[Pages H2521-H2544]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

WASHINGTON, D.C. ADMISSION ACT

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1017, I call up
the bill (H.R. 51) to provide for the admission of the State of
Washington, D.C. into the Union, and ask for its immediate
consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1017, an
amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of the
Rules Committee Print 116-55, modified by the amendment printed in part
A of House Report 116-436, is adopted and the bill, as amended, is
considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

H.R. 51

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives
of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the
``Washington, D.C. Admission Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

TITLE I--STATE OF WASHINGTON, D.C.

Subtitle A--Procedures for Admission

Sec. 101. Admission into the Union.
Sec. 102. Election of Senators and Representative.
Sec. 103. Issuance of presidential proclamation.

Subtitle B--Seat of Government of the United States

Sec. 111. Territory and boundaries.
Sec. 112. Description of Capital.
Sec. 113. Retention of title to property.
Sec. 114. Effect of admission on current laws of seat of Government of
United States.
Sec. 115. Capital National Guard.
Sec. 116. Termination of legal status of seat of Government of United
States as municipal corporation.

Subtitle C--General Provisions Relating to Laws of State

Sec. 121. Effect of admission on current laws.
Sec. 122. Pending actions and proceedings.
Sec. 123. Limitation on authority to tax Federal property.
Sec. 124. United States nationality.

TITLE II--INTERESTS OF FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

Subtitle A--Federal Property

Sec. 201. Treatment of military lands.
Sec. 202. Waiver of claims to Federal property.

Subtitle B--Federal Courts

Sec. 211. Residency requirements for certain Federal officials.
Sec. 212. Renaming of Federal courts.
Sec. 213. Conforming amendments relating to Department of Justice.
Sec. 214. Treatment of pretrial services in United States District
Court.

Subtitle C--Federal Elections

Sec. 221. Permitting individuals residing in Capital to vote in Federal
elections in State of most recent domicile.
Sec. 222. Repeal of Office of District of Columbia Delegate.
Sec. 223. Repeal of law providing for participation of seat of
government in election of President and Vice-President.
Sec. 224. Expedited procedures for consideration of constitutional
amendment repealing 23rd Amendment.

TITLE III--CONTINUATION OF CERTAIN AUTHORITIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Subtitle A--Employee Benefits

Sec. 301. Federal benefit payments under certain retirement programs.
Sec. 302. Continuation of Federal civil service benefits for employees
first employed prior to establishment of District of
Columbia merit personnel system.
Sec. 303. Obligations of Federal Government under judges' retirement
program.

Subtitle B--Agencies

Sec. 311. Public Defender Service.
Sec. 312. Prosecutions.
Sec. 313. Service of United States Marshals.
Sec. 314. Designation of felons to facilities of Bureau of Prisons.
Sec. 315. Parole and supervision.
Sec. 316. Courts.

Subtitle C--Other Programs and Authorities

Sec. 321. Application of the College Access Act.
Sec. 322. Application of the Scholarships for Opportunity and Results
Act.
Sec. 323. Medicaid Federal medical assistance percentage.
Sec. 324. Federal planning commissions.
Sec. 325. Role of Army Corps of Engineers in supplying water.
Sec. 326. Requirements to be located in District of Columbia.

TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 401. General definitions.
Sec. 402. Statehood Transition Commission.
Sec. 403. Certification of enactment by President.
Sec. 404. Severability.

[[Page H2522]]

TITLE I--STATE OF WASHINGTON, D.C.

Subtitle A--Procedures for Admission

SEC. 101. ADMISSION INTO THE UNION.

(a) In General.--Subject to the provisions of this Act,
upon the issuance of the proclamation required by section
103(a), the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth is
declared to be a State of the United States of America, and
is declared admitted into the Union on an equal footing with
the other States in all respects whatever.
(b) Constitution of State.--The State Constitution shall
always be republican in form and shall not be repugnant to
the Constitution of the United States or the principles of
the Declaration of Independence.
(c) Nonseverability.--If any provision of this section, or
the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is
held to be invalid, the remaining provisions of this Act and
any amendments made by this Act shall be treated as invalid.

SEC. 102. ELECTION OF SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVE.

(a) Issuance of Proclamation.--
(1) In general.--Not more than 30 days after receiving
certification of the enactment of this Act from the President
pursuant to section 403, the Mayor shall issue a proclamation
for the first elections for 2 Senators and one Representative
in Congress from the State, subject to the provisions of this
section.
(2) Special rule for elections of senators.--In the
elections of Senators from the State pursuant to paragraph
(1), the 2 Senate offices shall be separately identified and
designated, and no person may be a candidate for both
offices. No such identification or designation of either of
the offices shall refer to or be taken to refer to the terms
of such offices, or in any way impair the privilege of the
Senate to determine the class to which each of the Senators
shall be assigned.
(b) Rules for Conducting Elections.--
(1) In general.--The proclamation of the Mayor issued under
subsection (a) shall provide for the holding of a primary
election and a general election, and at such elections the
officers required to be elected as provided in subsection (a)
shall be chosen by the qualified voters of the District of
Columbia in the manner required by the laws of the District
of Columbia.
(2) Certification of results.--Election results shall be
certified in the manner required by the laws of the District
of Columbia, except that the Mayor shall also provide written
certification of the results of such elections to the
President.
(c) Assumption of Duties.--Upon the admission of the State
into the Union, the Senators and Representative elected at
the elections described in subsection (a) shall be entitled
to be admitted to seats in Congress and to all the rights and
privileges of Senators and Representatives of the other
States in Congress.
(d) Effect of Admission on House of Representatives
Membership.--
(1) Permanent increase in number of members.--Effective
with respect to the Congress during which the State is
admitted into the Union and each succeeding Congress, the
House of Representatives shall be composed of 436 Members,
including any Members representing the State.
(2) Initial number of representatives for state.--Until the
taking effect of the first apportionment of Members occurring
after the admission of the State into the Union, the State
shall be entitled to one Representative in the House of
Representatives upon its admission into the Union.
(3) Apportionment of members resulting from admission of
state.--
(A) Apportionment.--Section 22(a) of the Act entitled ``An
Act to provide for the fifteenth and subsequent decennial
censuses and to provide for apportionment of Representatives
in Congress'', approved June 18, 1929 (2 U.S.C. 2a(a)), is
amended by striking ``the then existing number of
Representatives'' and inserting ``436 Representatives''.
(B) Effective date.--The amendment made by subparagraph (A)
shall apply with respect to the first regular decennial
census conducted after the admission of the State into the
Union and each subsequent regular decennial census.

SEC. 103. ISSUANCE OF PRESIDENTIAL PROCLAMATION.

(a) In General.--The President, upon the certification of
the results of the elections of the officers required to be
elected as provided in section 102(a), shall, not later than
90 days after receiving such certification pursuant to
section 102(b)(2), issue a proclamation announcing the
results of such elections as so ascertained.
(b) Admission of State Upon Issuance of Proclamation.--Upon
the issuance of the proclamation by the President under
subsection (a), the State shall be declared admitted into the
Union as provided in section 101(a).

Subtitle B--Seat of Government of the United States

SEC. 111. TERRITORY AND BOUNDARIES.

(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), the
State shall consist of all of the territory of the District
of Columbia as of the date of the enactment of this Act,
subject to the results of the metes and bounds survey
conducted under subsection (c).
(b) Exclusion of Portion Remaining as Seat of Government of
United States.--The territory of the State shall not include
the area described in section 112, which shall be known as
the ``Capital'' and shall serve as the seat of the Government
of the United States, as provided in clause 17 of section 8
of article I of the Constitution of the United States.
(c) Metes and Bounds Survey.--Not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the President (in
consultation with the Chair of the National Capital Planning
Commission) shall conduct a metes and bounds survey of the
Capital, as described in section 112(b).

SEC. 112. DESCRIPTION OF CAPITAL.

(a) In General.--Subject to subsection (c), upon the
admission of the State into the Union, the Capital shall
consist of the property described in subsection (b) and shall
include the principal Federal monuments, the White House, the
Capitol Building, the United States Supreme Court Building,
and the Federal executive, legislative, and judicial office
buildings located adjacent to the Mall and the Capitol
Building (as such terms are used in section 8501(a) of title
40, United States Code).
(b) General Description.--Upon the admission of the State
into the Union, the boundaries of the Capital shall be as
follows: Beginning at the intersection of the southern right-
of-way of F Street NE and the eastern right-of-way of 2nd
Street NE;
(1) thence south along said eastern right-of-way of 2nd
Street NE to its intersection with the northeastern right-of-
way of Maryland Avenue NE;
(2) thence southwest along said northeastern right-of-way
of Maryland Avenue NE to its intersection with the northern
right-of-way of Constitution Avenue NE;
(3) thence west along said northern right-of-way of
Constitution Avenue NE to its intersection with the eastern
right-of-way of 1st Street NE;
(4) thence south along said eastern right-of-way of 1st
Street NE to its intersection with the southeastern right-of-
way of Maryland Avenue NE;
(5) thence northeast along said southeastern right-of-way
of Maryland Avenue NE to its intersection with the eastern
right-of-way of 2nd Street SE;
(6) thence south along said eastern right-of-way of 2nd
Street SE to the eastern right-of-way of 2nd Street SE;
(7) thence south along said eastern right-of-way of 2nd
Street SE to its intersection with the northern property
boundary of the property designated as Square 760 Lot 803;
(8) thence east along said northern property boundary of
Square 760 Lot 803 to its intersection with the western
right-of-way of 3rd Street SE;
(9) thence south along said western right-of-way of 3rd
Street SE to its intersection with the northern right-of-way
of Independence Avenue SE;
(10) thence west along said northern right-of-way of
Independence Avenue SE to its intersection with the
northwestern right-of-way of Pennsylvania Avenue SE;
(11) thence northwest along said northwestern right-of-way
of Pennsylvania Avenue SE to its intersection with the
eastern right-of-way of 2nd Street SE;
(12) thence south along said eastern right-of-way of 2nd
Street SE to its intersection with the southern right-of-way
of C Street SE;
(13) thence west along said southern right-of-way of C
Street SE to its intersection with the eastern right-of-way
of 1st Street SE;
(14) thence south along said eastern right-of-way of 1st
Street SE to its intersection with the southern right-of-way
of D Street SE;
(15) thence west along said southern right-of-way of D
Street SE to its intersection with the eastern right-of-way
of South Capitol Street;
(16) thence south along said eastern right-of-way of South
Capitol Street to its intersection with the northwestern
right-of-way of Canal Street SE;
(17) thence southeast along said northwestern right-of-way
of Canal Street SE to its intersection with the southern
right-of-way of E Street SE;
(18) thence east along said southern right-of-way of said E
Street SE to its intersection with the western right-of-way
of 1st Street SE;
(19) thence south along said western right-of-way of 1st
Street SE to its intersection with the southernmost corner of
the property designated as Square 736S Lot 801;
(20) thence west along a line extended due west from said
corner of said property designated as Square 736S Lot 801 to
its intersection with the southwestern right-of-way of New
Jersey Avenue SE;
(21) thence southeast along said southwestern right-of-way
of New Jersey Avenue SE to its intersection with the
northwestern right-of-way of Virginia Avenue SE;
(22) thence northwest along said northwestern right-of-way
of Virginia Avenue SE to its intersection with the western
right-of-way of South Capitol Street;
(23) thence north along said western right-of-way of South
Capitol Street to its intersection with the southern right-
of-way of E Street SW;
(24) thence west along said southern right-of-way of E
Street SW to its end;
(25) thence west along a line extending said southern
right-of-way of E Street SW westward to its intersection with
the eastern right-of-way of 2nd Street SW;
(26) thence north along said eastern right-of-way of 2nd
Street SW to its intersection with the southwestern right-of-
way of Virginia Avenue SW;
(27) thence northwest along said southwestern right-of-way
of Virginia Avenue SW to its intersection with the western
right-of-way of 3rd Street SW;
(28) thence north along said western right-of-way of 3rd
Street SW to its intersection with the northern right-of-way
of D Street SW;
(29) thence west along said northern right-of-way of D
Street SW to its intersection with the eastern right-of-way
of 4th Street SW;
(30) thence north along said eastern right-of-way of 4th
Street SW to its intersection with the northern right-of-way
of C Street SW;
(31) thence west along said northern right-of-way of C
Street SW to its intersection with the eastern right-of-way
of 6th Street SW;

