DC Voting Rights
Most Americans assume that all U.S. citizens have a right to vote and a right to representation (two Senators and a Representative). However, this is not the case for the approximately 600,000 residents of the District of Columbia. Although these citizens live in our nation’s capital, pay federal taxes and serve in the armed forces, they do not have representation in their federal legislature. District residents have no representation in the Senate and a non-voting Delegate in the House. As a result, DC residents are relegated to second-class citizenship. They are unable to bring grievances to influential Federal officials or reap the benefits Senators and Representatives are able to provide to their constituents.

While DC residents did have representation in the early 1790’s, DC residents lost their right to vote in 1801 after the passage of the Organic Act, when Congress voted to take control of the District of Columbia. This occurred just ten years after the ratification of the U.S. Constitution and a mere 26 years after the famous declaration by Sam Adams--“No Taxation Without Representation”-- a version on the motto remains on DC license plates today.

FairVote firmly stands behind the right of every U.S. citizen to have a meaningful vote. DC residents are no different than all other Americans and should not be treated as such. If Congress can take away voting rights of citizens, then surely it can replace them. Every DC resident should be able to elect a voting member of the House of Representatives and two U.S. Senators.

[ Learn more about the DC VRA ]

[ The District of Columbia and Presidential Nominations ]

[ For more information on the DC voting rights movement, visit DC Vote ]


 

Rep. Davis Cites Fresh Interest in D.C. Voting Rights, Including from Bush


By Lori Montgomery
Published December 17th 2005 in Washington Post

Legislation that would give the District a vote in Congress is gaining fresh support on Capitol Hill, and its sponsor said yesterday that he is pressing hard to persuade the White House to back the legislation.

Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.) said he is "still a ways" from putting the measure to a vote before his Government Reform Committee, the first step toward passage. But with 18 House co-sponsors, an expression of interest from the president and a new plan for expanding the House to accommodate the District's representative, "we have never been at this high-water mark before," Davis said.

"People like the concept," Davis told host Mark Plotkin on WTOP radio. "And I think there is a growing realization, even among people who don't like this bill, that you can't spend billions of dollars to bring democracy to Baghdad and not have a vote in the nation's capital."

Davis has battled for years to bring voting representation to the District. He said he raised the issue with President Bush at an event Tuesday in Virginia. Bush opposes giving the District a voice in the Senate. But when Davis explained that his bill would only affect the House, Bush replied: "That puts a little bit different light on it" and asked for more information, the congressman said.

"If we get the White House behind it -- and we're a long way from doing that, but we're engaged -- that could make a huge difference," Davis said.

The bill would expand the House temporarily from 435 seats to 437, giving a vote to Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) and adding a fourth member from Utah, which was the state next in line for a seat after the 2000 Census. Under the measure, the House would revert to 435 seats in the next reapportionment before the 2012 election, with the District keeping its vote.

By coupling the interests of the Democratic District with Republican Utah, Davis had hoped to unlock a partisan logjam. But the bill stirred fears among Democrats that an extra seat in Utah would permit the state's Republicans to redraw districts, threatening the seat of Utah's lone Democratic congressman, Jim Matheson.

Yesterday, Davis offered a solution: Make the new Utah representative run statewide, which would keep congressional districts intact.

Utah Republicans, including Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., are "very comfortable" with the idea, Davis said. Matheson, through an aide, called the idea "very interesting" but declined to take a position.

Advocates for D.C. voting rights hailed the proposal. "It's definitely a breakthrough and a significant change," said Ilir Zherka, executive director of D.C. Vote. "Hopefully, it will lead to Democrats saying, 'Okay, this problem's off the table. Now let's talk about the bill itself.' "

Norton, who has opposed the Davis bill, is less optimistic, said spokeswoman Doxie A. McCoy. Although talks between Norton and Davis are leading "in a positive direction," McCoy said, opposition from House GOP leaders is a greater obstacle than nervous Democrats.

"The Republicans are in control," McCoy said. "The Democrats don't control the Congress."