[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 4 (Tuesday, January 15, 2013)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E33]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             INTRODUCTION OF THE NEW COLUMBIA ADMISSION ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON

                      of the district of columbia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, January 15, 2013

  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the New Columbia 
Admission Act. The residents of our nation's capital are and always 
have been citizens of the United States. Yet they are the only 
taxpaying Americans who are not treated as full and equal citizens. The 
only way for them to obtain the citizenship rights they are entitled to 
is through the same statehood used by other Americans. Therefore, I am 
introducing the New Columbia Admission Act to create a state from 
essentially the eight home-town wards of the District of Columbia. This 
51st state, however, would have no jurisdiction over the federal 
territory, or enclave that now consists of the Washington that Members 
of Congress and visitors associate with 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. Our bill provides that 
the State of New Columbia would be equal to the other fifty states in 
all respects. Consequently, residents of New Columbia would have all 
the rights of citizenship they are entitled to as taxpaying American 
citizens, including two senators and, initially, one House member.
  Just as the New Columbia Admission Act was the first bill I 
introduced after I was first sworn in as a Member of Congress in the 
102nd Congress in 1991, this is my first bill in the 113th Congress. 
Our first try for statehood received significant support in the House. 
In 1993, we got the first and only vote on statehood for the District, 
with nearly 60% 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 the committee of 
jurisdiction did not proceed further. Although this start was 
encouraging, 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 costs of some state functions, posing 
fiscal barriers to entry into the Union on an equal basis, and in 
addition, the Democrats lost control of the House. The District of 
Columbia recognizes that it can enter the Union only on an equal basis 
and is prepared to do so. I then introduced the second best option 
available, a bill for Senate and House representation for D.C., and 
later, when Republicans controlled the House, a bill for a House vote. 
Because these bills had strong support from Democrats, I will introduce 
them again as well, but with the understanding that residents will 
never stop short of their full citizenship rights and, therefore, of 
statehood.
  The final analysis is that we have no alternative. To be content with 
less than statehood is to concede the equality of citizenship that is 
the birthright of our residents as citizens of the United States. It is 
too late for the residents of the District of Columbia to make such a 
concession as we approach the 212th year in our fight for equal 
treatment in our country. This bill is the first I file in the 113th 
Congress, and it reaffirms our determination to obtain each and every 
right enjoyed by citizens of the United States by becoming the 51st 
State of the Union.

                          ____________________