[[Page H2523]]

(32) thence north along said eastern right-of-way of 6th
Street SW to its intersection with the northern right-of-way
of Independence Avenue SW;
(33) thence west along said northern right-of-way of
Independence Avenue SW to its intersection with the western
right-of-way of 12th Street SW;
(34) thence south along said western right-of-way of 12th
Street SW to its intersection with the northern right-of-way
of D Street SW;
(35) thence west along said northern right-of-way of D
Street SW to its intersection with the eastern right-of-way
of 14th Street SW;
(36) thence south along said eastern right-of-way of 14th
Street SW to its intersection with the northeastern boundary
of the Consolidated Rail Corporation railroad easement;
(37) thence southwest along said northeastern boundary of
the Consolidated Rail Corporation railroad easement to its
intersection with the eastern shore of the Potomac River;
(38) thence generally northwest along said eastern shore of
the Potomac River to its intersection with a line extending
westward the northern boundary of the property designated as
Square 12 Lot 806;
(39) thence east along said line extending westward the
northern boundary of the property designated as Square 12 Lot
806 to the northern property boundary of the property
designated as Square 12 Lot 806, and continuing east along
said northern boundary of said property designated as Square
12 Lot 806 to its northeast corner;
(40) thence east along a line extending east from said
northeast corner of the property designated as Square 12 Lot
806 to its intersection with the western boundary of the
property designated as Square 33 Lot 87;
(41) thence south along said western boundary of the
property designated as Square 33 Lot 87 to its intersection
with the northwest corner of the property designated as
Square 33 Lot 88;
(42) thence counter-clockwise around the boundary of said
property designated as Square 33 Lot 88 to its southeast
corner, which is along the northern right-of-way of E Street
NW;
(43) thence east along said northern right-of-way of E
Street NW to its intersection with the western right-of-way
of 18th Street NW;
(44) thence south along said western right-of-way of 18th
Street NW to its intersection with the southwestern right-of-
way of Virginia Avenue NW;
(45) thence southeast along said southwestern right-of-way
of Virginia Avenue NW to its intersection with the northern
right-of-way of Constitution Avenue NW;
(46) thence east along said northern right-of-way of
Constitution Avenue NW to its intersection with the eastern
right-of-way of 17th Street NW;
(47) thence north along said eastern right-of-way of 17th
Street NW to its intersection with the southern right-of-way
of H Street NW;
(48) thence east along said southern right-of-way of H
Street NW to its intersection with the northwest corner of
the property designated as Square 221 Lot 35;
(49) thence counter-clockwise around the boundary of said
property designated as Square 221 Lot 35 to its southeast
corner, which is along the boundary of the property
designated as Square 221 Lot 37;
(50) thence counter-clockwise around the boundary of said
property designated as Square 221 Lot 37 to its southwest
corner, which it shares with the property designated as
Square 221 Lot 818;
(51) thence south along the boundary of said property
designated as Square 221 Lot 818 to its southwest corner,
which it shares with the property designated as Square 221
Lot 40;
(52) thence south along the boundary of said property
designated as Square 221 Lot 40 to its southwest corner;
(53) thence east along the southern border of said property
designated as Square 221 Lot 40 to its intersection with the
northwest corner of the property designated as Square 221 Lot
820;
(54) thence south along the western boundary of said
property designated as Square 221 Lot 820 to its southwest
corner, which it shares with the property designated as
Square 221 Lot 39;
(55) thence south along the western boundary of said
property designated as Square 221 Lot 39 to its southwest
corner, which is along the northern right-of-way of
Pennsylvania Avenue NW;
(56) thence east along said northern right-of-way of
Pennsylvania Avenue NW to its intersection with the western
right-of-way of 15th Street NW;
(57) thence south along said western right-of-way of 15th
Street NW to its intersection with a line extending northwest
from the southern right-of-way of the portion of Pennsylvania
Avenue NW north of Pershing Square;
(58) thence southeast along said line extending the
southern right-of-way of Pennsylvania Avenue NW to the
southern right-of-way of Pennsylvania Avenue NW, and
continuing southeast along said southern right-of-way of
Pennsylvania Avenue NW to its intersection with the western
right-of-way of 14th Street NW;
(59) thence south along said western right-of-way of 14th
Street NW to its intersection with a line extending west from
the southern right-of-way of D Street NW;
(60) thence east along said line extending west from the
southern right-of-way of D Street NW to the southern right-
of-way of D Street NW, and continuing east along said
southern right-of-way of D Street NW to its intersection with
the eastern right-of-way of 13\1/2\ Street NW;
(61) thence north along said eastern right-of-way of 13\1/
2\ Street NW to its intersection with the southern right-of-
way of Pennsylvania Avenue NW;
(62) thence east and southeast along said southern right-
of-way of Pennsylvania Avenue NW to its intersection with the
western right-of-way of 12th Street NW;
(63) thence south along said western right-of-way of 12th
Street NW to its intersection with a line extending to the
west the southern boundary of the property designated as
Square 324 Lot 809;
(64) thence east along said line to the southwest corner of
said property designated as Square 324 Lot 809, and
continuing northeast along the southern boundary of said
property designated as Square 324 Lot 809 to its eastern
corner, which it shares with the property designated as
Square 323 Lot 802;
(65) thence east along the southern boundary of said
property designated as Square 323 Lot 802 to its southeast
corner, which it shares with the property designated as
Square 324 Lot 808;
(66) thence counter-clockwise around the boundary of said
property designated as Square 324 Lot 808 to its northeastern
corner, which is along the southern right-of-way of
Pennsylvania Avenue NW;
(67) thence southeast along said southern right-of-way of
Pennsylvania Avenue NW to its intersection with the eastern
right-of-way of 4th Street NW;
(68) thence north along a line extending north from said
eastern right-of-way of 4th Street NW to its intersection
with the southern right-of-way of C Street NW;
(69) thence east along said southern right-of-way of C
Street NW to its intersection with the eastern right-of-way
of 3rd Street NW;
(70) thence north along said eastern right-of-way of 3rd
Street NW to its intersection with the southern right-of-way
of D Street NW;
(71) thence east along said southern right-of-way of D
Street NW to its intersection with the western right-of-way
of 1st Street NW;
(72) thence south along said western right-of-way of 1st
Street NW to its intersection with the northern right-of-way
of C Street NW;
(73) thence west along said northern right-of-way of C
Street NW to its intersection with the western right-of-way
of 2nd Street NW;
(74) thence south along said western right-of-way of 2nd
Street NW to its intersection with the northern right-of-way
of Constitution Avenue NW;
(75) thence east along said northern right-of-way of
Constitution Avenue NW to its intersection with the
northeastern right-of-way of Louisiana Avenue NW;
(76) thence northeast along said northeastern right-of-way
of Louisiana Avenue NW to its intersection with the
southwestern right-of-way of New Jersey Avenue NW;
(77) thence northwest along said southwestern right-of-way
of New Jersey Avenue NW to its intersection with the northern
right-of-way of D Street NW;
(78) thence east along said northern right-of-way of D
Street NW to its intersection with the northeastern right-of-
way of Louisiana Avenue NW;
(79) thence northeast along said northwestern right-of-way
of Louisiana Avenue NW to its intersection with the western
right-of-way of North Capitol Street;
(80) thence north along said western right-of-way of North
Capitol Street to its intersection with the southwestern
right-of-way of Massachusetts Avenue NW;
(81) thence southeast along said southwestern right-of-way
of Massachusetts Avenue NW to the southwestern right-of-way
of Massachusetts Avenue NE;
(82) thence southeast along said southwestern right-of-way
of Massachusetts Avenue NE to the southern right-of-way of
Columbus Circle NE;
(83) thence counter-clockwise along said southern right-of-
way of Columbus Circle NE to its intersection with the
southern right-of way of F Street NE; and
(84) thence east along said southern right-of-way of F
Street NE to the point of beginning.
(c) Exclusion of Building Serving as State Capitol.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, after
the admission of the State into the Union, the Capital shall
not be considered to include the building known as the ``John
A. Wilson Building'', as described and designated under
section 601(a) of the Omnibus Spending Reduction Act of 1993
(sec. 10-1301(a), D.C. Official Code).
(d) Clarification of Treatment of Frances Perkins
Building.--The entirety of the Frances Perkins Building,
including any portion of the Building which is north of D
Street Northwest, shall be included in the Capital.

