Madam Speaker, there was talk about retrocession. There can be arguments that the former retrocession was actually unconstitutional. In fact, the House of Representatives tried to pass a bill to say just that. It passed, and it, unfortunately, sat in the Senate Judiciary Committee without passing and challenges to the Supreme Court were dismissed on procedural grounds. Additionally, we have to remember the many reasons why the District is just that, a district. It is because the Founding Fathers did not want to create an imperial State that would have too much influence and control over the Capitol. My colleague from Maryland actually wrote about this in 1990 in a law review article published in the Catholic University Law Review. ``The Representatives from the new State, likely living minutes from their offices, will theoretically devote more time to institutional and committee politics and less to constant travel back and forth across the country, increasing their importance and influence on Capitol Hill.'' That was my colleague from Maryland. That is not my assertion. If D.C. does become a State, Madam Speaker, you will create almost by definition a super Congressman in this body and two super Senators that yield much more influence than others who have to travel back and forth to their district. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Lesko).
Share & report
More from Guy Reschenthaler
Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 756 and ask for its immediate consideration. The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 756 Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this…
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and in support of the underlying legislation. House Resolution 891 provides for consideration of three measures: H.R. 5283, H.R. 5961, and…
Mr. Speaker, just remember that the Senate has passed zero appropriations bills. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Lesko).
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania? There was no objection…





