Washington, so that is out of the question, and if they were no longer considered a district then "District of Columbia" wouldn't make much sense either. Also, the reason for the its foundation initially was to avoid having the Capital in one of the states in the first place. Also, there's the whole fact about having to change the flag..

    Posted by: Misa
  • No, Washington D.C. Should Remain a District

    Washington D.C. should remain a district and not become a state for the reason that the positives do not outweigh the negatives.
    What I mean by this is such: I can think of no benefits of Washington D.C. becoming a state and it would be a logistic nightmare to bring on two more senators, a governor, and more congresspeople. This is of course not to say that we cannot ever bring another state into this fine union, but merely that Washington D.C. functions well as it currently is --well, excluding congress of course.

  • Give DC back to Maryland

    The Federal Govt needs to designate what they consider the District (much like other federal lands) and stay within those lands. The rest needs to be given back the Maryland and could be called Washington, MD. Gives the residents of Washington representation and even better self rule. While I do note the citizens of DC don't have all the venues of other citizens, they choose to live in DC. It has existed in this form from creation.

  • No, but give them representation in congress.

    No need to make them a state, but they should be allocated at least one House of representative member. A special resolution can be made to give them voting representation in congress and yet not make them an official state - with a governor, state taxes, etc. This would be a good compromise.

  • No

    DC is property of the federal government. The land that is now Washington DC was given by Maryland to the federal government to create the capitol city. Washington DC also consumes an extreme amount of federal funds, making it a state and then having the feds fund it like it does simply because the state holds the capitol wouldn't be very fair to the other states. The only way I think DC should ever become a "state" would be to give it back to Maryland. The feds actually tried this and Maryland declined because DC would cost too much in state funds. I think it's best that DC remain a federal district and not a state.

    Posted by: amey
  • No, but give them representation in congress.

    No need to make them a state, but they should be allocated at least one House of representative member. A special resolution can be made to give them voting representation in congress and yet not make them an official state - with a governor, state taxes, etc. This would be a good compromise.

  • Washinton DC was designed to be autonomous

    Washington DC was set up to be an independent entity from the states. It's the seat of power for the government. However, in a city of over 5 million people, it's unfair that they only have a non-voting representative in congress. I live in a state of 1 million people and we are represented. Why shouldn't the DIstrict of Columbia not also get a vote in the federal government?

  • DC shouldn't be a state

    DC has less then 700,000 people and it's population consists of AFL-CIO and crony-capitalist hired lobbyists that are bankrupting America as well as overpaid federal employees. New York City is our largest city with 8 million people plus Wall Street while Houston is our fourth largest city with a very productive oil industry-should they become states as well and get their own Senators? DC cannot be granted statehood, it would only make this country worse.
    Instead of statehood, I propose all of DC save the National Mall be given back to Maryland. This would give DC residents voting rights without giving them unwarranted influence in politics.

  • It would defeat the purpose of the capital

    The whole reason Washington was created was so that no state would get special privileges over another state. Also, the capital used to be in Philadelphia , when war vets came to congress asking to be paid, the legislature said "we don't have the money right now," This caused riots and anger which led congress to flee to New Jersey because Pennsylvania agreed with the vets and refused to protect Congress. After this incident Congress decided not to trust anyone else with their safety and created their own district under their own control. Another reason that the district was created was so that the state holding the capital wouldn't be over represented in congress. These are the strongest reasons although money does come into play. One historian explained to me that the founders didn't intend to leave people under represented, they believed that every member of congress would take care of the district like they would take care of their own state, therefore they would have more representation than anyone else. No it hasn't really worked like that but that doesn't mean we can't try to get it to work like that. However , to compromise, I would agree with allowing the district to not pay federal taxes to make up for not having a representative, which I would take over my congressman anyway.

  • Can not be a state!

    The whole reasons of why the District Of Columbia isn't part of a state is because that state with DC in it would have to much power... And the Founding Fathers wanted states sovereignty so they could have equal influence in the united states government not one state having more power then others because it has the capital within it.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.