SEC. 113. RETENTION OF TITLE TO PROPERTY.

(a) Retention of Federal Title.--The United States shall
have and retain title to, or jurisdiction over, for purposes
of administration and maintenance, all real and personal
property with respect to which the United States holds title
or jurisdiction for such purposes on the day before the date
of the admission of the State into the Union.
(b) Retention of State Title.--The State shall have and
retain title to, or jurisdiction over, for purposes of
administration and maintenance, all real and personal
property with respect to which the District of Columbia holds
title or jurisdiction for such purposes on the day before the
date of the admission of the State into the Union.

SEC. 114. EFFECT OF ADMISSION ON CURRENT LAWS OF SEAT OF
GOVERNMENT OF UNITED STATES.

Except as otherwise provided in this Act, the laws of the
District of Columbia which are in effect on the day before
the date of the admission of the State into the Union
(without regard to whether such laws were enacted by Congress
or by the District of Columbia) shall apply in the Capital in
the same manner and to the same extent beginning on the date
of the admission of the State into the Union, and shall be
deemed laws of the United States which are applicable only in
or to the Capital.

[[Page H2524]]

SEC. 115. CAPITAL NATIONAL GUARD.

(a) Establishment.--Title 32, United States Code, is
amended as follows:
(1) Definitions.--In paragraphs (4), (6), and (19) of
section 101, by striking ``District of Columbia'' each place
it appears and inserting ``Capital''.
(2) Branches and organizations.--In section 103, by
striking ``District of Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''.
(3) Units: location; organization; command.--In subsections
(c) and (d) of section 104, by striking ``District of
Columbia'' both places it appears and inserting ``Capital''.
(4) Availability of appropriations.--In section 107(b), by
striking ``District of Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''.
(5) Maintenance of other troops.--In subsections (a), (b),
and (c) of section 109, by striking ``District of Columbia''
each place it appears and inserting ``Capital''.
(6) Drug interdiction and counter-drug activities.--In
section 112(h)--
(A) by striking ``District of Columbia,'' both places it
appears and inserting ``Capital,''; and
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``National Guard of the
District of Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital National
Guard''.
(7) Enlistment oath.--In section 304, by striking
``District of Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''.
(8) Adjutants general.--In section 314, by striking
``District of Columbia'' each place it appears and inserting
``Capital''.
(9) Detail of regular members of army and air force to duty
with national guard.--In section 315, by striking ``District
of Columbia'' each place it appears and inserting
``Capital''.
(10) Discharge of officers; termination of appointment.--In
section 324(b), by striking ``District of Columbia'' and
inserting ``Capital''.
(11) Relief from national guard duty when ordered to active
duty.--In subsections (a) and (b) of section 325, by striking
``District of Columbia'' each place it appears and inserting
``Capital''.
(12) Courts-martial of national guard not in federal
service: composition, jurisdiction, and procedures; convening
authority.--In sections 326 and 327, by striking ``District
of Columbia'' each place it appears and inserting
``Capital''.
(13) Active guard and reserve duty: governor's authority.--
In section 328(a), by striking ``District of Columbia'' and
inserting ``Capital''.
(14) Training generally.--In section 501(b), by striking
``District of Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''.
(15) Participation in field exercises.--In section 503(b),
by striking ``District of Columbia'' and inserting
``Capital''.
(16) National guard schools and small arms competitions.--
In section 504(b), by striking ``District of Columbia'' and
inserting ``Capital''.
(17) Army and air force schools and field exercises.--In
section 505, by striking ``National Guard of the District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital National Guard''.
(18) National guard youth challenge program.--In
subsections (c)(1), (g)(2), (j), (k), and (l)(1) of section
509, by striking ``District of Columbia'' each place it
appears and inserting ``Capital''.
(19) Issue of supplies.--In section 702--
(A) in subsection (a), by striking ``National Guard of the
District of Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital National
Guard''; and
(B) in subsections (b), (c), and (d), by striking
``District of Columbia'' each place it appears and inserting
``Capital''.
(20) Purchases of supplies from army or air force.--In
subsections (a) and (b) of section 703, by striking
``District of Columbia'' both places it appears and inserting
``Capital''.
(21) Accountability: relief from upon order to active
duty.--In section 704, by striking ``District of Columbia''
and inserting ``Capital''.
(22) Property and fiscal officers.--In section 708--
(A) in subsection (a), by striking ``National Guard of the
District of Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital National
Guard''; and
(B) in subsection (d), by striking ``District of Columbia''
and inserting ``Capital''.
(23) Accountability for property issued to the national
guard.--In subsections (c), (d), (e), and (f) of section 710,
by striking ``District of Columbia'' each place it appears
and inserting ``Capital''.
(24) Disposition of obsolete or condemned property.--In
section 711, by striking ``District of Columbia'' and
inserting ``Capital''.
(25) Disposition of proceeds of condemned stores issued to
national guard.--In paragraph (1) of section 712, by striking
``District of Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''.
(26) Property loss; personal injury or death.--In section
715(c), by striking ``District of Columbia'' and inserting
``Capital''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Capital defined.--
(A) In general.--Section 101 of title 32, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(20) `Capital' means the area serving as the seat of the
Government of the United States, as described in section 112
of the Washington, D.C. Admission Act.''.
(B) With regards to homeland defense activities.--Section
901 of title 32, United States Code, is amended--
(i) in paragraph (2), by striking ``District of Columbia''
and inserting ``Capital''; and
(ii) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) The term `Governor' means, with respect to the
Capital, the commanding general of the Capital National
Guard.''.
(2) Title 10, united states code.--Title 10, United States
Code, is amended as follows:
(A) Definitions.--In section 101--
(i) in subsection (a), by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(19) The term `Capital' means the area serving as the
seat of the Government of the United States, as described in
section 112 of the Washington, D.C. Admission Act.'';
(ii) in paragraphs (2) and (4) of subsection (c), by
striking ``District of Columbia'' both places it appears and
inserting ``Capital''; and
(iii) in subsection (d)(5), by striking ``District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''.
(B) Disposition on discharge.--In section 771a(c), by
striking ``District of Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''.
(C) TRICARE coverage for certain members of the national
guard and dependents during certain disaster response duty.--
In section 1076f--
(i) in subsections (a) and (c)(1), by striking ``with
respect to the District of Columbia, the mayor of the
District of Columbia'' both places it appears and inserting
``with respect to the Capital, the commanding general of the
Capital National Guard''; and
(ii) in subsection (c)(2), by striking ``District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''.
(D) Payment of claims: availability of appropriations.--In
paragraph (2)(B) of section 2732, by striking ``District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''.
(E) Members of army national guard: detail as students,
observers, and investigators at educational institutions,
industrial plants, and hospitals.--In section 7401(c), by
striking ``District of Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''.
(F) Members of air national guard: detail as students,
observers, and investigators at educational institutions,
industrial plants, and hospitals.--In section 9401(c), by
striking ``District of Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''.
(G) Ready reserve: failure to satisfactorily perform
prescribed training.--In section 10148(b)--
(i) by striking ``District of Columbia,'' and inserting
``Capital,''; and
(ii) by striking ``District of Columbia National Guard''
and inserting ``Capital National Guard''.
(H) Chief of the national guard bureau.--In section
10502(a)(1)--
(i) by striking ``District of Columbia,'' and inserting
``Capital,''; and
(ii) by striking ``District of Columbia National Guard''
and inserting ``Capital National Guard''.
(I) Vice chief of the national guard bureau.--In section
10505(a)(1)(A)--
(i) by striking ``District of Columbia,'' and inserting
``Capital,''; and
(ii) by striking ``District of Columbia National Guard''
and inserting ``Capital National Guard''.
(J) Other senior national guard bureau officers.--In
subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 10506(a)(1)--
(i) by striking ``District of Columbia,'' both places it
appears and inserting ``Capital,''; and
(ii) by striking ``District of Columbia National Guard''
both places it appears and inserting ``Capital National
Guard''.
(K) National guard bureau: general provisions.--In section
10508(b)(1), by striking ``District of Columbia'' and
inserting ``Capital''.
(L) Commissioned officers: original appointment;
limitation.--In section 12204(b), by striking ``District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''.
(M) Reserve components generally.--In section 12301(b), by
striking ``District of Columbia National Guard'' both places
it appears and inserting ``Capital National Guard''.
(N) National guard in federal service: call.--In section
12406--
(i) by striking ``District of Columbia,'' and inserting
``Capital,''; and
(ii) by striking ``National Guard of the District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital National Guard''.
(O) Result of failure to comply with standards and
qualifications.--In section 12642(c), by striking ``District
of Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''.
(P) Limitation on relocation of national guard units.--In
section 18238--
(i) by striking ``District of Columbia,'' and inserting
``Capital,''; and
(ii) by striking ``National Guard of the District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital National Guard''.

SEC. 116. TERMINATION OF LEGAL STATUS OF SEAT OF GOVERNMENT
OF UNITED STATES AS MUNICIPAL CORPORATION.

Notwithstanding section 2 of the Revised Statutes relating
to the District of Columbia (sec. 1-102, D.C. Official Code)
or any other provision of law codified in subchapter I of
chapter 1 of the District of Columbia Official Code,
effective upon the date of the admission of the State into
the Union, the Capital (or any portion thereof) shall not
serve as a government and shall not be a body corporate for
municipal purposes.

Subtitle C--General Provisions Relating to Laws of State

SEC. 121. EFFECT OF ADMISSION ON CURRENT LAWS.

