Why in the world would Republicans go along with this? First, it is probably unconstitutional. Second, Utah will probably automatically get another (red) seat after the 2010 census (only 4 years away), so why offset that by creating a new (blue) seat in D.C.? Third, Utah's extra seat will come at the expense of some state that has lost population, and that state will almost certainly be a blue state.
When D.C. was created, NOBODY lived there, so everyone who has moved there has done so KNOWING that D.C. has no representation in Congress. Now they cry about it. They are like people who buy a house next to an airport, and then complain about the noise. They are NOT disenfranchised, because they were NEVER enfranchised in the first place. End of argument; end of story.
1 Comments:
Why in the world would Republicans go along with this? First, it is probably unconstitutional. Second, Utah will probably automatically get another (red) seat after the 2010 census (only 4 years away), so why offset that by creating a new (blue) seat in D.C.? Third, Utah's extra seat will come at the expense of some state that has lost population, and that state will almost certainly be a blue state.
When D.C. was created, NOBODY lived there, so everyone who has moved there has done so KNOWING that D.C. has no representation in Congress. Now they cry about it. They are like people who buy a house next to an airport, and then complain about the noise. They are NOT disenfranchised, because they were NEVER enfranchised in the first place. End of argument; end of story.
Post a Comment
<< Home