I'd like to raise discussion and bring awareness to the topic of retroceding Washington back to Maryland. The argument against retroceding DC comes mostly from people with a ton of bias. Virginians don't want Maryland to get the city. Baltimoreans don't want to have to share their spot as top dogs within the state. The people of wealthier Northwest DC like the elite DC mailing address. Please try to rid yourself of the bias and realize that this is the best possible scenario for the region.

Here are the facts, taken from washingtonmd.org:

Did you know?
* that the District of Columbia is the only national capital among democratic nations of the world whose citizens have no voting representation in the national legislature?

* that the residents of the District of Columbia are the only Americans who are federally taxed without voting representation in the Federal Government?

* that District residents pay more federal income taxes per capita than the residents of all but one state?

* that more District residents, per capita, have fought in U.S. wars than the residents of any state, even though they have no vote in the U.S. Congress which declares those wars?

* that the District of Columbia is the only jurisdiction in the United States that cannot spend any of its own local tax dollars without specific approval from the U.S. Congress, in which District residents have no voting representation?

Two hundred years ago the District of Columbia was created on land ceded by the states of Virginia and Maryland. The Virginia portion was returned to that state in 1846. It is now time that the remainder of the District, except for a small Federal enclave, be reunited with Maryland.

The residents of the capital city of the world's greatest democracy are entitled to the same democratic rights as all other Americans, including:

· a local government that is accountable to them,
· a state government in which they participate as equal citizens, and
· full voting representation in the Congress of the United States.

THE DISTRICT NEEDS A STATE

The people of the District cannot alone carry all the responsibilities of state, county and municipal government. More than half of the total cost of running the city is for non-municipal functions. Washington needs a state, and Maryland, of which the District once was part, is the logical choice.

As citizens of Maryland, the people of the District of Columbia would have full democratic rights. Like people in any Maryland home-rule city, the citizens of the District would elect their own mayor and city council, who would have full authority in local affairs, as well as elect representatives to the state government. They would be represented in the U.S. Congress by Maryland Senators and Representatives that they vote for, whose right to vote could never be taken away.

Maryland would provide the state services that are now required of the District Government, or are being taken over by the Federal Government. Having the Federal Government be the "state" to the District of Columbia has not proven to be a workable or democratic solution. The Federal Government has neither the mandate nor the expertise to provide state functions. And without congressional voting representation, District residents have no effective voice in Federal Government actions.

THE SOLUTION . . . REUNION WITH MARYLAND: PRACTICAL, LOGICAL AND ACHIEVABLE

Reuniting the city of Washington with the state of Maryland is a practical and achievable way to provide full democratic rights to the people of the District of Columbia. There is both logic and precedent for such a solution. The Virginia portion of the original District of Columbia (now the City of Alexandria and Arlington County) was returned to that state more than 150 years ago. Its people today enjoy full democratic rights as citizens of Virginia. There are fewer political obstacles to achieving statehood through combination with Maryland than in achieving statehood for the District alone.

As residents of a self-governing, "home-rule" city in the state of Maryland, Washingtonians would have more real political power than they will ever have as unrepresented wards of a Federal enclave ruled by Congress. By leaving a small Federal District, made up of the Capitol Grounds, the Mall and the White House, to serve as the seat of Government under the direct control of Congress, the Constitutional requirement that there be a "district not exceeding ten miles square" would be honored. No Constitutional amendment is necessary. There was none in 1846 when the Virginia portion of the District was returned to Virginia.

EVERYONE WOULD COME OUT AHEAD

* Washington residents would benefit by being full citizens of the sovereign state of Maryland, with democratic rights equal to those of all other Americans, including voting representation in the state legislature and in the U.S. Congress. They would still live in the capital city of the United States. Elected city officials would be relieved of the burdens of state government and could concentrate on running an efficient and effective municipal government which would be under their control, and not under the control of Congress.

* Maryland would benefit by becoming the home of the nation's capital city. Washington would be a prestigious and economically important addition to Maryland, providing that state with enhanced tax revenue and a great advantage in the global competition for business.

* Congress would benefit by no longer having to provide local government to an unrepresented people. Its legislators could concentrate on the national issues they were elected to address.

GETTING THERE

The issue is political empowerment and full citizenship for the people of Washington. If you agree that reunion with Maryland makes sense, join with us in making it a reality. Become a member of the Committee for the Capital City by sending in the attached form. Help us with a donation to pay for printing and distributing this and other literature.



Please visit http://www.washingtonmd.org for more information.

HELL NO!:bash:


If anything I would try to recapture and "Reannex" Arlington and Alexandria (including the new boundaries of Alexandria) and make it part of DC. The city would have almost 1 million, will have plenty of opportunity for more growth.

Doesn't the Constitution say something about the federal city being 100 square miles??

So naw, I can't even see DC retroceeding back into its mother. Not at all.

Good topic though.

HELL NO!:bash:


If anything I would try to recapture and "Reannex" Arlington and Alexandria (including the new boundaries of Alexandria) and make it part of DC. The city would have almost 1 million, will have plenty of opportunity for more growth.

Doesn't the Constitution say something about the federal city being 100 square miles??

So naw, I can't even see DC retroceeding back into its mother. Not at all.

Good topic though.

Opposers from D.C. really overreact when reading this. Why does it rattle your nerves so much? And where are you from by the way?

Silver Springer .......I don't think I overreacted I just expressed my disillusionment with such an idea of Retroceeding back into Maryland with a :bash:

Honestly, if you're an American where would you say the capital city is if Washington, DC reverts back into Maryland.

Just the The Mall will be federal district???????

HMMMM!!????

I understand the idea of Arlington and Alexandria being annexed by Washington, DC would incense Richmond bureacrats and politicians and some lay people, but I would prefer that as opposed to sinking Washington, DC back into MD.

I'm from North Carolina, but I live in DC for the moment. Even if I wasn't living there, I would still feel the same way.

HELL NO!:bash:


If anything I would try to recapture and "Reannex" Arlington and Alexandria (including the new boundaries of Alexandria) and make it part of DC. The city would have almost 1 million, will have plenty of opportunity for more growth.

Doesn't the Constitution say something about the federal city being 100 square miles??

So naw, I can't even see DC retroceeding back into its mother. Not at all.

Good topic though.

Over my dead body!

I think for many many reasons, this wouldn't happen, nor do I think that is should.

DC is such a unique situation, I cannot see its local government fitting in well with the established framwork of the state legislature. Too much clashing. There would be a lot of 'that law doesn't/shouldn't/can't apply to us. we are "special." We are the nation's capital. screw you Annaoplis.'

I can see the argument on the whole representation thing. I say just give them a seat in the House and leave it at that.

I think for many many reasons, this wouldn't happen, nor do I think that is should.

DC is such a unique situation, I cannot see its local government fitting in well with the established framwork of the state legislature. Too much clashing. There would be a lot of 'that law doesn't/shouldn't/can't apply to us. we are "special." We are the nation's capital. screw you Annaoplis.'

I can see the argument on the whole representation thing. I say just give them a seat in the House and leave it at that.

There was some discussion recently about DC gaining a voting Rep. in the House (not just the non-votong one they have now) while at the same time Utah gains anouther Rep.

Basically it would be one democrat from DC and one Republican from Utah. It reminds me of the great compramises in adding states over slavery.

I think Washington needs to remain separate from Maryland and not become it's own state. The District of Columbia was created so that it was in a neutral place. Having the US capital in any state, whether in Maryland or in it's own state, would make that state more powerful than the others. This would not be a good idea in terms of friendliness amongst states. If you look at Canada, there are a good amount of people that do not like Ontario because Ontario controls all of Canada.

Regarding people living in Washington DC: if they want representation in Congress that much, move to Maryland or Virginia. Neither are very far from any place in the District of Columbia. No one is forced to live in Washington DC.

Over my dead body!
Thank you for your wonderful addition to this thread!:bash: You've just exhibited the ridiculous bias I anticipated. In your case, it's coming from the perspective of a Virginian who doesn't want to see the city go to Maryland for no logical reason.

I think for many many reasons, this wouldn't happen, nor do I think that is should.

DC is such a unique situation, I cannot see its local government fitting in well with the established framwork of the state legislature. Too much clashing. There would be a lot of 'that law doesn't/shouldn't/can't apply to us. we are "special." We are the nation's capital. screw you Annaoplis.'

I can see the argument on the whole representation thing. I say just give them a seat in the House and leave it at that.
Can you be more specific about DC's city government not fitting in well with established framework of the state legislature? I don't see how they'd..."clash."
Also, why shouldn't the citizens of the District have Senate representation?