(a) Legislative Power.--The legislative power of the State
shall extend to all rightful subjects of legislation in the
State, consistent with the Constitution of the United States
(including the restrictions and limitations imposed upon the
States by article I, section 10) and subject to the
provisions of this Act.
(b) Continuation of Authority and Duties of Members of
Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Offices.--Upon the
admission of the State into the Union, members of executive,
legislative, and judicial offices of the District of Columbia
shall be deemed members of the respective executive,
legislative, and judicial offices of the State, as provided
by the State Constitution and the laws of the State.

[[Page H2525]]

(c) Treatment of Federal Laws.--To the extent that any law
of the United States applies to the States generally, the law
shall have the same force and effect in the State as
elsewhere in the United States, except as such law may
otherwise provide.
(d) No Effect on Existing Contracts.--Nothing in the
admission of the State into the Union shall affect any
obligation under any contract or agreement under which the
District of Columbia or the United States is a party, as in
effect on the day before the date of the admission of the
State into the Union.
(e) Succession in Interstate Compacts.--The State shall be
deemed to be the successor to the District of Columbia for
purposes of any interstate compact which is in effect on the
day before the date of the admission of the State into the
Union.
(f) Continuation of Service of Federal Members on Boards
and Commissions.--Nothing in the admission of the State into
the Union shall affect the authority of a representative of
the Federal Government who, as of the day before the date of
the admission of the State into the Union, is a member of a
board or commission of the District of Columbia to serve as a
member of such board or commission or as a member of a
successor to such board or commission after the admission of
the State into the Union, as may be provided by the State
Constitution and the laws of the State.
(g) Special Rule Regarding Enforcement Authority of United
States Capitol Police, United States Park Police, and United
States Secret Service Uniformed Division.--The United States
Capitol Police, the United States Park Police, and the United
States Secret Service Uniformed Division may not enforce any
law of the State in the State, except to the extent
authorized by the State. Nothing in this subsection may be
construed to affect the authority of the United States
Capitol Police, the United States Park Police, and the United
States Secret Service Uniformed Division to enforce any law
in the Capital.

SEC. 122. PENDING ACTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS.

(a) State as Legal Successor to District of Columbia.--The
State shall be the legal successor to the District of
Columbia in all matters.
(b) No Effect on Pending Proceedings.--All existing writs,
actions, suits, judicial and administrative proceedings,
civil or criminal liabilities, prosecutions, judgments,
sentences, orders, decrees, appeals, causes of action,
claims, demands, titles, and rights shall continue unaffected
by the admission of the State into the Union with respect to
the State or the United States, except as may be provided
under this Act, as may be modified in accordance with the
provisions of the State Constitution, and as may be modified
by the laws of the State or the United States, as the case
may be.

SEC. 123. LIMITATION ON AUTHORITY TO TAX FEDERAL PROPERTY.

The State may not impose any tax on any real or personal
property owned or acquired by the United States, except to
the extent that Congress may permit.

SEC. 124. UNITED STATES NATIONALITY.

No provision of this Act shall operate to confer United
States nationality, to terminate nationality lawfully
acquired, or to restore nationality terminated or lost under
any law of the United States or under any treaty to which the
United States is or was a party.

TITLE II--INTERESTS OF FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

Subtitle A--Federal Property

SEC. 201. TREATMENT OF MILITARY LANDS.

(a) Reservation of Federal Authority.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2) and subsection
(b) and notwithstanding the admission of the State into the
Union, authority is reserved in the United States for the
exercise by Congress of the power of exclusive legislation in
all cases whatsoever over such tracts or parcels of land
located in the State that, on the day before the date of the
admission of the State into the Union, are controlled or
owned by the United States and held for defense or Coast
Guard purposes.
(2) Limitation on authority.--The power of exclusive
legislation described in paragraph (1) shall vest and remain
in the United States only so long as the particular tract or
parcel of land involved is controlled or owned by the United
States and held for defense or Coast Guard purposes.
(b) Authority of State.--
(1) In general.--The reservation of authority in the United
States under subsection (a) shall not operate to prevent such
tracts or parcels of land from being a part of the State, or
to prevent the State from exercising over or upon such lands,
concurrently with the United States, any jurisdiction which
it would have in the absence of such reservation of authority
and which is consistent with the laws hereafter enacted by
Congress pursuant to such reservation of authority.
(2) Service of process.--The State shall have the right to
serve civil or criminal process in such tracts or parcels of
land in which the authority of the United States is reserved
under subsection (a) in suits or prosecutions for or on
account of rights acquired, obligations incurred, or crimes
committed in the State but outside of such lands.

SEC. 202. WAIVER OF CLAIMS TO FEDERAL PROPERTY.

(a) In General.--As a compact with the United States, the
State and its people disclaim all right and title to any real
or personal property not granted or confirmed to the State by
or under the authority of this Act, the right or title to
which is held by the United States or subject to disposition
by the United States.
(b) Effect on Claims Against United States.--
(1) In general.--Nothing in this Act shall recognize, deny,
enlarge, impair, or otherwise affect any claim against the
United States, and any such claim shall be governed by
applicable laws of the United States.
(2) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this Act is intended
or shall be construed as a finding, interpretation, or
construction by Congress that any applicable law authorizes,
establishes, recognizes, or confirms the validity or
invalidity of any claim referred to in paragraph (1), and the
determination of the applicability to or the effect of any
law on any such claim shall be unaffected by anything in this
Act.

Subtitle B--Federal Courts

SEC. 211. RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN FEDERAL
OFFICIALS.

(a) Circuit Judges.--Section 44(c) of title 28, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``Except in the District of Columbia,
each'' and inserting ``Each''; and
(2) by striking ``within fifty miles of the District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``within fifty miles of the
Capital''.
(b) District Judges.--Section 134(b) of such title is
amended in the first sentence by striking ``the District of
Columbia, the Southern District of New York, and'' and
inserting ``the Southern District of New York and''.
(c) United States Attorneys.--Section 545(a) of such title
is amended by striking the first sentence and inserting
``Each United States attorney shall reside in the district
for which he or she is appointed, except that those officers
of the Southern District of New York and the Eastern District
of New York may reside within 20 miles thereof.''.
(d) United States Marshals.--Section 561(e)(1) of such
title is amended to read as follows:
``(1) the marshal for the Southern District of New York may
reside within 20 miles of the district; and''.
(e) Clerks of District Courts.--Section 751(c) of such
title is amended by striking ``the District of Columbia
and''.
(f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply only to individuals appointed after the date of
the admission of the State into the Union.

SEC. 212. RENAMING OF FEDERAL COURTS.

(a) Renaming.--
(1) Circuit court.--Section 41 of title 28, United States
Code, is amended--
(A) in the first column, by striking ``District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''; and
(B) in the second column, by striking ``District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital; Washington, Douglass
Commonwealth''.
(2) District court.--Section 88 of such title is amended--
(A) in the heading, by striking ``District of Columbia''
and inserting ``Washington, Douglass Commonwealth and the
Capital'';
(B) by amending the first paragraph to read as follows:
``The State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth and the
Capital comprise one judicial district.''; and
(C) in the second paragraph, by striking ``Washington'' and
inserting ``the Capital''.
(3) Clerical amendment.--The item relating to section 88 in
the table of sections for chapter 5 of such title is amended
to read as follows:

``88. Washington, Douglass Commonwealth and the Capital.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments Relating to Court of Appeals.--
Title 28, United States Code, is amended as follows:
(1) Appointment of judges.--Section 44(a) of such title is
amended in the first column by striking ``District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''.
(2) Terms of court.--Section 48(a) of such title is
amended--
(A) in the first column, by striking ``District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital'';
(B) in the second column, by striking ``Washington'' and
inserting ``Capital'' ; and
(C) in the second column, by striking ``District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``Capital''.
(3) Appointment of independent counsels by chief judge of
circuit.--Section 49 of such title is amended by striking
``District of Columbia'' each place it appears and inserting
``Capital''.
(4) Circuit court jurisdiction over certification of death
penalty counsels.--Section 2265(c)(2) of such title is
amended by striking ``the District of Columbia Circuit'' and
inserting ``the Capital Circuit''.
(5) Circuit court jurisdiction over review of federal
agency orders.--Section 2343 of such title is amended by
striking ``the District of Columbia Circuit'' and inserting
``the Capital Circuit''.
(c) Conforming Amendments Relating to District Court.--
Title 28, United States Code, is amended as follows:
(1) Appointment and number of district court judges.--
Section 133(a) of such title is amended in the first column
by striking ``District of Columbia'' and inserting
``Washington, Douglass Commonwealth and the Capital''.
(2) District court jurisdiction of tax cases brought
against united states.--Section 1346(e) of such title is
amended by striking ``the District of Columbia'' and
inserting ``Washington, Douglass Commonwealth and the
Capital''.
(3) District court jurisdiction over proceedings for
forfeiture of foreign property.--Section 1355(b)(2) of such
title is amended by striking ``the District of Columbia'' and
inserting ``Washington, Douglass Commonwealth and the
Capital''.
(4) District court jurisdiction over civil actions brought
against a foreign state.--Section 1391(f)(4) of such title is
amended by striking ``the District of Columbia'' and
inserting ``Washington, Douglass Commonwealth and the
Capital''.

