Download - UDC Law Review

More documents

Recommendations

Info

40 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICr OF COLUMBIA LAW REVIEWquire a constitutional amendment,342 nor require approval of the Marylandlegislature. 343The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Voting Rights Act of 1975 requiresstates to accept votes from people overseas, even though the people overseas arenot technically residents of the state. 344 Replacing that Act, the Uniformed andOverseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act makes provisions for American citizenswho reside outside of the United States to vote by absentee ballot?45 Underprovisions like this Act, District residents could vote in Maryland congressionalelections without becoming Maryland citizens. 346Some argue that Article I, Sections 2 and 3 of the Constitution are an impedimentto this approach. 347 Under these provisions, membership in the U.S. Houseand Senate is limited to individuals elected by the people of the several states. 348Arguably, because District citizens are not among the people of the severalstates, they cannot elect representatives and senators. On the other hand, theFourteenth Amendment may allow Congress to enact partial retrocession as wellas specifically grants Congress the power to enforce the amendment through legislation.349 When the District was established, its residents still voted in Marylandelections.3 5o Maryland's voting laws continued to be in force until Congresschanged those regulations?51 Congress has not passed any laws making the votinglaws of Maryland inapplicable 352 to District residents. However, the additionof over 500,000 votes to a Maryland federal election would change the dynamicsof Maryland elections and government. 353 It would be unfair to force this new342 [d.343 See DINH & CHARNES, supra note 323, at 9.344 Unified and Overseas Citizens Voting Rights Act of 1975, 42 U.S.c. § 1973, repealed byUniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, Pub. L. No. 99-410, 100 Stat. 924 (1986).345 Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, Pub. L. No. 99-410, 100 Stat. 924(1986).346 COMMON SENSE. supra note 144, at 65.347 U.S. CONST. art. I. § 2.3.348 [d.349 U.S. CONST. amend. XIV. § 5.350 Organic Act, ch. 15,2 Stat. 103 (1801) (eliminating the right of District residents to vote forSenators and Representatives). Prior to passage of the Organic Act, from 1790 to 1801, District residentsfully participated in federal elections as voters in Virginia and Maryland, the two states thatceded land in order to create the District of Columbia. [d. See An Act to Cede to Congress a Districtof Ten Miles Square in This State for the Seat of the Government of the United States, 1788 Md. Actsch. 46, reprinted in D.C. Code, 2001 Ed. An Act Authorizing Cession from MD. (West 2009).; see alsoAct for the Cession from the State of Virginia, 13 Va. Acts Ch. 32, reprinted in D.C. Code, 2001 Ed.Act of Cession from the State of Virgina (West 2009).351 See Jason I. Newman & Jacques B. DePuy, Bringing Democracy to the Nation's Last Co/ony: The District of Columbia Self-Government Act, 24 AM. U. L. REV. 537, 540 (1975).352 [d.353 REPORT TO THE A1TORNEY GENERAL, supra note 193, at 19-31.
TOW ARDS EQUAL FOOTING 41voting scheme onto Maryland residents without input from them. 354 This potentialconflict is just one of many matters that would have to be decided beforeDistrict residents could vote in Maryland elections. 355v. CAN THE DISTRICT AFFORD To BE A STATEThis author believes the question is better posed if inverted - can the Districtafford not to be a state? Revenue foregone due to limitations imposed by its·status significantly impacts the quality of life of District residents. Experts haveaddressed these limitations and what lifting them through Statehood could meanfor District finances. 356 The District is economically viable as a state, independentof special federal government support. 357A. What Effect, if any, Will Statehood Have on Federal Payments to D.C.?For many years, the District of Columbia received a special payment - referredto as "The Federal Payment" - that ended when the The District of ColumbiaRevitalization Act was enacted in 1998. 358 A recurring question has been whatwill become of federal contributions if the District becomes a state? The responseshave been similar; many believe the federal contributions will notchange. 