Doesn't the Constitution say something about the federal city being 100 square miles??

So naw, I can't even see DC retroceeding back into its mother. Not at all.

The constitution says DC can't exceed 100 square miles. As it is right now, Washington is at a serious disadvantage because it does not have a state to support it. Look at the school system and crime problem. Something is obviously not right. Either the Federal Government needs to subsidize the city or the city needs a state.

I think Washington needs to remain separate from Maryland and not become it's own state. The District of Columbia was created so that it was in a neutral place. Having the US capital in any state, whether in Maryland or in it's own state, would make that state more powerful than the others. This would not be a good idea in terms of friendliness amongst states. If you look at Canada, there are a good amount of people that do not like Ontario because Ontario controls all of Canada.
I don't follow...how exactly does Maryland become more powerful than other states if the city of Washington is in MD. Would the Maryland Legislature be able to levy taxes on Colorado? I really don't see Canadians hating Ontario for having Ottawa. Even if they did...it's irrelevant. I don't give a damn about being hated if it means my city's school system and crime can get cleaned up.
BTW, the US Capitol would still be located in "the Federal City," not Maryland.

I don't follow...how exactly does Maryland become more powerful than other states if the city of Washington is in MD. Would the Maryland Legislature be able to levy taxes on Colorado? I really don't see Canadians hating Ontario for having Ottawa. Even if they did...it's irrelevant. I don't give a damn about being hated if it means my city's school system and crime can get cleaned up.
BTW, the US Capitol would still be located in "the Federal City," not Maryland.

If the US capital was in a state, then the state could decide how some things are done in the capital city. After all, the capital is in their state. Thus, that state runs the capital, something that other states do not have the power to do. One can speculate that that would lead to corruption, such as backdoor deals between the state and the US capital, etc. This is precisely why the Founding Fathers made Washington DC a neutral location; so no state would have any kind of "better access" to federal officals than another state.

If the US capital was in a state, then the state could decide how some things are done in the capital city. After all, the capital is in their state. Thus, that state runs the capital, something that other states do not have the power to do. One can speculate that that would lead to corruption, such as backdoor deals between the state and the US capital, etc. This is precisely why the Founding Fathers made Washington DC a neutral location; so no state would have any kind of "better access" to federal officals than another state.

McCulloch v. Maryland already checked the power of states over the Federal Government. Also, the US Capitol building, Supreme Court and White House would not be in MD (not to mention most of the museums, Lincoln Memorial, Jefferson Memorial, Washington Monument and FDR memorial). Basically, only a bunch of government agencies would be in Maryland which is already the case anyway with the Pentagon, CIA etc being in VA, and the FDA, NIH, etc in Maryland.

McCulloch v. Maryland already checked the power of states over the Federal Government. Also, the US Capitol building, Supreme Court and White House would not be in MD (not to mention most of the museums, Lincoln Memorial, Jefferson Memorial, Washington Monument and FDR memorial). Basically, only a bunch of government agencies would be in Maryland which is already the case anyway with the Pentagon, CIA etc being in VA, and the FDA, NIH, etc in Maryland.

If we would still have a Federal District, then why change the boundaries? Is the issue of representation the only reason to make residential neighborhoods part of Maryland? In that case, it would be just as easy for residents to move to Maryland as it would be for Maryland to come to the residents.

Thank you for your wonderful addition to this thread!:bash: You've just exhibited the ridiculous bias I anticipated. In your case, it's coming from the perspective of a Virginian who doesn't want to see the city go to Maryland for no logical reason.

Bias? This is so annoying. This bias concept is constantly raised by people from MD on this board from thin air, as if normal people stand around all day worrying about such things.

Anyway, I don't care what DC does with MD... I was responding to the crazy suggestion that Arlington and Alexandria be returned to DC. Obviously, the chances of this happening are 0% and the comment was made in jest. Still, one reason I don't live in DC is it's not in a state... and I certainly wouldn't want that thrust upon anyone else.

As it is now, nobody is being forced to live in DC. Certainly it's a choice people of voting age can make.

I'd imagine if you put it to a vote in MD, it would be defeated out of hand.

If the US capital was in a state, then the state could decide how some things are done in the capital city. After all, the capital is in their state. Thus, that state runs the capital, something that other states do not have the power to do. One can speculate that that would lead to corruption, such as backdoor deals between the state and the US capital, etc. This is precisely why the Founding Fathers made Washington DC a neutral location; so no state would have any kind of "better access" to federal officals than another state.

Like there's no corruption in DC now...the trump card that the government has over any state (even including Texas) is the military. If the power mongers in Annapolis ever started pushing the Federal government around, the feds could always just occupy Annapolis. Giving the north-of-the-Potomac part of DC back to MD has actually been discussed, usually when there is a big budget deficit in the DC government. For that reason, it has always been dismissed in Md.

If we would still have a Federal District, then why change the boundaries? Is the issue of representation the only reason to make residential neighborhoods part of Maryland? In that case, it would be just as easy for residents to move to Maryland as it would be for Maryland to come to the residents.
No, it's mostly an issue of DC not being able to handle the responsibilities of both a state and a city. The schools, hospitals and police are grossly underfunded. This should definately not be the case for one of America's richest cities... something is wrong.

Bias? This is so annoying. This bias concept is constantly raised by people from MD on this board from thin air, as if normal people stand around all day worrying about such things.

Anyway, I don't care what DC does with MD... I was responding to the crazy suggestion that Arlington and Alexandria be returned to DC. Obviously, the chances of this happening are 0% and the comment was made in jest. Still, one reason I don't live in DC is it's not in a state... and I certainly wouldn't want that thrust upon anyone else.

As it is now, nobody is being forced to live in DC. Certainly it's a choice people of voting age can make.

I'd imagine if you put it to a vote in MD, it would be defeated out of hand.
I don't see the benefits of DC not being a state so I don't understand why "thrusting" statehood upon them would yield negative consequences. There already is a large DC statehood party askying for statehood. As to your next point: just because people choose to live in DC doesn't mean it's perfect the way it is. Some people live there for economic reasons. We shouldn't stop seeking to improve the city just because there are already people living there who choose to. Retrocession is 100% beneficial to the city.

As to your last point about the MD legislature not supporting it: I doubt the Georgia legislature would have voted for Emancipation in the 1850s. That doesn't make emancipation an unjust or irration cause, rather, quite the contrary. The only reason the MD legislature wouldn't support it is because of lack of education on the issue and lack of public support. I'm trying to change that.

The fed should take over.

The fed should take over.

That's about the worst thing that could happen. They should give the city money though. I believe Norton proposed a bill that would give the city government $1 billion per year adjusted for inflation every year.

I don't think they should take over everything, but I think they shouldn't feel as if they can't intervene if necessary, like they did w/ Barry. I think there is a lot of uniqueness lost in putting DC apart of any state, it's function dating back to its creation is just different and I think that should be one of the last options. If the federal government had more control in the city, a lot of the school, services, and infrastructure improvements that are needed would occur, just as they did in the 50s.

As far as voting is concerned, lots of people care, lots don't care. I think the city may even be better off just being exempt from certain taxes than having a representative and two senators. I think the city should have a conventional representative in the house though.

Opposers from D.C. really overreact when reading this. Why does it rattle your nerves so much? And where are you from by the way?

Most likely Virginia or some other trifflin southern state.

Silver Springer .......I don't think I overreacted I just expressed my disillusionment with such an idea of Retroceeding back into Maryland with a :bash:

Honestly, if you're an American where would you say the capital city is if Washington, DC reverts back into Maryland.

Just the The Mall will be federal district???????

HMMMM!!????

I understand the idea of Arlington and Alexandria being annexed by Washington, DC would incense Richmond bureacrats and politicians and some lay people, but I would prefer that as opposed to sinking Washington, DC back into MD.

I'm from North Carolina, but I live in DC for the moment. Even if I wasn't living there, I would still feel the same way.

Yep I knew it, and it will just hurt you southern people to have Maryland gain another Major powerful city like DC, which is why you people for the longest have been trying to sabatoge Business/Economic/Revenue Growth for Baltimore and Maryland.

I've notice that whenever I go to the Carolina's and Georgia I have never hear them say anything positive about Maryland, whenever tay talk about the DC area they always refer to Northern Virginia and if they ever mention Maryland they only know about Baltimore which is a national embarassment of a city.

