Washington, D.C. Admission Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. Speaker, America's Federal Government should be of the people, by the people, and for the people. But with H.R. 51, America's government will become of the Democrats, by the Democrats, and for the Democrats.

Let's be clear what H.R. 51 is all about. It is about Democrats adding two new progressive U.S. Senators to push a radical agenda championed by the squad to reshape America into the socialist utopia they always talk about.

If you doubt me, just listen to what our colleague, Congressman Jamie Raskin, recently told The Washington Post. He said:

There is a national political logic for D.C. statehood too, because the Senate has become the principal obstacle to social progress across a whole range of issues.

So there we have it. H.R. 51 is not really about voting representation. It is about Democrats consolidating their power in Washington.

There are numerous problems with H.R. 51. Mainly, it is flatly unconstitutional. Every Justice Department from President Kennedy's to President Obama's has been consistent that a constitutional amendment is needed to grant the District statehood.

Robert F. Kennedy said that granting D.C. statehood without a constitutional amendment was inconceivable. He also said granting D.C. statehood, as attempted by H.R. 51, would produce an absurdity. This absurdity is the 23rd Amendment which acknowledges the existence of a Federal District warranting three electoral college votes.

While H.R. 51 includes an expedited process for the 23rd Amendment's repeal in Congress, the problem is this would not happen until after D.C. becomes a State. This would create mass confusion as H.R. 51 is reviewed by the courts for years.

The Constitution is the foundational document upon which all laws of our country rest, and Congress cannot simply dismiss it with sham legislation. But that is what H.R. 51 attempts to do. Democrats want to rewrite the Constitution without going through the proper process of doing so.

During our committee's markup of H.R. 51, I offered an amendment that would assure the 23rd Amendment's repeal prior to statehood being granted, but Democrats opposed this amendment.

Why are Democrats pushing such a problematic bill through the House?

Why are they working so hard to advance D.C. statehood instead of pursuing a constitutional amendment that would engage the entire country through a process intended by our Founding Fathers?

Because they know Americans have firmly rejected D.C. statehood.

I urge my colleagues to vote with the vast majority of Americans and reject this unconstitutional and impractical bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, if this bill is about race, I wonder why your majority leader, Steny Hoyer, voted against this very bill in 1993.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. COMER.

I must admit, I am a little disappointed in the remarks of the majority leader. When I saw him approach the podium, I thought he was going to give us a detailed explanation as to why he voted against this very bill in 1993. Instead, he lectures us on having the exact same position today that he had in 1993. Hypocrisy runs deep.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. Speaker, listening to the debate, I wonder if our friends on the other side of the aisle would be so passionate if Washington, D.C., were 90 percent Republican as 90 percent Democrat.

H.R. 51 goes against the Founding Fathers' intent. It is unconstitutional, impractical, and a blatant power grab.

The Founding Fathers created the Federal city--this Federal city--to be separate and apart from the States which it would serve as the seat of government. They designed it this way so there would be no super State that could unduly influence Federal affairs and international relations.

Now, I understand the people of the District's desire for representation in Congress. I think that is a legitimate concern, and it is not a new one.

If Democrats truly wanted to grant the wishes of D.C. residents, then they would address the constitutional issues with H.R. 51 since it does not stand a chance in court. We all know that. This does not stand one chance in court.

Additionally, Democrats could explore other options other than statehood, but they are not interested in any of them since they don't add two new progressive Senators to the U.S. Senate.

Serious policy proposals like retrocession, allowing D.C. residents to vote in Maryland Federal elections, and most obviously, the passage of the constitutional amendment have been called for by many of my Republican colleagues.

No State has required a constitutional amendment to be admitted to the Union; not one. But D.C. is unique. The 23rd Amendment guarantees the District three electoral college votes. There is no precedent for granting statehood to a territory with electoral college votes or such a special place in our Constitution. H.R. 51 is an unconstitutional bill.

D.C. is also massively unprepared to assume the costs of the programs and benefits it receives by being the Federal seat of government. The new State will very likely levy a commuter tax to make up the funding gaps currently backed by the Federal taxpayers. H.R. 51 provides no guarantee to the American people that they will not be on the hook funding the new State for years, if not decades.

This bill is nothing more than an attempt to ignore the constitutional process and gain an advantage in the U.S. Senate, all to advance a radical agenda that continues to come out of this House and stalls in the Senate.

Democrats know a constitutional amendment granting D.C. statehood would be rejected, just as it has been in the past. H.R. 51 is intentionally designed to circumvent the Constitution and the will of the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this unconstitutional and impractical legislation. I urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source