Rachel KurziusVerified account

Maloney “is going to be carrying the ball today. I’m going to be sitting next to her but that’s all I can do,” says Norton

“The Republicans are not going to let this happen easily,” says Norton, calling this Maloney’s “most challenging markup yet (bc) Republicans are hellbent on throwing up obstacles. We are prepared for them.” Norton says this bill is “destined to pass” on the House floor

Hoyer notes that NJ Rep Jeff Van Drew, once a supporter of the statehood as Dem, took his name off the legislation once he became a member of the GOP

Norton says that she’s expecting delay tactics and lots of non-germane amendments from GOPers—“it’s not how you would expect a hearing about broadening democracy to go”

The meeting has come to order! "The United States is a democracy, but its capital is not," says @CarolynBMaloney. "This is absolutely wrong. It violates everything we stand for as Americans."

Maloney breaks down what she seems as Republican opposition: 1. That D.C. is corrupt (she says people making that argument ignore issues in their own states/party) 2. That D.C. would elect Dems, an argument Maloney characterizes as disturbing and anti-Democratic

Louisiana Rep Clay Higgins (R). "You want to make a 51st state, knock yourself out--follow the constitutionally mandated process." He says he's not against it. "Let us consider it," but he wants more hearings on the constitutional implications before a markup

Va Rep Gerry Connolly (D) doubts the sincerity of the GOP. "Does anyone in this room really think (Jim Jordan) would vote for a constitutional amendment?" He says that D.C. didn't exist when the Constitution was written

Connolly notes that constitutional amendments aren't the only way that states become states--he brings up West Virginia as an example

Jim Jordan responds to Connolly's question of where GOP has been on this: "Where have YOU been?", noting that 60 new pages of the bill were submitted less than a week ago

Jamie Raskin says that most states were not admitted via constitutional amendment (FYI the process D.C is using is literally called the "Tennessee plan"), and Congress has previously changed the borders of the capital, meaning it has the power to make D.C. a state

On to TN Rep Mark Green (R): he says his opposition is bc of the oath he took to uphold the Constitution. "It's not to the people of this country...it's to defend the Constitution against all enemies." He admits Federalist 43 to the record (read it here: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed43.asp … )

Raskin counters that Norton's legislation doesn't make the seat of government a state--it distinguishes between the federal govt and the residential/biz parts of D.C. Green isn't buying it

It's Md Rep John Sarbanes (D), who wants to go back to the Ancient Greeks and talk about the marketplace of ideas. he says some Americans are being forcibly kept out of the political town square thru voter suppression and thru the disenfranchisement of D.C. residents

GA Rep Jody Hice (R) says the Founding Fathers designed D.C. to be a separate seat of govt outside of a state ... "and now we're going to make it a state?! ... I just can't even wrap my mind around the process of where this cmte is taking us"

It's time for Tx Rep Chip Roy (R): "If we think D.C. should be a state bc it's got 700,000 people despite the fact that many of those people chose to live there ... the question is just simply whether this small area should be a state. The people here can move if they choose to."

Wisconsin Rep Glenn Grothman (R): "D.C. is not a state, it is a city ... It's a govt town with a little bit of tourism connected to the buildings." Grothman gets the biggest response so far from the crowd, which doesn't sound too happy with his remarks

NM Rep Deb Haaland (D): "If we're talking about land, this is Indian land," to scattered applause. "We talk about land and we talk about fairness and democracy and I felt it impt to recognize that there were people here long before it was anyone's state." She supports the bill

Raskin is back to address "a few floating fallacies" 1. idea that a capital city shouldn't vote (brings up state capitals) If Paris didn't have rep., "you'd have another French revolution," he says. 2. Notes that fed govt employees vote, leading to lil comedy routine w/ Connolly

There's a q about what would happen to the 23rd Amendment, which gave D.C. representation in the electoral college. Norton says it would be appealed, and she doesn't imagine that being controversial at all bc no one would want D.C. to have double the votes