The Senate Site: Utah's 4th Seat, Episode 3271

Part of an op-ed in today's Washington Times:

The Framers didn't intend to create a city where American citizens were completely unrepresented. But this is the situation we have.

Some have called the D.C. House Voting Rights Act a novel approach to exercising the District Clause of the Constitution to provide representation for D.C. residents. However, the important research of individuals like Viet Dinh and Judge Ken Starr shows Congress first used that power to allow D.C. residents to vote in Maryland and Virginia between 1790 and 1801. Congress rescinded that right by statue in 1801. Furthermore, the courts have upheld Congress' treatment of Washington, D.C., as a "state" under many provisions of the Constitution. Sen. Orrin Hatch, Utah Republican and himself a constitutional expert, recently reaffirmed the constitutionality of the D.C. House Voting Rights Act.

The Framers stated that Congress would exercise "exclusive legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District... as may . .. become the seat of Government of the United States." The Framers did not tell Congress where to put the district. The Framers did not tell the Congress how to govern that district. The Framers simply empowered the Congress to do whatever it deemed appropriate, within the confines of the Constitution, to establish and manage the Federal District.

Some opponents claim a constitutional amendment is the only way to grant the citizens of the District voting rights. But the argument that a right granted by statute and rescinded by statute can now only be granted by a constitutional amendment fundamentally makes no sense.

As per usual, there is no mention of Utah or correcting the bureaucratic injustice that shortchanges our citizens every time a vote is taken in the US House of Representatives.

Hat tip: DC Vote.