[[Page H2526]]

(5) District court jurisdiction over actions brought by
corporations against united states.--Section 1402(a)(2) of
such title is amended by striking ``the District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``Washington, Douglass Commonwealth
and the Capital''.
(6) Venue in district court of certain actions brought by
employees of executive office of the president.--Section 1413
of such title is amended by striking ``the District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``Washington, Douglass Commonwealth
and the Capital''.
(7) Venue in district court of action enforcing foreign
judgment.--Section 2467(c)(2)(B) of such title is amended by
striking ``the District of Columbia'' and inserting
``Washington, Douglass Commonwealth and the Capital''.
(d) Conforming Amendments Relating to Other Courts.--Title
28, United States Code, is amended as follows:
(1) Appointment of bankruptcy judges.--Section 152(a)(2) of
such title is amended in the first column by striking
``District of Columbia'' and inserting ``Washington, Douglass
Commonwealth and the Capital''.
(2) Location of court of federal claims.--Section 173 of
such title is amended by striking ``the District of
Columbia'' and inserting ``the Capital''.
(3) Duty station of judges of court of federal claims.--
Section 175 of such title is amended by striking ``the
District of Columbia'' each place it appears and inserting
``the Capital''.
(4) Duty station of judges for purposes of traveling
expenses.--Section 456(b) of such title is amended to read as
follows:
``(b) The official duty station of the Chief Justice of the
United States, the Justices of the Supreme Court of the
United States, and the judges of the United States Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit shall be the Capital.''.
(5) Court accommodations for federal circuit and court of
federal claims.--Section 462(d) of such title is amended by
striking ``the District of Columbia'' and inserting ``the
Capital''.
(6) Places of holding court of court of federal claims.--
Section 798(a) of such title is amended--
(A) by striking ``Washington, District of Columbia'' and
inserting ``the Capital''; and
(B) by striking ``the District of Columbia'' and inserting
``the Capital''.
(e) Other Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Service of process on foreign parties at state
department office.--Section 1608(a)(4) of such title is
amended by striking ``Washington, District of Columbia'' and
inserting ``the Capital''.
(2) Service of process in property cases at attorney
general office.--Section 2410(b) of such title is amended by
striking ``Washington, District of Columbia'' and inserting
``the Capital''.
(f) Definition.--Section 451 of title 28, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
undesignated paragraph:
``The term `Capital' means the area serving as the seat of
the Government of the United States, as described in section
112 of the Washington, D.C. Admission Act.''.
(g) References in Other Laws.--Any reference in any Federal
law (other than a law amended by this section), rule, or
regulation--
(1) to the United States Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia shall be deemed to refer to the United States
Court of Appeals for the Capital;
(2) to the District of Columbia Circuit shall be deemed to
refer to the Capital Circuit; and
(3) to the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia shall be deemed to refer to the United States
District Court for Washington, Douglass Commonwealth and the
Capital.
(h) Effective Date.--This section and the amendments made
by this section shall take effect upon the admission of the
State into the Union.

SEC. 213. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS RELATING TO DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE.

(a) Appointment of United States Trustees.--Section
581(a)(4) of title 28, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``the District of Columbia'' and inserting ``the
Capital and Washington, Douglass Commonwealth''.
(b) Independent Counsels.--
(1) Appointment of additional personnel.--Section 594(c) of
such title is amended--
(A) by striking ``the District of Columbia'' the first
place it appears and inserting ``Washington, Douglass
Commonwealth and the Capital''; and
(B) by striking ``the District of Columbia'' the second
place it appears and inserting ``Washington, Douglass
Commonwealth''.
(2) Judicial review of removal.--Section 596(a)(3) of such
title is amended by striking ``the District of Columbia'' and
inserting ``Washington, Douglass Commonwealth and the
Capital''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect upon the admission of the State into the
Union.

SEC. 214. TREATMENT OF PRETRIAL SERVICES IN UNITED STATES
DISTRICT COURT.

Section 3152 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``(other than the
District of Columbia)'' and inserting ``(subject to
subsection (d), other than the District of Columbia)''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d) In the case of the judicial district of Washington,
Douglass Commonwealth and the Capital--
``(1) upon the admission of the State of Washington,
Douglass Commonwealth into the Union, the Washington,
Douglass Commonwealth Pretrial Services Agency shall continue
to provide pretrial services in the judicial district in the
same manner and to the same extent as the District of
Columbia Pretrial Services Agency provided such services in
the judicial district of the District of Columbia as of the
day before the date of the admission of the State into the
Union; and
``(2) upon the receipt by the President of the
certification from the State of Washington, Douglass
Commonwealth under section 315(b)(4) of the Washington, D.C.
Admission Act that the State has in effect laws providing for
the State to provide pre-trial services, paragraph (1) shall
no longer apply, and the Director shall provide for the
establishment of pretrial services in the judicial district
under this section.''.

Subtitle C--Federal Elections

SEC. 221. PERMITTING INDIVIDUALS RESIDING IN CAPITAL TO VOTE
IN FEDERAL ELECTIONS IN STATE OF MOST RECENT
DOMICILE.

(a) Requirement for States to Permit Individuals to Vote by
Absentee Ballot.--
(1) In general.--Each State shall--
(A) permit absent Capital voters to use absentee
registration procedures and to vote by absentee ballot in
general, special, primary, and runoff elections for Federal
office; and
(B) accept and process, with respect to any general,
special, primary, or runoff election for Federal office, any
otherwise valid voter registration application from an absent
Capital voter, if the application is received by the
appropriate State election official not less than 30 days
before the election.
(2) Absent capital voter defined.--In this section, the
term ``absent Capital voter'' means, with respect to a State,
a person who resides in the Capital and is qualified to vote
in the State (or who would be qualified to vote in the State
but for residing in the Capital), but only if the State is
the last place in which the person was domiciled before
residing in the Capital.
(3) State defined.--In this section, the term ``State''
means each of the several States, including the State.
(b) Recommendations to States to Maximize Access to Polls
by Absent Capital Voters.--To afford maximum access to the
polls by absent Capital voters, it is the sense of Congress
that the States should--
(1) waive registration requirements for absent Capital
voters who, by reason of residence in the Capital, do not
have an opportunity to register;
(2) expedite processing of balloting materials with respect
to such individuals; and
(3) assure that absentee ballots are mailed to such
individuals at the earliest opportunity.
(c) Enforcement.--The Attorney General may bring a civil
action in the appropriate district court of the United States
for such declaratory or injunctive relief as may be necessary
to carry out this section.
(d) Effect on Certain Other Laws.--The exercise of any
right under this section shall not affect, for purposes of a
Federal tax, a State tax, or a local tax, the residence or
domicile of a person exercising such right.
(e) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect upon
the date of the admission of the State into the Union, and
shall apply with respect to elections for Federal office
taking place on or after such date.

SEC. 222. REPEAL OF OFFICE OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DELEGATE.

(a) In General.--Sections 202 and 204 of the District of
Columbia Delegate Act (Public Law 91-405; sections 1-401 and
1-402, D.C. Official Code) are repealed, and the provisions
of law amended or repealed by such sections are restored or
revived as if such sections had not been enacted.
(b) Conforming Amendments to District of Columbia Elections
Code of 1955.--The District of Columbia Elections Code of
1955 is amended--
(1) in section 1 (sec. 1-1001.01, D.C. Official Code), by
striking ``the Delegate to the House of Representatives,'';
(2) in section 2 (sec. 1-1001.02, D.C. Official Code)--
(A) by striking paragraph (6),
(B) in paragraph (12), by striking ``(except the Delegate
to Congress for the District of Columbia)'', and
(C) in paragraph (13), by striking ``the Delegate to
Congress for the District of Columbia,'';
(3) in section 8 (sec. 1-1001.08, D.C. Official Code)--
(A) by striking ``Delegate,'' in the heading, and
(B) by striking ``Delegate,'' each place it appears in
subsections (d), (h)(1)(A), (h)(2), (i)(1), (j)(1), (j)(3),
and (k)(3);
(4) in section 10 (sec. 1-1001.10, D.C. Official Code)--
(A) by striking subparagraph (A) of subsection (a)(3), and
(B) in subsection (d)--
(i) by striking ``Delegate,'' each place it appears in
paragraph (1), and
(ii) by striking paragraph (2) and redesignating paragraph
(3) as paragraph (2);
(5) in section 11(a)(2) (sec. 1-1001.11(a)(2), D.C.
Official Code), by striking ``Delegate to the House of
Representatives,'';
(6) in section 15(b) (sec. 1-1001.15(b), D.C. Official
Code), by striking ``Delegate,''; and
(7) in section 17(a) (sec. 1-1001.17(a), D.C. Official
Code), by striking ``except the Delegate to the Congress from
the District of Columbia''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect upon the admission of the State into the
Union.

SEC. 223. REPEAL OF LAW PROVIDING FOR PARTICIPATION OF SEAT
OF GOVERNMENT IN ELECTION OF PRESIDENT AND
VICE-PRESIDENT.

(a) In General.--Chapter 1 of title 3, United States Code,
is amended--

[[Page H2527]]

(1) by striking section 21; and
(2) in the table of sections, by striking the item relating
to section 21.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall take effect upon the date of the admission of the State
into the Union, and shall apply to any election of the
President and Vice-President taking place on or after such
date.

SEC. 224. EXPEDITED PROCEDURES FOR CONSIDERATION OF
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT REPEALING 23RD
AMENDMENT.

(a) Joint Resolution Described.--In this section, the term
``joint resolution'' means a joint resolution--
(1) entitled ``A joint resolution proposing an amendment to
the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 23rd
article of amendment''; and
(2) the matter after the resolving clause of which consists
solely of text to amend the Constitution of the United States
to repeal the 23rd article of amendment to the Constitution.
(b) Expedited Consideration in House of Representatives.--
(1) Placement on calendar.--Upon introduction in the House
of Representatives, the joint resolution shall be placed
immediately on the appropriate calendar.
(2) Proceeding to consideration.--
(A) In general.--It shall be in order, not later than 30
legislative days after the date the joint resolution is
introduced in the House of Representatives, to move to
proceed to consider the joint resolution in the House of
Representatives.
(B) Procedure.--For a motion to proceed to consider the
joint resolution--
(i) all points of order against the motion are waived;
(ii) such a motion shall not be in order after the House of
Representatives has disposed of a motion to proceed on the
joint resolution;
(iii) the previous question shall be considered as ordered
on the motion to its adoption without intervening motion;
(iv) the motion shall not be debatable; and
(v) a motion to reconsider the vote by which the motion is
disposed of shall not be in order.
(3) Consideration.--When the House of Representatives
proceeds to consideration of the joint resolution--
(A) the joint resolution shall be considered as read;
(B) all points of order against the joint resolution and
against its consideration are waived;
(C) the previous question shall be considered as ordered on
the joint resolution to its passage without intervening
motion except 10 hours of debate equally divided and
controlled by the proponent and an opponent;
(D) an amendment to the joint resolution shall not be in
order; and
(E) a motion to reconsider the vote on passage of the joint
resolution shall not be in order.
(c) Expedited Consideration in Senate.--
(1) Placement on calendar.--Upon introduction in the
Senate, the joint resolution shall be placed immediately on
the calendar.
(2) Proceeding to consideration.--
(A) In general.--Notwithstanding rule XXII of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, it is in order, not later than 30
legislative days after the date the joint resolution is
introduced in the Senate (even though a previous motion to
the same effect has been disagreed to) to move to proceed to
the consideration of the joint resolution.
(B) Procedure.--For a motion to proceed to the
consideration of the joint resolution--
(i) all points of order against the motion are waived;
(ii) the motion is not debatable;
(iii) the motion is not subject to a motion to postpone;
(iv) a motion to reconsider the vote by which the motion is
agreed to or disagreed to shall not be in order; and
(v) if the motion is agreed to, the joint resolution shall
remain the unfinished business until disposed of.
(3) Floor consideration.--
(A) In general.--If the Senate proceeds to consideration of
the joint resolution--
(i) all points of order against the joint resolution (and
against consideration of the joint resolution) are waived;
(ii) consideration of the joint resolution, and all
debatable motions and appeals in connection therewith, shall
be limited to not more than 30 hours, which shall be divided
equally between the majority and minority leaders or their
designees;
(iii) a motion further to limit debate is in order and not
debatable;
(iv) an amendment to, a motion to postpone, or a motion to
commit the joint resolution is not in order; and
(v) a motion to proceed to the consideration of other
business is not in order.
(B) Vote on passage.--In the Senate the vote on passage
shall occur immediately following the conclusion of the
consideration of the joint resolution, and a single quorum
call at the conclusion of the debate if requested in
accordance with the rules of the Senate.
(C) Rulings of the chair on procedure.--Appeals from the
decisions of the Chair relating to the application of this
subsection or the rules of the Senate, as the case may be, to
the procedure relating to the joint resolution shall be
decided without debate.
(d) Rules Relating to Senate and House of
Representatives.--
(1) Coordination with action by other house.--If, before
the passage by one House of the joint resolution of that
House, that House receives from the other House the joint
resolution--
(A) the joint resolution of the other House shall not be
referred to a committee; and
(B) with respect to the joint resolution of the House
receiving the resolution--
(i) the procedure in that House shall be the same as if no
joint resolution had been received from the other House; and
(ii) the vote on passage shall be on the joint resolution
of the other House.
(2) Treatment of joint resolution of other house.--If one
House fails to introduce or consider the joint resolution
under this section, the joint resolution of the other House
shall be entitled to expedited floor procedures under this
section.
(3) Treatment of companion measures.--If, following passage
of the joint resolution in the Senate, the Senate receives
the companion measure from the House of Representatives, the
companion measure shall not be debatable.
(e) Rules of House of Representatives and Senate.--This
section is enacted by Congress--
(1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate
and House of Representatives, respectively, and as such is
deemed a part of the rules of each House, respectively, but
applicable only with respect to the procedure to be followed
in that House in the case of the joint resolution, and
supersede other rules only to the extent that it is
inconsistent with such rules; and
(2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of
either House to change the rules (so far as relating to the
procedure of that House) at any time, in the same manner, and
to the same extent as in the case of any other rule of that
House.

TITLE III--CONTINUATION OF CERTAIN AUTHORITIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Subtitle A--Employee Benefits

SEC. 301. FEDERAL BENEFIT PAYMENTS UNDER CERTAIN RETIREMENT
PROGRAMS.

(a) Continuation of Entitlement to Payments.--Any
individual who, as of the day before the date of the
admission of the State into the Union, is entitled to a
Federal benefit payment under the District of Columbia
Retirement Protection Act of 1997 (subtitle A of title XI of
the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government
Improvement Act of 1997; sec. 1-801.01 et seq., D.C. Official
Code) shall continue to be entitled to such a payment after
the admission of the State into the Union, in the same
manner, to the same extent, and subject to the same terms and
conditions applicable under such Act.
(b) Obligations of Federal Government.--
(1) In general.--Any obligation of the Federal Government
under the District of Columbia Retirement Protection Act of
1997 which exists with respect to any individual or with
respect to the District of Columbia as of the day before the
date of the admission of the State into the Union shall
remain in effect with respect to such an individual and with
respect to the State after the admission of the State into
the Union, in the same manner, to the same extent, and
subject to the same terms and conditions applicable under
such Act.
(2) D.C. federal pension fund.--Any obligation of the
Federal Government under chapter 9 of the District of
Columbia Retirement Protection Act of 1997 (sec. 1-817.01 et
seq., D.C. Official Code) with respect to the D.C. Federal
Pension Fund which exists as of the day before the date of
the admission of the State into the Union shall remain in
effect with respect to such Fund after the admission of the
State into the Union, in the same manner, to the same extent,
and subject to the same terms and conditions applicable under
such chapter.
(c) Obligations of State.--Any obligation of the District
of Columbia under the District of Columbia Retirement
Protection Act of 1997 which exists with respect to any
individual or with respect to the Federal Government as of
the day before the date of the admission of the State into
the Union shall become an obligation of the State with
respect to such an individual and with respect to the Federal
Government after the admission of the State into the Union,
in the same manner, to the same extent, and subject to the
same terms and conditions applicable under such Act.

SEC. 302. CONTINUATION OF FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE BENEFITS FOR
EMPLOYEES FIRST EMPLOYED PRIOR TO ESTABLISHMENT
OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MERIT PERSONNEL SYSTEM.

(a) Obligations of Federal Government.--Any obligation of
the Federal Government under title 5, United States Code,
which exists with respect to an individual described in
subsection (c) or with respect to the District of Columbia as
of the day before the date of the admission of the State into
the Union shall remain in effect with respect to such
individual and with respect to the State after the admission
of the State into the Union, in the same manner, to the same
extent, and subject to the same terms and conditions
applicable under such title.
(b) Obligations of State.--Any obligation of the District
of Columbia under title 5, United States Code, which exists
with respect to an individual described in subsection (c) or
with respect to the Federal Government as of the day before
the date of the admission of the State into the Union shall
become an obligation of the State with respect to such
individual and with respect to the Federal Government after
the admission of the State into the Union, in the same
manner, to the same extent, and subject to the same terms and
conditions applicable under such title.
(c) Individuals Described.--An individual described in this
subsection is an individual who was first employed by the
government of the District of Columbia before October 1,
1987.

SEC. 303. OBLIGATIONS OF FEDERAL GOVERNMENT UNDER JUDGES'
RETIREMENT PROGRAM.

(a) Continuation of Obligations.--
(1) In general.--Any obligation of the Federal Government
under subchapter III of chapter 15 of title 11, District of
Columbia Official Code--

[[Page H2528]]

(A) which exists with respect to any individual and the
District of Columbia as the result of service accrued prior
to the date of the admission of the State into the Union
shall remain in effect with respect to such an individual and
with respect to the State after the admission of the State
into the Union, in the same manner, to the same extent, and
subject to the same terms and conditions applicable under
such subchapter; and
(B) subject to paragraph (2), shall exist with respect to
any individual and the State as the result of service accrued
after the date of the admission of the State into the Union
in the same manner, to the same extent, and subject to the
same terms and conditions applicable under such subchapter as
such obligation existed with respect to individuals and the
District of Columbia as of the date of the admission of the
State into the Union.
(2) Treatment of service accrued after taking effect of
state retirement program.--Subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1)
does not apply to service accrued on or after the termination
date described in subsection (b).
(b) Termination Date.--The termination date described in
this subsection is the date on which the State provides
written certification to the President that the State has in
effect laws requiring the State to appropriate and make
available funds for the retirement of judges of the State.

Subtitle B--Agencies

SEC. 311. PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE.

(a) Continuation of Operations and Funding.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2) and
subsection (b), title III of the District of Columbia Court
Reform and Criminal Procedure Act of 1970 (sec. 2-1601 et
seq., D.C. Official Code) shall apply with respect to the
State and to the public defender service of the State after
the date of the admission of the State into the Union in the
same manner and to the same extent as such title applied with
respect to the District of Columbia and the District of
Columbia Public Defender Service as of the day before the
date of the admission of the State into the Union.
(2) Responsibility for employer contribution.--For purposes
of paragraph (2) of section 305(c) of such Act (sec. 2-
1605(c)(2), D.C. Official Code), the Federal Government shall
be treated as the employing agency with respect to the
benefits provided under such section to an individual who is
an employee of the public defender service of the State and
who, pursuant to section 305(c) of such Act (sec. 2-1605(c),
D.C. Official Code), is treated as an employee of the Federal
Government for purposes of receiving benefits under any
chapter of subpart G of part III of title 5, United States
Code.
(b) Renaming of Service.--Effective upon the date of the
admission of the State into the Union, the State may rename
the public defender service of the State.
(c) Continuation of Federal Benefits for Employees.--
(1) In general.--Any individual who is an employee of the
public defender service of the State as of the day before the
date described in subsection (d) and who, pursuant to section
305(c) of the District of Columbia Court Reform and Criminal
Procedure Act of 1970 (sec. 2-1605(c), D.C. Official Code),
is treated as an employee of the Federal Government for
purposes of receiving benefits under any chapter of subpart G
of part III of title 5, United States Code, shall continue to
be treated as an employee of the Federal Government for such
purposes, notwithstanding the termination of the provisions
of subsection (a) under subsection (d).
(2) Responsibility for employer contribution.--Beginning on
the date described in subsection (d), the State shall be
treated as the employing agency with respect to the benefits
described in paragraph (1) which are provided to an
individual who, for purposes of receiving such benefits, is
continued to be treated as an employee of the Federal
Government under such paragraph.
(d) Termination.--Subsection (a) shall terminate upon the
date on which the State provides written certification to the
President that the State has in effect laws requiring the
State to appropriate and make available funds for the
operation of the office of the State which provides the
services described in title III of the District of Columbia
Court Reform and Criminal Procedure Act of 1970 (sec. 2-1601
et seq., D.C. Official Code).

SEC. 312. PROSECUTIONS.

