WASHINGTON D.C. MAY GET A REPRESENTATIVE EVEN THOUGH IT'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL
The United States Senate passed a bill which gives Washington D.C. a representative in the House of Representatives. The bill is being sent to the House of representatives where it is thought that it will easily pass. Hello? Senators? Representatives? Have none of you read the Constitution? Here...let me help you:
From the Constitution Article 1 Section 2:
"The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.
No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen."
Notice the Constitution clearly says "State." It does not say "city" nor does it say "district." This precludes Washington D.C. from having a representative in the House of Representatives. In order to lawfully give give Washington D.C. it's own representative in the House, the Constitution would need to be amended. Seriously, has anyone in D.C. read the Constitution?
