And how, precisely, is this fair to the people of D.C.?
They have no oversight of Congress; they're essentially lab animals in a zoo run by people sent by other folks from faraway communities across the country. Disinterested zookeepers, at that, since they're there for actual legislation, not the hard work of municipal governance.
They're at the whims of a President they literally can't vote for, who can apparently do whatever he wants to pursue **his** policies in their district, to include defunding the District's organizations and schools and police.
And with respect to Mr. Jefferson, time has proven that state affiliation really doesn't matter to politicians or people or how people vote. Most of our states are actually fairly evenly split and it's not like the **actual** campuses of government cannot be immunized from state law if needed; it's not like allowing DC representation will somehow keep Congress from meeting or render POTUS homeless or evict the federal bureaucracy from their warrens.
Once again, I contend that if the population of DC was not predominantly of the demographics assumed to be supportive of "liberals", many of the same people defending Jefferson's disenfranchisement would instead be screaming for equality and statehood. Partisan advantage is a powerful incentive.
www.johnlocke.org
