It’s somehow worse than that they DO have (kinda) reps Eleanor Holmes Norton DC house reps are “delegates” so they cant vote on bills but the position still exist.
Congress has the right to levy taxes under the Taxing and Spending Clause. However non voting members can’t vote on any laws and therefore can’t vote on tax related law . Wikipedia says They receive compensation, benefits, and the ability to send mail without a stamp like full house members. I’ve heard they can vote in committees but I can’t confirm that
so I would say this is taxation without representation. Or taxation with the most minimal amount of powerless representation possible. But that’s a longer phrase
In theory, because every congressperson lives in DC a large fraction of the year, every one represents them. Giving them their own rep on top of that would give them too much power. In theory.
Congressmembers are only a minuscule fraction of the population of DC. And the rest of the population never voted for any of them. So the vast, vast majority of people in DC are unrepresented.
Yes, it’s silly to say they’re being represented. They don’t chose them and Representatives and Senators don’t give a hoot about what D.C. residents want on a national stage. They barely care what their constituents want. I have never heard them even mention the people of D.C. when talking about issues.
It would not be giving D.C. too much power because ultimately Congress governs D.C., not the local government which exists entirely at Congress’s pleasure, so this would at least give D.C. some influence over its own government rather than none, which is what it currently has.
It because D.C. is not a state, and they have no Representative in Congress.
Yes, that’s what I was referencing
It’s somehow worse than that they DO have (kinda) reps Eleanor Holmes Norton DC house reps are “delegates” so they cant vote on bills but the position still exist.
Well to my understanding, aren’t tax related things not controlled by them? Does Congress as a whole control those things?
Congress has the right to levy taxes under the Taxing and Spending Clause. However non voting members can’t vote on any laws and therefore can’t vote on tax related law . Wikipedia says They receive compensation, benefits, and the ability to send mail without a stamp like full house members. I’ve heard they can vote in committees but I can’t confirm that
so I would say this is taxation without representation. Or taxation with the most minimal amount of powerless representation possible. But that’s a longer phrase
But can that mail be used to cancel Gym membership?
In theory, because every congressperson lives in DC a large fraction of the year, every one represents them. Giving them their own rep on top of that would give them too much power. In theory.
Congressmembers are only a minuscule fraction of the population of DC. And the rest of the population never voted for any of them. So the vast, vast majority of people in DC are unrepresented.
Yes, it’s silly to say they’re being represented. They don’t chose them and Representatives and Senators don’t give a hoot about what D.C. residents want on a national stage. They barely care what their constituents want. I have never heard them even mention the people of D.C. when talking about issues.
It would not be giving D.C. too much power because ultimately Congress governs D.C., not the local government which exists entirely at Congress’s pleasure, so this would at least give D.C. some influence over its own government rather than none, which is what it currently has.