Bias? This is so annoying. This bias concept is constantly raised by people from MD on this board from thin air, as if normal people stand around all day worrying about such things.

Anyway, I don't care what DC does with MD... I was responding to the crazy suggestion that Arlington and Alexandria be returned to DC. Obviously, the chances of this happening are 0% and the comment was made in jest. Still, one reason I don't live in DC is it's not in a state... and I certainly wouldn't want that thrust upon anyone else.

As it is now, nobody is being forced to live in DC. Certainly it's a choice people of voting age can make.

I'd imagine if you put it to a vote in MD, it would be defeated out of hand.

Yeah because there is no strict law that bars non-Marylanders from pretending to be Maryland Resident's just to vote in Maryland.

they only know about Baltimore which is a national embarassment of a city.
I think I'm putting it mildly when I say: SHUT THE FUCK UP

I'm usually quiet and non-confrontational, but I have to say it...the troll is back again:bash:

Yep I knew it, and it will just hurt you southern people to have Maryland gain another Major powerful city like DC, which is why you people for the longest have been trying to sabatoge Business/Economic/Revenue Growth for Baltimore and Maryland.

I've notice that whenever I go to the Carolina's and Georgia I have never hear them say anything positive about Maryland, whenever tay talk about the DC area they always refer to Northern Virginia and if they ever mention Maryland they only know about Baltimore which is a national embarassment of a city.


Me being from North Carolina has nothing to with me disliking Maryland, or thinking that retroceeding into Maryland is an idiot idea (sorry).. Hell I love Maryland. But like a lot of posters have said earlier, DC was created as neutral city. I agree, I still don't think it should be a "state", but it should have voting powers, at the very least in House of Representative, and somewhat reluctantly I would say two in the Senate. Its just how it should be so they can take that silly sign of those license plates.

Now, I do find it funny that Haudidoody and Harlem87 are so incensed about the idea of Arlington and Alexandria retroceeding back into its original 100 square formation into DC. Like I said, I would RATHER see that happen than D.C. retroceed back into Maryland.

The only reason Arlington and part of Alexandria would go back to DC would be for tradition and make DC the square shape it used to be. But DC should stay the same way that it is now. It's fine as is, all that's wrong is the management and when it is managed better somehow, whether through its own management becoming better or the federal government relinquishing more control, it'll be better off and ideas like these won't be discussed as often.

I think all these ideas, DC going back to MD, Arlington and Alexandria being annexed, or even the metro becoming its own state all have little to no chance of happening whatsoever.

Now, I do find it funny that Haudidoody and Harlem87 are so incensed about the idea of Arlington and Alexandria retroceeding back into its original 100 square formation into DC. Like I said, I would RATHER see that happen than D.C. retroceed back into Maryland.
Similarly, I find it funny that you're so incensed about the idea of DC (including the former city of Georgetown, Maryland) being returned to its rightful owners for the benefit of everyone involved.

I think I'm putting it mildly when I say: SHUT THE FUCK UP

You took the words right out of my mouth

I think I'm putting it mildly when I say: SHUT THE FUCK UP

No You Shut the Fuck Up.

Prove me wrong by posting a posting an article showing that there is an increase of people(Educated Middle/Upper Class) people from Atlanta, Charlotte, Miami, Houston, San Diego, Chicago, New York, and Boston are relocating to Baltimore in High Numbers like they did when they Migrated to Atlanta, Houston, Miami, and Charlotte in the last Decade.

I know you can't because you know Baltimore is in a rut which is why you ran like a chicken to Atlanta, Georgia were alot of former Baltimoreans are running to along with running to Charlotte.

Me being from North Carolina has nothing to with me disliking Maryland, or thinking that retroceeding into Maryland is an idiot idea (sorry).. Hell I love Maryland. But like a lot of posters have said earlier, DC was created as neutral city. I agree, I still don't think it should be a "state", but it should have voting powers, at the very least in House of Representative, and somewhat reluctantly I would say two in the Senate. Its just how it should be so they can take that silly sign of those license plates.

You ruined your credibility.

I could understand if DC was never part of the state of Maryland but it is just selfish to think that DC should not retroceed back to Maryland.

Let them talk about rejoining NC and SC back into one state and see how many of you People will speak out against it, which will be the complete oppisite.

Now, I do find it funny that Haudidoody and Harlem87 are so incensed about the idea of Arlington and Alexandria retroceeding back into its original 100 square formation into DC. Like I said, I would RATHER see that happen than D.C. retroceed back into Maryland.

What you mean is that you people will rather support DC become part of Virginia(and help Virginia's Business/Economic/Revenue Growth Quadruple) instead of DC retroceeding back to Maryland.

You took the words right out of my mouth

You too need to shut the fuck up.

You know I'm right.

How many people from Virginia, The Carolina's, Georgia, and Texas would be willing to spend a day in Baltimore?????????????

No You Shut the Fuck Up.

Prove me wrong by posting a posting an article showing that there is an increase of people(Educated Middle/Upper Class) people from Atlanta, Charlotte, Miami, Houston, San Diego, Chicago, New York, and Boston are relocating to Baltimore in High Numbers like they did when they Migrated to Atlanta, Houston, Miami, and Charlotte in the last Decade.

I know you can't because you know Baltimore is in a rut which is why you ran like a chicken to Atlanta, Georgia were alot of former Baltimoreans are running to along with running to Charlotte.

I don't understand what you are tying to do here. You seem to be ensconced in your beloved south-of-the-Potomac world with no purpose in life other than to convince us that we live in hell on earth, in the most vile of terms. Just why are you wasting your time on us, being so beyond redemption as wealth haters? If you did rip the scales from our eyes, there would be more competition from the likes of us and things might not be so good for you. So it's in your interest to let us wallow in our ignorant hated of success if for no other reason than so you can have somebody to compare your wonderfulness to...there can be no good without evil. If you are successful in convincing us, you won't have our evil to make you feel good and then, you will feel bad. Maybe it's time to go home, back to the sandbox, until you have the ability to engage in reasonable discussion

You too need to shut the fuck up.

You know I'm right.

How many people from Virginia, The Carolina's, Georgia, and Texas would be willing to spend a day in Baltimore?????????????

actually I know people from every state you mentioned that spent a day in baltimore...

The only reason Arlington and part of Alexandria would go back to DC would be for tradition and make DC the square shape it used to be. But DC should stay the same way that it is now. It's fine as is, all that's wrong is the management and when it is managed better somehow, whether through its own management becoming better or the federal government relinquishing more control, it'll be better off and ideas like these won't be discussed as often.

I think all these ideas, DC going back to MD, Arlington and Alexandria being annexed, or even the metro becoming its own state all have little to no chance of happening whatsoever.

:|

Conclusion Balwash: The other jursidictions have a distinct dislike for Maryland. I was hoping to find some good valid answers instead of a resounding "Hell No".

What you mean is that you people will rather support DC become part of Virginia(and help Virginia's Business/Economic/Revenue Growth Quadruple) instead of DC retroceeding back to Maryland.

That is the exact opposite of what he posted. What he means is quite clear. Here look again, even though you quoted him, you clearly didn't read it.


Now, I do find it funny that Haudidoody and Harlem87 are so incensed about the idea of Arlington and Alexandria retroceeding back into its original 100 square formation into DC. Like I said, I would RATHER see that happen than D.C. retroceed back into Maryland.

He says return the Virginia portions back to DC. Reading comprehension nor politeness are strong suites of yours.

Conclusion Balwash: The other jursidictions have a distinct dislike for Maryland. I was hoping to find some good valid answers instead of a resounding "Hell No".
No one is posting valid reasoning against retrocession because there is no valid reasoning to oppose retrocession.

DC can get voting rights, get a representative in the house, and this nonsense will be put to rest. That's really the only thing, and besides that, people on these boards obviously want DC to be a part of MD primarily w/ reasons not related to voting rights. DC from a financial standpoint gets a better deal by being independent of any state. It's just a primarily black, crime-ridden, and poorly-managed city. Just a half a dozen or so other large cities in the country. There's been a dark period but in many ways it's on the up and it'll be able to survive w/ lots of assistance from the federal government b/c of the reason in which it was designed in the first place.

That is the exact opposite of what he posted. What he means is quite clear. Here look again, even though you quoted him, you clearly didn't read it.



He says return the Virginia portions back to DC. Reading comprehension nor politeness are strong suites of yours.

No, you need to improve your Reading Comprehension because I said that I want DC to retroceed back to Maryland, I can care less what happens to Alexandria/Arlington.

