Eleanor Holmes Norton: “Before I discuss the substance of H.R. 192, I will discuss democracy and the lack of it in D.C. The nearly 700,000…”

“Before I discuss the substance of H.R. 192, I will discuss democracy and the lack of it in D.C. The nearly 700,000 District residents have no voting representation in Congress, and Congress has the ultimate say, even on local D.C. matters. My Republican colleagues are correct that Congress has the constitutional authority to legislate on local D.C. matters, but the majority is wrong that Congress has a constitutional duty to do so. Instead, legislating on local D.C. matters is a choice. In Federalist No. 43, James Madison said of the residents of the future D.C.: ``As a municipal legislature for local purposes, derived from their own suffrages, will of course be allowed them. . . . '' The Supreme Court held in 1953 that: `` . . . there is no constitutional barrier to the delegation by Congress to the District of Columbia of full legislative power.'' D.C.'s local legislature, the Council, has 13 members. The members are elected by D.C. residents. If D.C. residents do not like how the members vote, they can vote them out of office. That is called democracy. Congress has 535 Members. The Members are elected by residents of their States. None are elected by D.C. residents. If D.C. residents do not like how the Members vote on local D.C. matters, they cannot vote them out of office. That is the antithesis of democracy. The merits of H.R. 192 should be irrelevant since there is never justification for Congress legislating on local D.C. matters.…”