Cap'n Arbyte's

Advertisements


Local interest


Other sites


Blogroll

241 Traitors

There are 241 traitors currently serving in the House:

The Democratic-led House of Representatives voted 241-177 to expand its chamber and provide a representative for the District of Columbia… [source]

This is unconstitutional. Obviously, brazenly so. Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution begins with "The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States…" States! The District of Columbia is not a state. Neither are Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, or the various lesser dependent areas. They don't get a representative in the House either.

The 241 members of the House who voted in favor of this bill have violated their oath of office by supporting this unconstitutional bill and they deserve to be impeached.

If you believe it's a good idea for D.C. residents to have a voting representative in the House, amend the Constitution to allow it, or give the District back to Maryland, but do not ignore the Constitution.

Comments: 4

1: Enough Wealth
2007-04-23 06:44:02 UTC

Is making D.C. a state also an option? (I'm not sure what the process is/was to make Alaska and Hawaii states...)

2: Brandon Berg
2007-04-23 16:07:27 UTC

Sure, but given that pretty much everything the Federal government does is unconstitutional, why get worked up over this particular (relatively innocuous) breach of duty?

What I don't get is why so many people voted for it. Democrats, I can understand, but why would a Republican vote to give representation to such a heavily Democratic city?

3: Brandon Berg
2007-04-23 16:13:22 UTC

Never mind. I just read the story, and Utah gets another representative, too.

Also, the tab order of the comment form is weird. It goes from the Name box to the Password box to the Preview button, and then to the box for the comment text. IMO, the last two should be switched.

4: Captain Arbyte
2007-04-24 02:28:01 UTC

Enough,

Yes, I think making D.C. a state would also work.

Brandon,

It bothers me because it's so blatant. There's no hiding behind subtle, complex, or scholarly arguments on this one. This bill is obviously unconstitutional. Voting for it anyway is a clear demonstration that they don't take the Constitution, or their oath, seriously.

What web browser are you using? (Tabbing works fine for me in Opera.)

The comment period has expired.

Tiny Island