DC can get voting rights, get a representative in the house, and this nonsense will be put to rest. That's really the only thing, and besides that, people on these boards obviously want DC to be a part of MD primarily w/ reasons not related to voting rights. DC from a financial standpoint gets a better deal by being independent of any state. It's just a primarily black, crime-ridden, and poorly-managed city. Just a half a dozen or so other large cities in the country. There's been a dark period but in many ways it's on the up and it'll be able to survive w/ lots of assistance from the federal government b/c of the reason in which it was designed in the first place.

And you would hate for Maryland to be apart of it because it will make Maryland more powerful than Virginia and attract more Businesses to Maryland and possibly attract Businesses from Virginia to move to Maryland.

^^You're just revealing more about yourself. You're whole mentality is adversarial. It's quite obvious that it's a MD v. VA thing, and it's so painfully transparent why issues like this are even brought up by people like you. You want businesses to move from VA to MD. So not only do you want to attract businesses from other places and, not only facilitate a business-friendly and start-up-friendly atmosphere in MD, but you want jobs to leave VA and come to MD. This is one of your M.O's. I don't want this. I don't want jobs to leave MD. I hope jobs come to the entire area and DC, MD, and VA all gain lots of jobs, and I'd would actually prefer that they come from somewhere other than MD, b/c believe it or not, I don't want MD to suffer, which is unlike your attitude w/ respect to VA. You have no interest in developing the region as a whole as one.

And again, a sentiment that's been echoed from non-marylanders and marylanders alike, is that putting DC with a state, it's the last option, no one would prefer that, people would like DC to stay how it's been traditionally as a separate enclave, independent of any state. It's that simple. Give DC the representation and the problem is solved. Most of the economic "incentives" that DC would get are simply unsubstantiated and aren't proven to occur only if it were in a state. It belongs to the federal government and that's where it can get any money it needs from, not from any state in particular.

No, you need to improve your Reading Comprehension because I said that I want DC to retroceed back to Maryland, I can care less what happens to Alexandria/Arlington.

So you can't read or write? Point to any point in this thread where you said you wanted DC back to MD. Its only a two page thread.

You like to take random quotes and intrepret them into some delusion, its amusing.

DC can get voting rights, get a representative in the house, and this nonsense will be put to rest. That's really the only thing, and besides that, people on these boards obviously want DC to be a part of MD primarily w/ reasons not related to voting rights. DC from a financial standpoint gets a better deal by being independent of any state. It's just a primarily black, crime-ridden, and poorly-managed city. Just a half a dozen or so other large cities in the country. There's been a dark period but in many ways it's on the up and it'll be able to survive w/ lots of assistance from the federal government b/c of the reason in which it was designed in the first place.
It's much more than an issue of voting rights. The benefits of making most of the district part of Maryland are huge for both parties. "It's just a primarily black, crime-ridden, and poorly-managed city," what is the relevance of the city being primarily black?

DC can get voting rights, get a representative in the house, and this nonsense will be put to rest. That's really the only thing, and besides that, people on these boards obviously want DC to be a part of MD primarily w/ reasons not related to voting rights. DC from a financial standpoint gets a better deal by being independent of any state. It's just a primarily black, crime-ridden, and poorly-managed city. Just a half a dozen or so other large cities in the country. There's been a dark period but in many ways it's on the up and it'll be able to survive w/ lots of assistance from the federal government b/c of the reason in which it was designed in the first place.

Yup nonsense, just like the retrocession of what is now Arlington and Alexandria to continue slave trade is nonsense. Or is it NovaWolverine?

It's much more than an issue of voting rights. The benefits of making most of the district part of Maryland are huge for both parties. "It's just a primarily black, crime-ridden, and poorly-managed city," what is the relevance of the city being primarily black?

Before you spout off with the PC litany, it was intended to relate DC to the St. Louises, B'mores, Phillys, Detroits, Atlantas, etc. out there that have suffered with issues that primarily black cities face. Don't tell me that primarily black cities are the same as other cities out there are aren't primarily black but still poor. The racial make-up of the city and the history that it has gone through is very indicative of the problems that it has faced in the past few decades, from drugs to crime to racism, it goes on and on. Inefficient government w/ piss-poor management and high crime are probably the most glaring problems that plagues all of those cities I've mentioned. The remedy of those problems will be slow b/c of how complex the situation is. The point is that DC is not unique in that aspect and the fact that those cities are in states apparently don't help them. DC is doing great economically right now, the main reason of the idea of retrocession is voting rights.

Yup nonsense, just like the retrocession of what is now Arlington and Alexandria to continue slave trade is nonsense. Or is it NovaWolverine?

It is nonsense. That's completely irrelevant to what is going on now. If I was living back then, I probably would have favored keeping DC the way it was then. I would have said forget slave trade, get that out of DC and continued. Just b/c there's division doesn't mean succession or retrocession needs to occur. Why don't you explain to me the reason why retrocession is a good idea. Why don't you just say that it's move that you favor primarily to benefit the state of MD. You're not from DC, you can't speak for them and the people in DC really don't think this is the best idea either. The status of DC as an entity and symbol is of no concern whatsoever to you. And since I disagree with retrocession like most of the country, and I happen to be living in VA in 2007, I must be a bad person and I must think this way b/c I want to sabotage and hurt MD, right?

It is nonsense. That's completely irrelevant to what is going on now. If I was living back then, I probably would have favored keeping DC the way it was then. I would have said forget slave trade, get that out of DC and continued. Just b/c there's division doesn't mean succession or retrocession needs to occur. Why don't you explain to me the reason why retrocession is a good idea. Why don't you just say that it's move that you favor primarily to benefit the state of MD. You're not from DC, you can't speak for them and the people in DC really don't think this is the best idea either. The status of DC as an entity and symbol is of no concern whatsoever to you. And since I disagree with retrocession like most of the country, and I happen to be living in VA in 2007, I must be a bad person and I must think this way b/c I want to sabotage and hurt MD, right?

Thats right smart ass.

:weirdo:

Before you spout off with the PC litany, it was intended to relate DC to the St. Louises, B'mores, Phillys, Detroits, Atlantas, etc. out there that have suffered with issues that primarily black cities face. Don't tell me that primarily black cities are the same as other cities out there are aren't primarily black but still poor. The racial make-up of the city and the history that it has gone through is very indicative of the problems that it has faced in the past few decades, from drugs to crime to racism, it goes on and on. Inefficient government w/ piss-poor management and high crime are probably the most glaring problems that plagues all of those cities I've mentioned. The remedy of those problems will be slow b/c of how complex the situation is. The point is that DC is not unique in that aspect and the fact that those cities are in states apparently don't help them. DC is doing great economically right now, the main reason of the idea of retrocession is voting rights.

And you don't want Maryland to have Business/Economic/Revenue Power over Virginia.

Sounds like someone has a low self-esteem.

Sounds like someone has a low self-esteem.

hahaha

...or they're off their lithium...:nuts: :nuts:

Where would George Washington have placed the federal city today, since it seems Maryland and Virginia are no longer friends/southerners?

Where would George Washington have placed the federal city today, since it seems Maryland and Virginia are no longer friends/southerners?
Maryland and Virginia are still "friends." Besides the fact that you steal our water and have detrimental unrestrained growth, many of our citizens work in your Commonwealth and vice versa. NoVa and Suburban Maryland are demographically and politically very similar. After all, our state song includes the line "Virginia shall not call in vain! Maryland, my Maryland." :cheers1:


BTW, retrocession would help to create efficiency in the region by combining many state level government agencies. DC's government is forced to perform the role of a state government in many cases. Why not combine the two entities (MD and DC) to eliminate those redundant governmental activities?

I'm not stealing anybody's water. (not at the moment anyway...)
If Congress wants to Act on the retrocession thing, nobody can stop them except the Maryland government, but the idea seems to be brought up and forgotten every decade. What's different about 2007, going on into the next decade?
Since the Maryland and Virginia DC suburbs are so similar, why not combine all of them into a new state, also against our founding fathers' wishes?
Why not combine the entire seaboard into one state to eliminate all those redundant governmental activities? Why isn't BosWash one big Multiple Combined Statistical Area? Why aren't the areas around the California/Oregon border a state called Jefferson? What do George Washington and Thomas Jefferson have to do with the Pacific Northwest?
Where am I? What month is it?

