The District of Columbia is Not Being Taxed without Representation Like the American Colonies

           Advocates for statehood for the federal District of Columbia argue that it is being taxed without being represented in the United States Congress, like the argument made for the American Revolution by the Thirteen American Colonies against the United Kingdom that was the basis for the slogan, “No taxation without representation.”  However, there are major differences and there are other solutions besides statehood for more equality and to avoid constitutional concerns.

            The Colonies collectively are estimated to have had nearly a third of the population of the United Kingdom, yet had no representation in the more than 600-member British Parliament.  Furthermore, that Parliament sat remotely across the Atlantic, which took weeks for communication at the time.  The Federal District has an estimated population of about 700,000 out of well over 300 million, and the Congress sits in it.  Indeed, the main reason it is wrong that Columbia is unrepresented is that it is represented by the entire House of Representatives generally, which, under its rules, even dedicates a standing Committee to its affairs, although the District enjoys home rule, but particularly it is represented by a Delegate.   Like the Delegates of the territories under House rules, Columbia’s has powers equal to Representatives in committee and even on the floor, except voting on final passage of bills.

            A Republican proposal to eliminate the federal income tax obligations for District residents, which would obviate the taxation part of the argument, has been repeatedly rejected by Democrats.   Note: payroll taxes, which should be optional, are for the receipt for benefits.  An exemption could also be made for excise taxes.

            Another proposed solution has been to retrocede the residential portions of Washington to Maryland, just as had been done with parts of the District that had been ceded by Virginia.  Maryland should then be awarded an additional U.S. House seat for that District, at least, with a corresponding increase in the size of the House.  Note: I have argued for a significant increase in the size of the House from the current number of 435, which has not kept pace with population growth over the last several decades, which could give the current residents of the District additional seats.  The State of Maryland, including the former District, would continue to be represented by two U.S. Senators and the State would appoint the corresponding number of presidential and vice presidential Electors that would commensurate with the size of its congressional delegation.  Maryland’s current method of appointment is by popular election statewide with the slate of Electors of the presidential ticket receiving the most votes being sent to the Electoral College.

           The reason the Framers of the Constitution established a federal district for the capitol was to avoid the undue influence of any State.  Of particular concern would be the advocacy by a congressional delegation representing Colombia for growing government to increase state tax revenues or for patronage for residents.  Retrocession would give equality to the residents of the federal District without causing the degree of harm feared by the Framers.