[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 5 (Wednesday, January 12, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E56]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    INTRODUCTION OF THE NEW COLUMBIA ADMISSION ACT, THE DISTRICT OF 
 COLUMBIA EQUAL REPRESENTATION ACT AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA HOUSE 
                           VOTING RIGHTS ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON

                      of the district of columbia

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, January 12, 2011

  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce three bills that 
provide different approaches for obtaining congressional representation 
and full democracy for the more than 600,000 American citizens who 
reside in the nation's capital and pay the full array of federal taxes 
that support the government of the United States, but have no voting 
representation in Congress. These bills are the New Columbia Admission 
Act, the District of Columbia Equal Representation Act (formerly titled 
the No Taxation Without Representation Act) and the District of 
Columbia House Voting Rights Act. These are the first bills of our Free 
and Equal D.C. series--bills that address the missing rights to self-
government and democracy that other American citizens enjoy--to be 
introduced in the coming weeks. I have introduced all three of these 
bills during different periods in the past. I introduce them today 
after listening to residents at the many Community Conversations I have 
held in each ward of the District since a dangerous gun amendment--
which would have eliminated all of the District's gun laws and would 
have done much more--forced delay of the District of Columbia House 
Voting Rights Act in April 2010.
  These Community Conversations, as well as other constituent meetings 
and correspondence, have indicated that these three bills have 
significant support among D.C. residents. I introduce them today, a 
week after the new House majority eliminated the District's vote in the 
Committee of the Whole, despite a finding by the federal courts that 
this vote is constitutional. Recognizing that the House would not 
consider any approach to representation and full democracy for D.C. 
residents at this time, I am introducing bills that each had majority 
support in the District among residents during the years that each was 
under consideration. D.C. residents, in their quest for full democracy, 
have always embraced the approach that appeared most timely and 
possible. Because we are blocked from pursuing any approach at this 
time, I am introducing the bills that residents have indicated would 
have their continued support. These bills send a direct message to 
Congress that residents are undeterred in the pursuit of our rights, 
and the bills also will help ensure no weakening in the momentum 
residents have built here and throughout the country over the past 
several years for full democracy. However, I have not included a bill 
to fully or partially retrocede the District of Columbia to the State 
of Maryland, ideas that also have been mentioned for many years. Few 
District residents have indicated support for retrocession approaches, 
and, in our experience, even fewer Maryland public officials and 
residents support them. It is inconsistent with the District's pursuit 
of self-determination to impose upon another jurisdiction without 
consent from that jurisdiction.
  D.C. residents are entitled to nothing less than full and equal 
citizenship, which can only be achieved through statehood. Accordingly, 
the first bill I introduced when I came to Congress in 1991, the New 
Columbia Admission Act, would have made the District of Columbia the 
51st state, the State of New Columbia. The New Columbia Admission Act 
would create a state from essentially the eight home-town wards of the 
District. However, the state would have no jurisdiction over the 
federal territory in the District of Columbia, consisting of most of 
the Washington that Members of Congress and visitors associate with 
Washington, DC, the capital of our country. The U.S. Capitol premises, 
the principal federal monuments, federal buildings and grounds, the 
National Mall and other federal property here would remain under 
federal jurisdiction, as elsewhere. Our bill provides that the State of 
New Columbia would be equal to the other 50 states in all respects, in 
that the residents of New Columbia would have all the rights of 
citizenship they are entitled to as taxpaying American citizens. New 
Columbia would have two senators and, initially, one House member.
  The New Columbia Admission Act has received significant support in 
the House in the past. In 1993, we got the first vote on statehood for 
the District of Columbia, with nearly 60 percent of Democrats and one 
Republican voting for the New Columbia Admission Act. The Senate held a 
hearing on its companion bill, introduced by Senator Ted Kennedy, but 
declined to hold a markup in committee or to consider it on the floor. 
Soon thereafter, the District, which is the only U.S. city that pays 
for state functions, found it necessary to ask the federal government 
to take over the cost of some state functions, posing fiscal barriers 
to entry into the Union on an equal basis, and the Democrats lost 
control of the House. This temporary setback led me to introduce the 
second best option then available, a bill for Senate and House 
representation for D.C.
  Today, I also introduce the District of Columbia Equal Representation 
Act, which would give the District of Columbia two senators and, 
initially, one House member. With statehood delayed, Senator Joseph 
Lieberman and I introduced this bill for several years as the No 
Taxation Without Representation Act. The House, which was controlled by 
Republicans, did not act on the bill. The Senate held hearings and 
marked up the bill in 2002, but did not bring it to the floor.
  Today, I also introduce the District of Columbia House Voting Rights 
Act, a bill for one House member, initially, for D.C. residents. In 
2005, when I continued to be in the minority, then-Representative Tom 
Davis and I partnered on a bipartisan bill, the District of Columbia 
House Voting Rights Act, giving House votes to Democratic D.C. and 
Republican Utah. The D.C. House Voting Rights Act marked the first time 
in decades that we achieved large House and Senate majorities for 
voting rights for D.C. residents, and brought the city closer than we 
have ever come to voting representation in more than two centuries. 
This bill likely would be law today had the gun lobby not insisted on 
adding an amendment that would not only have eliminated the District's 
gun laws, but also would have added measures making the nation's 
capital a virtually gun law-free jurisdiction.
  In introducing these bills, we lay down a marker of our determination 
to never relent or retreat until we have obtained each and every right 
to which we are entitled, whether through the frustration and anguish 
of the incrementalism that Congress has always forced upon us or with 
the full and complete set of rights, which would be achieved through 
statehood. We will be watchful to both make and seize every opportunity 
to pursue our rights, regardless of who controls Congress. We accept no 
imposed limit on our equal rights as American citizens, and we will 
pursue them all until the day when there is no difference in 
citizenship between residents of the District of Columbia and other 
American citizens.

                          ____________________