I'm not stealing anybody's water. (not at the moment anyway...)
If Congress wants to Act on the retrocession thing, nobody can stop them except the Maryland government, but the idea seems to be brought up and forgotten every decade. What's different about 2007, going on into the next decade?
Since the Maryland and Virginia DC suburbs are so similar, why not combine all of them into a new state, also against our founding fathers' wishes?
Why not combine the entire seaboard into one state to eliminate all those redundant governmental activities? Why isn't BosWash one big Multiple Combined Statistical Area? Why aren't the areas around the California/Oregon border a state called Jefferson? What do George Washington and Thomas Jefferson have to do with the Pacific Northwest?
Where am I? What month is it?
So you're rebuttal is essentially: "Well that just ain't how we do things round these here parts." Just because we havn't been doing something in the past, doesn't mean it's not the right thing to do in the future. I guess many Virginians before you had a similar response when the slaves were freed: "Them negros wasn't free before, why is they freed now?" I respect state's rights, it gives each state its own identity, but I don't think that should come at the expense of the society's welfare, which it is in this case to a great extent.

I don't have a rebuttal, that's why I'm asking you: what is going to make Congress Act now? Does the US want Washington in a state? Why are you referring to me as a Virginian? Why do suburban-DC Marylanders always bring up slavery/the Civil War?

Despite strong support for the cause of the Confederate States of America, Maryland did not secede during the American Civil War, in part due to precautions taken by the government in Washington, D.C. President Lincoln suspended several civil liberties, including the writ of habeas corpus, ordered US troops to place artillery on Federal Hill to directly threaten the city of Baltimore and helped ensure the election of a new pro-union governor and legislature. President Lincoln even went so far as to jail certain pro-South members of the state legislature at Fort McHenry including, ironically, the grandson of Francis Scott Key. The Constitutionality of these actions is still a source of controversy and debate. Because Maryland had not seceded from the Union, it was exempted from the anti-slavery provisions of the Emancipation Proclamation (The Emancipation Proclamation only applied to states in rebellion). A constitutional convention was held during 1864 that culminated in the passage of a new state constitution on November 1 of that year. Article 24 of that document outlawed the practice of slavery. The right to vote was extended to non-white males in 1867.

Arguments for retrocession

Proponents like the Committee for the Capital City feel such a move would be of financial benefit to Washington; the city would be relieved of burdens not shared by other American cities such as running a prison system and a Department of Motor Vehicles, and it would finally be free from the veto power of Congress. Maryland would benefit from the prestige of being the home state of the national capital of the world's superpower and would gain additional tax revenue. Congress would benefit from no longer having to scrutinize the decisions of the city government; committees overseeing DC government have traditionally been amongst the least prestigious jobs for members. Further, it would give most residents of the District a say in federal government, as they would be able to vote for a represenative and senators, and thus have representation.

Arguments against retrocession

Proponents of D.C. statehood are against the idea of retrocession because they feel that the city, having been separated from Maryland since the 18th century, has a separate identity; although Maryland is mere city blocks away from many Washingtonians, there is no connection to the state for them. Others see it as a means to block proper representation, which they feel includes two senators. Since these senators would be almost certainly Democratic, the Republicans in the Senate would not be eager to admit the District as a state. It would have less problem giving the city back to Maryland, as that would, at worst, mean one more Democrat in the House. Many in Washington object to Maryland's use of the death penalty, which has been abolished in the District. Many in Maryland object to retrocession because they feel that the city, which has relatively high crime and poverty rates, would be a burden on state government agencies. Others feel that the federal government should have a role in running the national capital; such a role allows for proper management of the city as a symbol of the nation and can be used to reject projects that would be seen by a majority of Americans as ruinous to the capital.

And here's my side of the argument:
:lol:

^^ ^^
To conclude that retrocession is not the best option is to conclude the the arrogance and supposed District identity of Northwestern Washingtonians is more valid than the welfare of all Washingtonians. Something tells me the people of Anacostia could care less about this supposedly distinct District identity.

I don't have a rebuttal, that's why I'm asking you: what is going to make Congress Act now? Does the US want Washington in a state? Why are you referring to me as a Virginian? Why do suburban-DC Marylanders always bring up slavery/the Civil War?

The only things that will make congress act now are civic action and the realization that this is the best and most feasable option for the region. As this issue of DC voting rights comes to a head, the Democrats are going to push for 2 Senators in addition to the 1 representative for DC. The GOP is never going to allow 2 new guaranteed Democratic Senators so they will obviously oppose that idea at all costs. Since it is only fair that the people of the city are represented some way in both houses of Congress, the only logical solution would be to retrocede DC. The Democrats would gladly accept solidifying their Senatorial hold on the increasingly Conservative state of Maryland. As for civic action, I know I'm doing my part. I can't really speak to your last comment, but I will say that the then-Governor of Maryland was definately pro-Union and that most of the state was too, despite the lamentable actions of a few Baltimoreans.

Interesting stuff man.
This thread has been made before in the past, before I joined - in the main US forum. I believe only the people from MD wanted retrocession (on the forum at that time) everyone else concluded that Washington should not be part of a state.
My conclusion so far is that moving the federal city into a state is a national issue. I think you could ask a mod to move this into the main forum or start a new thread there for a more interesting discussion.

It is a natl. issue. I agree w/ the last couple sentences in the against retrocession part that says that the federal government should be in control of DC. I agree with that. It belongs to the US tax payers and the federal gov't should be in control. I think the "redundant" gov't argument is dumb. The city can govern itself perfectly fine, and would do it much better than the state of Maryland can if it has good management. What makes you think that DC, which is wealthier than the rest of the state of MD, would be getting its fair share back in tax money if it were to join MD? It would subsidize the crappier parts of the state just as wealthy areas of every state do. The federal government can do everything and more the state of MD can. DC still has only 600k people, running the DMV and prisons don't have to overburden the city.

I think more people would be in favor of giving DC full representation in Congress before giving it to a state, that's how much the independent status of DC means.

It is a natl. issue. I agree w/ the last couple sentences in the against retrocession part that says that the federal government should be in control of DC. I agree with that. It belongs to the US tax payers and the federal gov't should be in control. I think the "redundant" gov't argument is dumb. The city can govern itself perfectly fine, and would do it much better than the state of Maryland can if it has good management. What makes you think that DC, which is wealthier than the rest of the state of MD, would be getting its fair share back in tax money if it were to join MD? It would subsidize the crappier parts of the state just as wealthy areas of every state do. The federal government can do everything and more the state of MD can. DC still has only 600k people, running the DMV and prisons don't have to overburden the city.

I think more people would be in favor of giving DC full representation in Congress before giving it to a state, that's how much the independent status of DC means.
First of all, the Federal Government would and should retain control over the National Mall and Monuments in a seperate "Federal City." You think the "redundant government argument is dumb" huh? Thats nice. Then why is what should be the wealthiest city in the country struggling so much? The city should have absolutely no problem flourishing given the type of high-paying jobs provided there. What makes you say the city government can govern itself better than the state of Maryland can? Whats changed to make them so efficient? Also, saying that DC is wealthier than MD and that Maryland would be sucking money out of DC is a flat out lie: the per capita income of the city is 28,659 while it is 30% higher in Maryland at 37,446. What do you mean when you say that the Federal Government can do everything and more than the state of Maryland can? Last I checked, they don't run the DMV and state prisons. Simply throwing Federal money at the problem is an irresponsible waste of taxpayers' money. "Running the DMV and prisons don't have to overburden the city," what will change to make these things not overburden the city? The city has been working on cutting administrative costs for years, and all of their efforts have failed. Retrocession is the most logical cure for these administrative difficulties.

DC is struggling b/c of the demographics that exist. That's a big deal. And making DC apart of MD doesn't change that. When Barry screwed up the city even more, the federal government took more control and only when Williams came into office did they back off a bit. If needed, the federal government can do that same thing. That's why they don't run the prisons and DMV. There can very easily be more federal oversight of those.

I'm not advocating throwing money at the problem, I'm for the opposite, I didn't say anything about the federal government throwing money at the problems in DC. The federal government becoming involved, doesn't equate to money being thrown at the problem. It means competent people stepping in to manage and fix the problem.

You're making it sound as if the problems that DC faces are strongly correlated to it's status as an independent city. But when you look at cities like Philly, B'more, Atlanta, it's the same thing, and it's b/c of the demographics.

DC's per-capita income is about $55,000. You're probably looking at median, which in DC's case has a different significance. Because of the wealth distribution, w/ so many super rich, DC's average is skewed up, but the median is more valuable at determining distribution. Nevertheless, DC would most certainly receive less than its fair share if it were to join just about any state.

