One more big step on DC Voting Rights

by EDavis, Wed Jun 13, 2007 at 04:03:32 PM EST

It's rare to see a Congressional committee given a standing ovation after a markup vote - but that's what happened in a packed Senate committee room this morning.

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee passed the DC House Voting Rights bill (S. 1257) by a vote of 9-1, with three Republicans voting YES  (Collins, Coleman, Voinovich).   This was the latest step forward for this legislation, which was first introduced in the 108th Congress.  The bill gives DC a permanent voting representative in the House and also adds another House seat, which will go to Utah.  That bipartisan formula has brought some Republicans onto the bill and has been key to getting it this far.  The next step is getting enough Republicans to avoid a filibuster and then bringing it to the Senate floor, hopefully later this summer.




Tags: DC, voring rights, elections (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 5 Comments :: Post a Comment


Re: One more big step on DC Voting Rights (none / 0)

So basically it's a wash? One Utah, one DC? How about 2 senate seats for DC?


by carolinezhang on Wed Jun 13, 2007 at 04:05:06 PM EST

Re: One more big step on DC Voting Rights (none / 0)

It is split based on population.  DC has people for one seat.  Most seats are around 500,000-800,000 people.  


by JeremiahTheMessiah on Wed Jun 13, 2007 at 04:07:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: One more big step on DC Voting Rights (none / 0)

How would anyone oppose this? Who voted no?

Honestly, it doesn't help any party and in the words of our founders, no taxation without representation!

I hate my Senator Coleman but at least he did the right thing.


"Live your beliefs and you can turn the world around." --Thoreau
by Populista on Wed Jun 13, 2007 at 04:24:57 PM EST

Re: One more big step on DC Voting Rights (none / 0)

Check this out from GreenPapers.com for a great breakdown of representative democracy.

Montana gets the worst deal, with over 900,000 citizens represented by only one representative in the House. Wyoming gets the best deal, with under 500,000 for their one seat - a similar deal to what DC would get. Virtually every other state has between 600,000 and 700,000 people per seat.

What about UTAH? They are one of the worst represented, with 745,000 people per seat. An additional seat would change that to roughly 550,000 per seat, making it among the best ratios.

But, what about Mississippi? They also have a weak ratio - 713,000 to 1 - but an additional seat there would change it to 570,400 to 1. Not too different from Utah.


www.thingsyoungerthanmccain.com
by LandStander on Wed Jun 13, 2007 at 04:48:04 PM EST

Re: Montana gets the worst deal (none / 0)

  MT may get the worst deal in the House, but that is far outweighed by the fact that they have two Senators for less than one million population. California gets the worst deal in the Congress with only two Senators for 36 million people.


by Zack from the SFV on Fri Jun 15, 2007 at 03:04:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.

Login
Username:

Password: