The congressional bill that would grant DC a vote in the House of Representatives has taken a step backwards. Although it passed the Senate, it was pulled from a final vote in the House of Representatives until next week.

The debate on the bill has brought to light additional information that has this blog taking a step back from its earlier post (This Far and No Further) expressing support for the bill. 

At the time it was argued that since Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives the Congress authority over the District, it could choose to grant it a seat in the House.  In the course of the debate attention was drawn to Article I, Section 2, which gives the Congress the authority to set the total membership of the House.

If Congress can decide the total membership of the House, and governs the District, it can choose to grant one of those members to the District, right?  Well, not really.

The first paragraph of Article I, Section 2 begins, “The House of Representatives shall be composed of members  chosen every second year by the people of the several states.”  However you slice it, the District is not a state.

This blog remains opposed to statehood for the District, and reaffirms its position that full congressional representation  can only occur when the federal government retrocedes the District to the state of Maryland, from which it was separated when it was designated the seat of government.  This blog reaffirms the view that as the body that represents the people, the House of Representatives should be as inclusively representative as possible.

However, this blog withdraws its support for the DC voting rights bill.  Unfortunately, unless or until the Constitution is amended, it will not accomodate the compromise it had previously supported.