It is nonsense. That's completely irrelevant to what is going on now. If I was living back then, I probably would have favored keeping DC the way it was then. I would have said forget slave trade, get that out of DC and continued. Just b/c there's division doesn't mean succession or retrocession needs to occur. Why don't you explain to me the reason why retrocession is a good idea. Why don't you just say that it's move that you favor primarily to benefit the state of MD. You're not from DC, you can't speak for them and the people in DC really don't think this is the best idea either. The status of DC as an entity and symbol is of no concern whatsoever to you. And since I disagree with retrocession like most of the country, and I happen to be living in VA in 2007, I must be a bad person and I must think this way b/c I want to sabotage and hurt MD, right?

The reasons for retrocession were stated on the first page, by all means go back and read it. If you're saying this is nonsense, then we should correct the wrongs of the past and give Arlington and Alexandria back to D.C. You should have no objection to that but for some reason you do.

If the federal goverment continues to place national war monuments in Arlington, I don't see why it shouldn't be ceded again. There is too much concentration of federal activities for it be part of Va. The federal government treates it just as if it was part of D.C. for no good reason. Why not take it back then? But once again we see the double standard of the D.C. area, what's OK Va isn't Ok for Maryland.

The reasons for retrocession were stated on the first page, by all means go back and read it. If you're saying this is nonsense, then we should correct the wrongs of the past and give Arlington and Alexandria back to D.C. You should have no objection to that but for some reason you do.

If the federal goverment continues to place national war monuments in Arlington, I don't see why it shouldn't be ceded again. There is too much concentration of federal activities for it be part of Va. The federal government treates it just as if it was part of D.C. for no good reason. Why not take it back then? But once again we see the double standard of the D.C. area, what's OK Va isn't Ok for Maryland.

I don't agree with the reasons for retrocession. I've already stated that. Just b/c those are the reasons doesn't mean I have to agree with them.

And I do have a problem with any ceding in 2007, period. I don't want anyone ceding anything. It's completely unnecessary. If Arlington were nothing but a hole in the ground, you wouldn't be complaining one bit. All it sounds like is envy IMO. Unless there is a real good reason to cede, it's not necessary. Arlington and Alexandria were ceded back in the 19th century, why are we harping on that? What's done is done. It has no significance to anyone today. I live in Arlington and I can tell you that we don't want to be a part of DC. That's why a lot of people live here, b/c it's not DC. The concentration of federal activity is b/c of it's proximity to DC, who said VA can't have a high concentration of federal activity?

It's better if you say that ceding DC to Maryland and Arlington to DC are just power shifts that you would like to see that benefit your cause, which is some immature and stupid tit-for-tat type of thing.

We need to have a forum meet, there is no way that some of you people can be this weird in real life.

I don't agree with the reasons for retrocession. I've already stated that. Just b/c those are the reasons doesn't mean I have to agree with them.

And I do have a problem with any ceding in 2007, period. I don't want anyone ceding anything. It's completely unnecessary. If Arlington were nothing but a hole in the ground, you wouldn't be complaining one bit. All it sounds like is envy IMO. Unless there is a real good reason to cede, it's not necessary. Arlington and Alexandria were ceded back in the 19th century, why are we harping on that? What's done is done. It has no significance to anyone today. I live in Arlington and I can tell you that we don't want to be a part of DC. That's why a lot of people live here, b/c it's not DC. The concentration of federal activity is b/c of it's proximity to DC, who said VA can't have a high concentration of federal activity?

It's better if you say that ceding DC to Maryland and Arlington to DC are just power shifts that you would like to see that benefit your cause, which is some immature and stupid tit-for-tat type of thing.

We need to have a forum meet, there is no way that some of you people can be this weird in real life.
Your arguments are so absurd. You basically don't want anything ceded now because the entire Washington Area situation completely favors NoVa, and the way things have been going are completely unfair. Virginia gets Arlington (which the Federal Government seems to treat as though it's still part of DC), and you adamently oppose Maryland getting back their half of the city. You want to have your cake and keep everyone else from eating it too.

I'd be down with a forum meet. I'm in DC from March 10-17th and over the summer. I say we meet on 3 Sister's Rock...it's the closest we're going to come to nuetral territory. :)

Your arguments are so absurd. You basically don't want anything ceded now because the entire Washington Area situation completely favors NoVa, and the way things have been going are completely unfair.

No one thinks this way. No one looks at DC or the government as occupying someone else's. Get out of your dorm room and live life and stop taking things so seriously. I don't see some huge discrepancy that you do. Northern Virginia was nothing for a long time and it seems like now that it has grown, people don't like it. Why do development projects, growth and everything in general need to be equally dispersed to every part of the area at all times? Thirty yrs from now, it may be the opposite, just as it was thirty yrs ago. I'm glad that the this retrocession thread has been revealed to be one motivated by some silly rivalry that apparently only one side cares about, and not about voting rights, which is why intelligent people bring it up.

If Arlington going back would make you less jealous than fine cede it back to DC. And this excuse, "the federal gov't thinks it is part of DC" and "it's got too much federal activity to be in VA". That's complete bullshit and you know it. If you think having DC "back" ought to set you "ahead", than go right ahead, I just feel like the logic behind this is childish. And the best part of this whole thing is that it's not happening.

man, i've lived in both montgomery and fairfax county and i've never experienced such hatred/jealousy. my friends and family all got along. whats with the marylanders hatred for the va side of the metro. its not like without either side the metro area would even be anything significant - whats dc metro without moco ? whats dc metro without nova? get over yourselves and realize that either way both sides have become successfull areas when compared to most regions, and thats due to reliance on each other for labor force and economy.

One point that hasn't been mentioned is the university education burden for people in DC. They have no reasonable in-state university and the policy for getting in-state tuition at out-of-state schools is ridiculously hard I'm told.

Just another bullet on a long list of problems facing a city without a state.

It doesn't make sense. Just give representation in congress to DC.

It doesn't make sense. Just give representation in congress to DC.
Why don't you read up on the reasoning before so cavalierly making that judgment.

If Arlington going back would make you less jealous than fine cede it back to DC. And this excuse, "the federal gov't thinks it is part of DC" and "it's got too much federal activity to be in VA". That's complete bullshit and you know it. If you think having DC "back" ought to set you "ahead", than go right ahead, I just feel like the logic behind this is childish. And the best part of this whole thing is that it's not happening.
Well that's not very optimistic.
Due to the political and economic differences between Northern Virginia and the rest of the commonwealth, some secessionist sentiments have emerged with those persons wishing that the area could become the separate state of "North Virginia." Delegate Jeannemarie Devolites (R-35) expressed a common sentiment when she said "The formula for funding school construction in Northern Virginia requires that we pay 500 percent more than the actual cost of a project. We have to pay 500 percent because we give 400 percent away to the rest of the state." The lack of funding for transportation projects in Northern Virginia is also an issue that often causes consternation by the region's politicians and citizens.

Secession would require consent from the Virginia General Assembly and the admission of a new state by the U.S. Congress, neither of which is a practical possibility. Consequently, the idea is a rhetorical one used to express frustration with the treatment of Northern Virginia by the state government as well as the occasional opposing political sentiments between it and the rest of Virginia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Virginia#Secession)
Oh nose!
Please everybody, keep hope alive!
Jefferson is a mostly rural area of Southern Oregon and Northern California in the United States. Several times during the 19th, 20th and 21st centuries there have been attempts to establish the area as a separate state. This region on the Pacific Coast is the most famous of several that have sought to adopt the name of Thomas Jefferson, the third President of the United States
...
Today there are more talks of creating the new state, mostly only half serious. Many citizens of "Jefferson" feel threatened by National Marine Fisheries Service's plans to create fish hatcheries along the Klamath River, as well as creating a buffering zone along the river. This buffering zone would oust many people from their homes and even demolish an entire town. Meanwhile, others in "Jefferson" have embraced the idea of the entire Pacific Northwest breaking away from the United States and Canada to become its own country, Cascadia. A large barn off of Interstate 5 north of Weed, California has "the State of Jefferson" painted on the roof. Indeed, some local drivers have license plate frames declaring themselves citizens of Jefferson. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_%28proposed_U.S._state%29)
I have a dream!

DC is struggling b/c of the demographics that exist. That's a big deal. And making DC apart of MD doesn't change that. When Barry screwed up the city even more, the federal government took more control and only when Williams came into office did they back off a bit. If needed, the federal government can do that same thing. That's why they don't run the prisons and DMV. There can very easily be more federal oversight of those.