(a) Assignment of Assistant United States Attorneys.--
(1) In general.--In accordance with subchapter VI of
chapter 33 of title 5, United States Code, the Attorney
General, with the concurrence of the District of Columbia or
the State (as the case may be), shall provide for the
assignment of assistant United States attorneys to the State
to carry out the functions described in subsection (b).
(2) Assignments made on detail without reimbursement by
state.--In accordance with section 3373 of title 5, United
States Code--
(A) an assistant United States attorney who is assigned to
the State under this section shall be deemed under subsection
(a) of such section to be on detail to a regular work
assignment in the Department of Justice; and
(B) the assignment of an assistant United States attorney
to the State under this section shall be made without
reimbursement by the State of the pay of the attorney or any
related expenses.
(b) Functions Described.--The functions described in this
subsection are criminal prosecutions conducted in the name of
the State which would have been conducted in the name of the
United States by the United States attorney for the District
of Columbia or his or her assistants, as provided under
section 23-101(c), District of Columbia Official Code, but
for the admission of the State into the Union.
(c) Minimum Number Assigned.--The number of assistant
United States attorneys who are assigned under this section
may not be less than the number of assistant United States
attorneys whose principal duties as of the day before the
date of the admission of the State into the Union were to
conduct criminal prosecutions in the name of the United
States under section 23-101(c), District of Columbia Official
Code.
(d) Termination.--The obligation of the Attorney General to
provide for the assignment of assistant United States
attorneys under this section shall terminate upon written
certification by the State to the President that the State
has appointed attorneys of the State to carry out the
functions described in subsection (b).
(e) Clarification Regarding Clemency Authority.--
(1) In general.--Effective upon the admission of the State
into the Union, the authority to grant clemency for offenses
against the District of Columbia or the State shall be
exercised by such person or persons, and under such terms and
conditions, as provided by the State Constitution and the
laws of the State, without regard to whether the prosecution
for the offense was conducted by the District of Columbia,
the State, or the United States.
(2) Definition.--In this subsection, the term ``clemency''
means a pardon, reprieve, or commutation of sentence, or a
remission of a fine or other financial penalty.

SEC. 313. SERVICE OF UNITED STATES MARSHALS.

(a) Provision of Services for Courts of State.--The United
States Marshals Service shall provide services with respect
to the courts and court system of the State in the same
manner and to the same extent as the Service provided
services with respect to the courts and court system of the
District of Columbia as of the day before the date of the
admission of the State into the Union, except that the
President shall not appoint a United States Marshal under
section 561 of title 28, United States Code, for any court of
the State.
(b) Termination.--The obligation of the United States
Marshals Service to provide services under this section shall
terminate upon written certification by the State to the
President that the State has appointed personnel of the State
to provide such services.

SEC. 314. DESIGNATION OF FELONS TO FACILITIES OF BUREAU OF
PRISONS.

(a) Continuation of Designation.--Chapter 1 of subtitle C
of title XI of the National Capital Revitalization and Self-
Government Improvement Act of 1997 (sec. 24-101 et seq., D.C.
Official Code) and the amendments made by such chapter--
(1) shall continue to apply with respect to individuals
convicted of offenses under the laws of the District of
Columbia prior to the date of the admission of the State into
the Union; and
(2) shall apply with respect to individuals convicted of
offenses under the laws of the State after the date of the
admission of the State into the Union in the same manner and
to the same extent as such chapter and amendments applied
with respect to individuals convicted of offenses under the
laws of the District of Columbia prior to the date of the
admission of the State into the Union.
(b) Termination.--The provisions of this section shall
terminate upon written certification by the State to the
President that the State has in effect laws for the housing
of individuals described in subsection (a) in correctional
facilities.

SEC. 315. PAROLE AND SUPERVISION.

(a) United States Parole Commission.--
(1) Parole.--The United States Parole Commission--
(A) shall continue to exercise the authority to grant,
deny, and revoke parole, and to impose conditions upon an
order of parole, in the case of any individual who is an
imprisoned felon who is eligible for parole or reparole under
the laws of the District of Columbia as of the day before the
date of the admission of the State into the Union, as
provided under section 11231 of the National Capital
Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997
(sec. 24-131, D.C. Official Code); and
(B) shall exercise the authority to grant, deny, and revoke
parole, and to impose conditions upon an order of parole, in
the case of any individual who is an imprisoned felon who is
eligible for parole or reparole under the laws of the State
in the same manner and to the same extent as the Commission
exercised in the case of any individual described in
subparagraph (A).
(2) Supervision of released offenders.--The United States
Parole Commission--
(A) shall continue to exercise the authority over
individuals who are released offenders of the District of
Columbia as of the day before the date of the admission of
the State into the Union, as provided under section
11233(c)(2) of the National Capital Revitalization and Self-
Government Improvement Act of 1997 (sec. 24-133(c)(2), D.C.
Official Code); and
(B) shall exercise authority over individuals who are
released offenders of the State in the same manner and to the
same extent as the Commission exercised authority over
individuals described in subparagraph (A).
(3) Continuation of federal benefits for employees.--
(A) Continuation.--Any individual who is an employee of the
United States Parole Commission as of the later of the day
before the date described in subparagraph (A) of paragraph
(4) or the day before the date described in subparagraph (B)
of paragraph (4) and who, on or after such date, is an
employee of the office of the

[[Page H2529]]

State which exercises the authority described in either such
subparagraph, shall continue to be treated as an employee of
the Federal Government for purposes of receiving benefits
under any chapter of subpart G of part III of title 5, United
States Code, notwithstanding the termination of the
provisions of this subsection under paragraph (4).
(B) Responsibility for employer contribution.--Beginning on
the later of the date described in subparagraph (A) of
paragraph (4) or the date described in subparagraph (B) of
paragraph (4), the State shall be treated as the employing
agency with respect to the benefits described in subparagraph
(A) which are provided to an individual who, for purposes of
receiving such benefits, is continued to be treated as an
employee of the Federal Government under such subparagraph.
(4) Termination.--The provisions of this subsection shall
terminate--
(A) in the case of paragraph (1), on the date on which the
State provides written certification to the President that
the State has in effect laws providing for the State to
exercise the authority to grant, deny, and revoke parole, and
to impose conditions upon an order of parole, in the case of
any individual who is an imprisoned felon who is eligible for
parole or reparole under the laws of the State; and
(B) in the case of paragraph (2), on the date on which the
State provides written certification to the President that
the State has in effect laws providing for the State to
exercise authority over individuals who are released
offenders of the State.
(b) Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency.--
(1) Renaming.--Effective upon the date of the admission of
the State into the Union--
(A) the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for
the District of Columbia shall be known and designated as the
Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for
Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, and any reference in any
law, rule, or regulation to the Court Services and Offender
Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia shall be
deemed to refer to the Court Services and Offender
Supervision Agency for Washington, Douglass Commonwealth; and
(B) the District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency shall
be known and designated as the Washington, Douglass
Commonwealth Pretrial Services Agency, and any reference in
any law, rule or regulation to the District of Columbia
Pretrial Services Agency shall be deemed to refer to the
Washington, Douglass Commonwealth Pretrial Services Agency.
(2) In general.--The Court Services and Offender
Supervision Agency for Washington, Douglass Commonwealth,
including the Washington, Douglass Commonwealth Pretrial
Services Agency (as renamed under paragraph (1))--
(A) shall continue to provide pretrial services with
respect to individuals who are charged with an offense in the
District of Columbia, provide supervision for individuals who
are offenders on probation, parole, and supervised release
pursuant to the laws of the District of Columbia, and carry
out sex offender registration functions with respect to
individuals who are sex offenders in the District of
Columbia, as of the day before the date of the admission of
the State into the Union, as provided under section 11233 of
the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government
Improvement Act of 1997 (sec. 24-133, D.C. Official Code);
and
(B) shall provide pretrial services with respect to
individuals who are charged with an offense in the State,
provide supervision for offenders on probation, parole, and
supervised release pursuant to the laws of the State, and
carry out sex offender registration functions in the State,
in the same manner and to the same extent as the Agency
provided such services and supervision and carried out such
functions for individuals described in subparagraph (A).
(3) Continuation of federal benefits for employees.--
(A) Continuation.--Any individual who is an employee of the
Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for
Washington, Douglass Commonwealth as of the day before the
date described in paragraph (4), and who, on or after such
date, is an employee of the office of the State which
provides the services and carries out the functions described
in paragraph (4), shall continue to be treated as an employee
of the Federal Government for purposes of receiving benefits
under any chapter of subpart G of part III of title 5, United
States Code, notwithstanding the termination of the
provisions of paragraph (2) under paragraph (4).
(B) Responsibility for employer contribution.--Beginning on
the date described in paragraph (4), the State shall be
treated as the employing agency with respect to the benefits
described in subparagraph (A) which are provided to an
individual who, for purposes of receiving such benefits, is
continued to be treated as an employee of the Federal
Government under such subparagraph.
(4) Termination.--Paragraph (2) shall terminate on the date
on which the State provides written certification to the
President that the State has in effect laws providing for the
State to provide pretrial services, supervise offenders on
probation, parole, and supervised release, and carry out sex
offender registration functions in the State.

SEC. 316. COURTS.

