taxation without representation

One morning watching the news, I listened to Washingtonians be alarmed at the low numbers of US citizens who would support their "right" to have a voice in Congress. They demonstrate this continued frustration through their license plates that read "Taxation Without Representation."

If asked, I would vote against DC becoming a state or having a voice in Congress. Why, you may ask, would I want to deny fellow US citizens the right to be represented? The reason is I conceptualize the United States of America, perhaps a bit differently than the average person.

I think of the USA as the original European Union. We are a bunch of states that have agreed to cooperate for the greater good of our area. We have our own quirky laws within each state. We make most of our decisions at the state level. And really, the federal government has little recourse to persuade a state to fall in line (e.g., take away funds). International human rights groups recently realized this issue when Texas planned to execute someone and the US federal government had no recourse to make Texas not execute the guy. And we all know how much Texas likes its executions! Similarly, California was persuaded to join the union in 1850 because the northern forces were concerned about its growing population and power in the west. The US union, at that time, did not want another powerhouse competing (keep your friends close and enemies closer) and needed more non-slave states to support its cause against the confederates. And as we now know, California joined the union. Therefore, because the USA is a union of states, I believe it is important that we have a dedicated "federal" space -- and DC serves that purpose.

I have noticed that DC has a great transportation system, it is working on improving its public schools, there are efforts to increase its tourism, most places are handicap accessible, the museums are free, and a host of other benefits exist for those living in this city. It seems, when federal legislators live in the area they still manage to have money funneled here, despite DC not being a state. However, if DC were to become a state, it would not only serve as the voice of the union it would also be in its interests to channel even more funds to its local constituency. I can only imagine the beautification projects that would start with even more $$ coming this way. Hence, I'd prefer to keep the status quo and leave this area without its representation.

-----------------------------

P.S. Coming to work this morning, I listened to a guy lament about his roommates to a woman:

• "It's the small things that are a bother," he says, "they don't turn off the lights when they leave a room, they don't answer the phone when it rings, and they leave their computers running all night. It's running up our bills."
• His friend responded, "Yea, and it's not good for the environment."
• He retorted, "Oh yea. But, it's not good for our electricity bill."

I think more along his lines. Sometimes, there's just no need to abstract a situation and try to bring in broader considerations. The practical, tangible, immeadiate impact is it's not good for the electricty bill.... and no one wants to pay extra for their bills!