I'm not advocating throwing money at the problem, I'm for the opposite, I didn't say anything about the federal government throwing money at the problems in DC. The federal government becoming involved, doesn't equate to money being thrown at the problem. It means competent people stepping in to manage and fix the problem.

You're making it sound as if the problems that DC faces are strongly correlated to it's status as an independent city. But when you look at cities like Philly, B'more, Atlanta, it's the same thing, and it's b/c of the demographics.

DC's per-capita income is about $55,000. You're probably looking at median, which in DC's case has a different significance. Because of the wealth distribution, w/ so many super rich, DC's average is skewed up, but the median is more valuable at determining distribution. Nevertheless, DC would most certainly receive less than its fair share if it were to join just about any state.

Problems in Philly have nothing to do with racial demographics, which is what you seem to identify solely as "demographics" in your other posts. It is a city where the black and white populations are even. The only things wrong with Philly stem from management in City Hall.

In regards to income, statisticians usually only use median household income to determine wealth. In MD, that is greater than $54,000 while in DC it is slightly below the US average at $43,215 (both figures from 2003). In every single state, the super rich can skew the mean per-capita incomes up, so while DC may have more super-rich per capita, so do most other big cities. DC is not unique in this respect. That's why we don't cite mean per capita incomes in arguments.

As it is, I respect DC's independence, and I think that most of its problems could be solved by proper representation in Congress--1 member in the House and 2 senators. This would give DC power in Congress to vie for the funding it needs. Other than that, I don't think that the Feds should have any jurisdiction over the city aside from a "Federal District" which would include the mall and surrounding buildings such as the White House and Capitol Building.

When the founding fathers dreamed of a capital city, they imagined that it would contain pretty much only federal workers. They never thought that it would become the economic powerhouse that it is today where now only about 1/4 of its area's inhabitants work for the Federal government. Thus a new approach must be taken, one that does not involve so much Federal interference. Mayor Williams showed that it was possible to run the city amazingly well and efficiently and I believe that Mayor Fenty will show us that it is something that will stick around.

In sum: need proper representation in Congress, need less Fed interference.

Problems in Philly have nothing to do with racial demographics, which is what you seem to identify solely as "demographics" in your other posts. It is a city where the black and white populations are even. The only things wrong with Philly stem from management in City Hall.

In regards to income, statisticians usually only use median household income to determine wealth. In MD, that is greater than $54,000 while in DC it is slightly below the US average at $43,215 (both figures from 2003). In every single state, the super rich can skew the mean per-capita incomes up, so while DC may have more super-rich per capita, so do most other big cities. DC is not unique in this respect. That's why we don't cite mean per capita incomes in arguments.

As it is, I respect DC's independence, and I think that most of its problems could be solved by proper representation in Congress--1 member in the House and 2 senators. This would give DC power in Congress to vie for the funding it needs. Other than that, I don't think that the Feds should have any jurisdiction over the city aside from a "Federal District" which would include the mall and surrounding buildings such as the White House and Capitol Building.

When the founding fathers dreamed of a capital city, they imagined that it would contain pretty much only federal workers. They never thought that it would become the economic powerhouse that it is today where now only about 1/4 of its area's inhabitants work for the Federal government. Thus a new approach must be taken, one that does not involve so much Federal interference. Mayor Williams showed that it was possible to run the city amazingly well and efficiently and I believe that Mayor Fenty will show us that it is something that will stick around.

In sum: need proper representation in Congress, need less Fed interference.

If DC gets 2 Senators and Representative then I think I might support that option over retrocession. However, they need nothing short of FULL REPRESENTATION and Federal financial assistance. If getting that is too difficult, I think retrocession is the best option. I also agree about the Federal Government needing to butt out of the city's affairs outside of the National Mall area. Also, if they could start paying some sort of Real Estate tax that'd be swell. They own 47% of our land! BTW, at this point, only 11% of the Washington area works directly for the Federal Government. When you add in Baltimore that number goes down further.

If DC gets 2 Senators and Representative then I think I might support that option over retrocession. However, they need nothing short of FULL REPRESENTATION and Federal financial assistance. If getting that is too difficult, I think retrocession is the best option. I also agree about the Federal Government needing to butt out of the city's affairs outside of the National Mall area. Also, if they could start paying some sort of Real Estate tax that'd be swell. They own 47% of our land! BTW, at this point, only 11% of the Washington area works directly for the Federal Government. When you add in Baltimore that number goes down further.

A real estate tax?!?!?! Haha dude, McCullough vs Maryland?

Problems in Philly have nothing to do with racial demographics, which is what you seem to identify solely as "demographics" in your other posts. It is a city where the black and white populations are even. The only things wrong with Philly stem from management in City Hall.
In sum: need proper representation in Congress, need less Fed interference.

You can't deny the strong correlation that exists between cities with a high black population and prevalence of an inefficient city government. Around 50% black is a lot. I'm aware of the politics in Philly, and I'm not attributing all the problems to race, but you can't go as far as to say that problems, including those w/ crime, schools and attitudes, have nothing to do with race. That's bullshit and you know it. It's no different from many others in this area. I'm not pointing out a particular reason for a problem, just the conditions that exist that lead somehow to an inefficient gov't. And this point was merely brought up to refute the many so-called economic incentives for DC to be retroceded. Many cities that do belong to a state face the same problems that DC does.

I think at the very least, DC should be tax exempt, if not, it should have representation in Congress. Keep in mind that there are DC statehood initiatives out there too, so DC independence is important to people.

I also think that the federal gov't should stay out as much as possible. But I don't blame the federal gov't as much as I do Marion Barry. Mayor Williams gave the city a lot of credibility and I sure it does continue with Mayor Fenty. I think eventhough they may be a lot different in ways, at least they're responsible and competent with such a demanding task and Fenty seems this way at least.

You can't deny the strong correlation that exists between cities with a high black population and prevalence of an inefficient city government. Around 50% black is a lot. I'm aware of the politics in Philly, and I'm not attributing all the problems to race, but you can't go as far as to say that problems, including those w/ crime, schools and attitudes, have nothing to do with race. That's bullshit and you know it. It's no different from many others in this area. I'm not pointing out a particular reason for a problem, just the conditions that exist that lead somehow to an inefficient gov't. And this point was merely brought up to refute the many so-called economic incentives for DC to be retroceded. Many cities that do belong to a state face the same problems that DC does.

I think at the very least, DC should be tax exempt, if not, it should have representation in Congress. Keep in mind that there are DC statehood initiatives out there too, so DC independence is important to people.

Yet you want to contribute current economic situation in D.C. to Williams, a Black ex-mayor, administration and council. Atlanta is booming too with a high concentration of Black people, right now Los Angeles and San Fransisco aren't at their best. Even with the lower Black population in Philly, D.C. and Atlanta are doing better then that stagnant town. You can't have it both ways, which is it going to be?

the problem with the whole issue of DC statehood, DC annexation,or reorganizing the region is that opposition and difference of opinion is so grat that it is unlikely that action would take place.

Perhaps then, it is better to look at what should happen rather than what could or will happenl.

It would seem to me that the following are issues on the jurisdiction issue:

• DC is not the only place within our nation without full consitutional rights

• DC is structured to be a city, has no state like qualities

• the nation is comfortable with a federal district that not only maintains the capital but, in essense IS the capital; such feelings would not extend to a state containing many areas not part of the capital complex to be the home of the capital. in essence, people do not wish to see MD (or VA for that matter) have special status.

If all the above are valid points, there is one solution that could solve the problem (again...it won't happen, but perhaps it makes sense):

Combine DC and the parts of the metro area in MD and VA (both inside and outside the beltway) into the State of Columbia.

Yes, our 51st state! It would have the population and diversity that would exceed many of our states. Its special status is accepted since unlike MD, this state would be structured to include the government's chief zone.

Bethesda, Langley, the Pentagon, etc., fully function as parts of our centralized government every bit as much as buildings that line the Mall.

Heck, there already is a potential "University of Columbia" just sitting there in College Park (sorry Terps).

This idea calls for Washington to be one of a series of cities in the new state. Places like Silver Spring, for example, keep their municipal status, just as part of a new state.

A decision could be made if the new city of Washington would have its present boundaries or would revert to its original diamond shape with areas on the VA side of the Potomac to go along with the MD side.

so we're talking about a State of Columbia that includes Washington and individual towns and counties in MD and VA, a federal state rather than a federal city, fulling possessing the full range of rights of any state, still represtative of the national government rather than being a part of a non-federally gov't oriented state.

It won't work. But should it???????????