359 Dr. Andrew Brimmer, as well as many other scholars, reached the354 Id.355 Id. This plan would keep the District out of state government, but there would be timeswhen District representation would be essential. Should the District send representatives to drawboundaries? State governments decide districting issues. The District would deserve a say. In Maryland,the Governor fills vacancies in the Senate. Would this require District residents to vote forGovernor? If not, one would represent the District in the federal government for whom they did notvote. That would make no sense. Last, should District residents vote in Maryland primary elections?If they have a say in the final decision, should they not have a say in the earlier decision?356 IF You FAVOR FREEDOM, supra note 3, at 32-42.357 Admission of the State of New Columbia into the Union: Hearing on H. R. 51 Before the H.Comm. on the District of Columbia, lOOth Cong., 1st Sess. (1987) (statement of Matthew Watson,Former Auditor, Dist. of Columbia); See also IF You FAVOR FREEDOM, supra note 3, at 33.358 Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Pub. L. No.1 05-33, 111 Stat. 251 (1997). The Act has animpact on eight major areas of the District Government: 1) retirement funds for certain classes ofD.C. employees; 2) financing the accumulated deficit; 3) reforming the criminal justice system; 4)management reform; 5) privatization of tax collections: 6) improving bond financing; 7) reform of theregulatory process; and 8) elimination of the federal payment. Id.359 Admission of the State of New Columbia into tire Union: Hearing on H.R. 5/ Before tire H.Comm. on the District of Columbia, looth Cong .• 1st Sess. (1987) (statement of Matthew Watson,Former Auditor, Dist. of Columbia).Although not legally compelled to, the President has supported and the Congress hasregularly appropriated federal payments for the District of Columbia. Upon admission as astate, the District would have no greater or lesser entitlement to receive continued payments.But, there is no reason to believe that the payments would not continue. While J believe thatthe District is financially viable as a state even without the continuance of the federal payment,there would certainly be some decline in the quality of services if the District does not
Page 2 and 3: University of the District of Colum
Page 8 and 9: 2 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICr OF COL
Page 10 and 11: 4 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF COL
Page 12 and 13: 6 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRIcr OF COL
Page 14 and 15: 8 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICf OF COL
Page 16 and 17: 10 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CO
Page 18 and 19: 12 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICI' OF C
Page 22 and 23: 16 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRlcr OF CO
Page 24 and 25: 18 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICf OF CO
Page 30 and 31: 24 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRIcr OF CO
Page 42 and 43: 36 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICr OF CO
Page 76 and 77: 70 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRIcr OF Co
Page 84 and 85: 78 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICI' OF C
Page 94 and 95: 88 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRKi OF COL
Page 96 and 97:
90 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CO
Page 98 and 99:
92 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICr OF CO
Page 100 and 101:
94 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICf OF CO
Page 102 and 103:
96 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICf OF CO
Page 104 and 105:
98 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CO
Page 106 and 107:
100 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICf OF C
Page 108 and 109:
102 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF C
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
BRINGING HOME THE BACON: A TWO·PRO
Page 122 and 123:
BRINGING HOME THE BACON: A TWO-PRON
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
APPEALING TO THE LEGISLATURE: A COM
Page 144 and 145:
POST-CONVICfION DNA & PRESERVATION
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
POST-CONVICTION DNA & PRESERVATION
Page 150 and 151:
POST-CONVICflON DNA & PRESERVATION
Page 152 and 153:
POST-CONVICfION DNA & PRESERV A nON
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
POST-CONVICTION DNA & PRESERVATION
Page 160 and 161:
MISSING IN ACTION:PRISONERS OF WAR
Page 162 and 163:
MISSING IN ACfION 157provide humane
Page 164 and 165:
MISSING IN ACTION 159quantity, qual
Page 166 and 167:
MISSING IN ACfION 161tion of the ca
Page 168 and 169:
MISSING IN ACI10N 163rently in the
Page 170 and 171:
MISSING IN ACfION 165Rasul v. Bush.
Page 172 and 173:
MISSING IN ACTION 167missions. ,,91
Page 174 and 175:
MISSING IN ACfION 169The Supreme Co
Page 176 and 177:
MISSING IN ACfION 171constitute a c
Page 178 and 179:
MISSING IN ACTION 173Court has open
Page 180 and 181:
MISSING IN ACfION 175sel. But, the
Page 182:
MISSING IN ACTION 177posed, efforts
show all

Download - UDC Law Review

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?