Yet you want to contribute current economic situation in D.C. to Williams, a Black ex-mayor, administration and council. Atlanta is booming too with a high concentration of Black people, right now Los Angeles and San Fransisco aren't at their best. Even with the lower Black population in Philly, D.C. and Atlanta are doing better then that stagnant town. You can't have it both ways, which is it going to be?

Most people liked Tony Williams, but many thought that he forgot about the lower class in an attempt to get the yuppies and rich folks in town. I don't think this, I think he was a good mayor and I think it's easy for people to target him, he was more productive at helping the city get on it's feet again financially so then money could be used to help the poorer places. Trying to do it the other way around has not worked for some places in the past.

But that's really not the point. I don't care what race Williams is. I'm not trying to pigeon hole DC into a permanent category. I'm simply expressing the situation that exists and whether you want to acknowledge it or not is up to you. The situation doesn't spell out permanent failure which is what you end up taking from what I've been saying. But you are underestimating the effect that the post-civil rights era and crack epidemic had in our community. More or less an entire generation has had to deal with the repercussions and they take a while to get better. Philly, DC, B'more and ATL are all cities with high crime and pretty inefficient gov'ts. and booming commercial districts which is what must happen for cities to get back roaring and that's what they are doing, they're coming back up.

If you think that I'm saying that black people are inherently bad at running gov'ts, you are mistaken. But for the past 30 or so yrs, you can't separate the needs and struggle of the black lower class in some select cities w/ the corrupt and inefficient gov'ts. that often exist there.

Edsg, I like that idea. It's been mulled over on this site before a long time ago. I've seen state of columbia and state of potomac before. I don't know how many people would go for it. It would benefit the entire region and give this region w/ such high gov't presence more of a centralized home I guess. The only thing is that DC technically would still lose it's uniqueness to an extent by being apart of a state. But being a part of a 51st state, a new state, would still keep it somewhat like what the founders wanted as far as specialized designated area is concerned, and it would have voting rights. I just don't know how popular it would be to some MDers and VAers though. Also, along with UMD, you may have George Mason depending on what boundaries you draw and it would be good for UDC too.

the problem with the whole issue of DC statehood, DC annexation,or reorganizing the region is that opposition and difference of opinion is so grat that it is unlikely that action would take place.

Perhaps then, it is better to look at what should happen rather than what could or will happenl.

It would seem to me that the following are issues on the jurisdiction issue:

• DC is not the only place within our nation without full consitutional rights

• DC is structured to be a city, has no state like qualities

• the nation is comfortable with a federal district that not only maintains the capital but, in essense IS the capital; such feelings would not extend to a state containing many areas not part of the capital complex to be the home of the capital. in essence, people do not wish to see MD (or VA for that matter) have special status.

If all the above are valid points, there is one solution that could solve the problem (again...it won't happen, but perhaps it makes sense):

Combine DC and the parts of the metro area in MD and VA (both inside and outside the beltway) into the State of Columbia.

Yes, our 51st state! It would have the population and diversity that would exceed many of our states. Its special status is accepted since unlike MD, this state would be structured to include the government's chief zone.

Bethesda, Langley, the Pentagon, etc., fully function as parts of our centralized government every bit as much as buildings that line the Mall.

Heck, there already is a potential "University of Columbia" just sitting there in College Park (sorry Terps).

This idea calls for Washington to be one of a series of cities in the new state. Places like Silver Spring, for example, keep their municipal status, just as part of a new state.

A decision could be made if the new city of Washington would have its present boundaries or would revert to its original diamond shape with areas on the VA side of the Potomac to go along with the MD side.

so we're talking about a State of Columbia that includes Washington and individual towns and counties in MD and VA, a federal state rather than a federal city, fulling possessing the full range of rights of any state, still represtative of the national government rather than being a part of a non-federally gov't oriented state.

It won't work. But should it???????????

This might be very bad. On one hand the new state would be by far the richest in the country. On the other hand it would make the other 2 states amongst the poorest in the country. Also, what would you include in the new state? Would Howard and Anne Arundel County be included? Would all of Baltimore be included?

It would be surprising if the two states became among the poorest. Then again, it does depend on how you draw the boundaries. But I agree, I think there are benefits and negatives with the plan, I don't think anyone sees it happening so I guess we can ignore the negatives.

It would be surprising if the two states became among the poorest. Then again, it does depend on how you draw the boundaries. But I agree, I think there are benefits and negatives with the plan, I don't think anyone sees it happening so I guess we can ignore the negatives.

Almost all of these possibilities have the same probability....zero. Nobody in Maryland at least, has ever discussed giving up land to DC since the first creation of a federal zone over 200 years ago. The only time I have ever heard even the slightest hint of a discussion in my life was a discussion of taking BACK DC except for a small government district around the Mall. That discussion lasted about 10 minutes.

Almost all of these possibilities have the same probability....zero. Nobody in Maryland at least, has ever discussed giving up land to DC since the first creation of a federal zone over 200 years ago. The only time I have ever heard even the slightest hint of a discussion in my life was a discussion of taking BACK DC except for a small government district around the Mall. That discussion lasted about 10 minutes.

Yes, apathy and accepting the norm are exactly what this country and this region need. Imagine if they'd said that about slavery.

Yes, apathy and accepting the norm are exactly what this country and this region need. Imagine if they'd said that about slavery.

so you are equating scando's suggestion that borders between our 50 states and the District of Columbia are rigid with support for slavery? you're beginning to sound a lot like Condi Rice (a Washington, I believe) compare our struggle with Iraq and Sadaam Hussein with our battle against Germany and Adolph Hitler in WWII. You definitely seem to have hit the hyperbole button on this one, Washed Balls.

so you are equating scando's suggestion that borders between our 50 states and the District of Columbia are rigid with support for slavery? you're beginning to sound a lot like Condi Rice (a Washington, I believe) compare our struggle with Iraq and Sadaam Hussein with our battle against Germany and Adolph Hitler in WWII. You definitely seem to have hit the hyperbole button on this one, Washed Balls.
I'm saying refusal to change and apathy are never reasons to oppose something. I never said that those who oppose changing DC's borders are as bad as those who opposed ending slavery. If you're opposing doing something, oppose it because you believe the condition after the change will be worse than the condition before it. What scando seemed to be saying (at least to me) was that DC's borders shouldn't change because no one really cares enough and it's not on people's minds. The same reasoning against ending slavery probably applied to most of the people in the North before the Civil War.

I'm saying refusal to change and apathy are never reasons to oppose something. I never said that those who oppose changing DC's borders are as bad as those who opposed ending slavery. If you're opposing doing something, oppose it because you believe the condition after the change will be worse than the condition before it. What scando seemed to be saying (at least to me) was that DC's borders shouldn't change because no one really cares enough and it's not on people's minds. The same reasoning against ending slavery probably applied to most of the people in the North before the Civil War.

Exactly. The fallacy of many is that they believe things in their time will stay that way forever, especially when it's to their liking and convienence.

Yes, apathy and accepting the norm are exactly what this country and this region need. Imagine if they'd said that about slavery.

That is pretty much what people said about slavery, only in much stronger terms. It was customary, established, profitable and "justified" by the morals of some people alive in that era. It took a war to force the issue and even then another century before many accepted the change. I don't think that state boundaries are quite the same, but they are full of identity issues, comfort zones and custom. Perhaps more relevant, the borders determine the power base of politicians whose income and influence depend on the lines being where they are. Nobody's going to go there without a truly compelling reason and strong desire from the citizenry, which just ain't happening.

What scando seemed to be saying (at least to me) was that DC's borders shouldn't change because no one really cares enough and it's not on people's minds. The same reasoning against ending slavery probably applied to most of the people in the North before the Civil War.

That's close to what I am saying but I'm not saying "shouldn't" as much as "ain't going to happen". Nobody is going to upset the political equilibrium of the states without a real compelling reason. I don't see signs in the streets, marchers, newspaper editorials anywhere. No voter initiatives, petitions or other political movements. I only have ever seen a relatively small group of people in DC who are understandably aggravated about their political status, but people in Maryland or Virginia just don't care. Furthermore, the idea of granting full citizenship to DC'ers is hard to buy for many Republicans who suppose that DC people might be primarily Democratic.

I don't think this rises anywhere near to the level of slavery on the scale of issues. It's rediculous to ever suggest that living in DC can compare to being a slave. Fortunately DC people have the option of leaving if they choose and are not physically oppressed, corporally punished or lacking in personal liberty.

haha poor marylanders :(

Oh Boston!