(a) Continuation of Operations.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and
(3) and subsection (b), title 11, District of Columbia
Official Code, as in effect on the date before the date of
the admission of the State into the Union, shall apply with
respect to the State and the courts and court system of the
State after the date of the admission of the State into the
Union in the same manner and to the same extent as such title
applied with respect to the District of Columbia and the
courts and court system of the District of Columbia as of the
day before the date of the admission of the State into the
Union.
(2) Responsibility for employer contribution.--For purposes
of paragraph (2) of section 11-1726(b) and paragraph (2) of
section 11-1726(c), District of Columbia Official Code, the
Federal Government shall be treated as the employing agency
with respect to the benefits provided under such section to
an individual who is an employee of the courts and court
system of the State and who, pursuant to either such
paragraph, is treated as an employee of the Federal
Government for purposes of receiving benefits under any
chapter of subpart G of part III of title 5, United States
Code.
(3) Other exceptions.--
(A) Selection of judges.--Effective upon the date of the
admission of the State into the Union, the State shall select
judges for any vacancy on the courts of the State.
(B) Renaming of courts and other offices.--Effective upon
the date of the admission of the State into the Union, the
State may rename any of its courts and any of the other
offices of its court system.
(C) Rules of construction.--Nothing in this paragraph shall
be construed--
(i) to affect the service of any judge serving on a court
of the District of Columbia on the day before the date of the
admission of the State into the Union, or to require the
State to select such a judge for a vacancy on a court of the
State; or
(ii) to waive any of the requirements of chapter 15 of
title 11, District of Columbia Official Code (other than
section 11-1501(a) of such Code), including subchapter II of
such chapter (relating to the District of Columbia Commission
on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure), with respect to the
appointment and service of judges of the courts of the State.
(b) Continuation of Federal Benefits for Employees.--
(1) In general.--Any individual who is an employee of the
courts or court system of the State as of the day before the
date described in subsection (e) and who, pursuant to section
11-1726(b) or section 11-1726(c), District of Columbia
Official Code, is treated as an employee of the Federal
Government for purposes of receiving benefits under any
chapter of subpart G of part III of title 5, United States
Code, shall continue to be treated as an employee of the
Federal Government for such purposes, notwithstanding the
termination of the provisions of this section under
subsection (e).
(2) Responsibility for employer contribution.--Beginning on
the date described in subsection (e), the State shall be
treated as the employing agency with respect to the benefits
described in paragraph (1) which are provided to an
individual who, for purposes of receiving such benefits, is
continued to be treated as an employee of the Federal
Government under such paragraph.
(c) Continuation of Funding.--Section 11241 of the National
Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of
1997 (section 11-1743 note, District of Columbia Official
Code) shall apply with respect to the State and the courts
and court system of the State after the date of the admission
of the State into the Union in the same manner and to the
same extent as such section applied with respect to the Joint
Committee on Judicial Administration in the District of
Columbia and the courts and court system of the District of
Columbia as of the day before the date of the admission of
the State into the Union.
(d) Treatment of Court Receipts.--
(1) Deposit of receipts into treasury.--Except as provided
in paragraph (2), all money received by the courts and court
system of the State shall be deposited in the Treasury of the
United States.
(2) Crime victims compensation fund.--Section 16 of the
Victims of Violent Crime Compensation Act of 1996 (sec. 4-
515, D.C. Official Code), relating to the Crime Victims
Compensation Fund, shall apply with respect to the courts and
court system of the State in the same manner and to the same
extent as such section applied to the courts and court system
of the District of Columbia as of the day before the date of
the admission of the State into the Union.
(e) Termination.--The provisions of this section, other
than paragraph (3) of subsection (a) and except as provided
under subsection (b), shall terminate on the date on which
the State provides written certification to the President
that the State has in effect laws requiring the State to
appropriate and make available funds for the operation of the
courts and court system of the State.

Subtitle C--Other Programs and Authorities

SEC. 321. APPLICATION OF THE COLLEGE ACCESS ACT.

(a) Continuation.--The District of Columbia College Access
Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-98; sec. 38-2701 et seq., D.C.
Official Code) shall apply with respect to the State, and to
the public institution of higher education designated by the
State as the successor to the University of the District of
Columbia, after the date of the admission of the State into
the Union in the same manner and to the same extent as such
Act applied with respect to the District of Columbia and the
University of the District of Columbia as of the day before
the date of the admission of the State into the Union.
(b) Termination.--The provisions of this section, other
than with respect to the public institution of higher
education designated by the State as the successor to the
University of the District of Columbia, shall terminate upon
written certification by the State to the President that the
State has in effect laws requiring the State to provide
tuition assistance substantially

[[Page H2530]]

similar to the assistance provided under the District of
Columbia College Access Act of 1999.

SEC. 322. APPLICATION OF THE SCHOLARSHIPS FOR OPPORTUNITY AND
RESULTS ACT.

(a) Continuation.--The Scholarships for Opportunity and
Results Act (division C of Public Law 112-10; sec. 38-1853.01
et seq., D.C. Official Code) shall apply with respect to the
State after the date of the admission of the State into the
Union in the same manner and to the same extent as such Act
applied with respect to the District of Columbia as of the
day before the date of the admission of the State into the
Union.
(b) Termination.--The provisions of this section shall
terminate upon written certification by the State to the
President that the State has in effect laws requiring the
State--
(1) to provide tuition assistance substantially similar to
the assistance provided under the Scholarships for
Opportunity and Results Act; and
(2) to provide supplemental funds to the public schools and
public charter schools of the State in the amounts provided
in the most recent fiscal year for public schools and public
charter schools of the State or the District of Columbia (as
the case may be) under such Act.

SEC. 323. MEDICAID FEDERAL MEDICAL ASSISTANCE PERCENTAGE.

(a) Continuation.--Notwithstanding section 1905(b) of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d(b)), during the period
beginning on the date of the admission of the State into the
Union and ending on September 30 of the fiscal year during
which the State submits the certification described in
subsection (b), the Federal medical assistance percentage for
the State under title XIX of such Act shall be the Federal
medical assistance percentage for the District of Columbia
under such title as of the day before the date of the
admission of the State into the Union.
(b) Termination.--The certification described in this
subsection is a written certification by the State to the
President that, during each of the first 5 fiscal years
beginning after the date of the certification, the estimated
revenues of the State will be sufficient to cover any
reduction in revenues which may result from the termination
of the provisions of this section.

SEC. 324. FEDERAL PLANNING COMMISSIONS.

(a) National Capital Planning Commission.--
(1) Continuing application.--Subject to the amendments made
by paragraphs (2) and (3), upon the admission of the State
into the Union, chapter 87 of title 40, United States Code,
shall apply as follows:
(A) Such chapter shall apply with respect to the Capital in
the same manner and to the same extent as such chapter
applied with respect to the District of Columbia as of the
day before the date of the admission of the State into the
Union.
(B) Such chapter shall apply with respect to the State in
the same manner and to the same extent as such chapter
applied with respect to the State of Maryland and the
Commonwealth of Virginia as of the day before the date of the
admission of the State into the Union.
(2) Composition of national capital planning commission.--
Section 8711(b) of title 40, United States Code, is amended--
(A) by amending subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) to read
as follows:
``(B) four citizens with experience in city or regional
planning, who shall be appointed by the President.''; and
(B) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
``(2) Residency requirement.--Of the four citizen members,
one shall be a resident of Virginia, one shall be a resident
of Maryland, and one shall be a resident of Washington,
Douglass Commonwealth.''.
(3) Conforming amendments to definitions of terms.--
(A) Environs.--Paragraph (1) of section 8702 of such title
is amended by striking ``the territory surrounding the
District of Columbia'' and inserting ``the territory
surrounding the National Capital''.
(B) National capital.--Paragraph (2) of section 8702 of
such title is amended to read as follows:
``(2) National capital.--The term `National Capital' means
the area serving as the seat of the Government of the United
States, as described in section 112 of the Washington, D.C.
Admission Act, and the territory the Federal Government owns
in the environs.''.
(C) National capital region.--Subparagraph (A) of paragraph
(3) of section 8702 of such title is amended to read as
follows:
``(A) the National Capital and the State of Washington,
Douglass Commonwealth;''.
(b) Commission of Fine Arts.--
(1) Limiting application to the capital.--Section
9102(a)(1) of title 40, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``the District of Columbia'' and inserting ``the
Capital''.
(2) Definition.--Section 9102 of such title is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d) Definition.--In this chapter, the term `Capital'
means the area serving as the seat of the Government of the
United States, as described in section 112 of the Washington,
D.C. Admission Act.''.
(3) Conforming amendment.--Section 9101(d) of such title is
amended by striking ``the District of Columbia'' and
inserting ``the Capital''.
(c) Commemorative Works Act.--
(1) Limiting application to capital.--Section 8902 of title
40, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(c) Limiting Application to Capital.--This chapter
applies only with respect to commemorative works in the
Capital and its environs.''.
(2) Definition.--Paragraph (2) of section 8902(a) of such
title is amended to read as follows:
``(2) Capital and its environs.--The term `Capital and its
environs' means--
``(A) the area serving as the seat of the Government of the
United States, as described in section 112 of the Washington,
D.C. Admission Act; and
``(B) those lands and properties administered by the
National Park Service and the General Services Administration
located in the Reserve, Area I, and Area II as depicted on
the map entitled `Commemorative Areas Washington, DC and
Environs', numbered 869/86501 B, and dated June 24, 2003,
that are located outside of the State of Washington, Douglass
Commonwealth.''.
(3) Temporary site designation.--Section 8907(a) of such
title is amended by striking ``the District of Columbia'' and
inserting ``the Capital and its environs''.
(4) General conforming amendments.--Chapter 89 of such
title is amended by striking ``the District of Columbia and
its environs'' each place it appears in the following
sections and inserting ``the Capital and its environs'':
(A) Section 8901(2) and 8901(4).
(B) Section 8902(a)(4).
(C) Section 8903(d).
(D) Section 8904(c).
(E) Section 8905(a).
(F) Section 8906(a).
(G) Section 8909(a) and 8909(b).
(5) Additional conforming amendment.--Section 8901(2) of
such title is amended by striking ``the urban fabric of the
District of Columbia'' and inserting ``the urban fabric of
the area serving as the seat of the Government of the United
States, as described in section 112 of the Washington, D.C.
Admission Act''.
(d) Effective Date.--This section and the amendments made
by this section shall take effect on the date of the
admission of the State into the Union.

SEC. 325. ROLE OF ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS IN SUPPLYING WATER.

(a) Continuation of Role.--Chapter 95 of title 40, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following
new section:

``Sec. 9508. Applicability to Capital and State of
Washington, Douglass Commonwealth

``(a) In General.--Effective upon the admission of the
State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth into the Union,
any reference in this chapter to the District of Columbia
shall be deemed to refer to the Capital or the State of
Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, as the case may be.
``(b) Definition.--In this section, the term `Capital'
means the area serving as the seat of the Government of the
United States, as described in section 112 of the Washington,
D.C. Admission Act.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections of chapter
95 of such title is amended by adding at the end the
following:

``9508. Applicability to Capital and State of Washington, Douglass
Commonwealth.''.

SEC. 326. REQUIREMENTS TO BE LOCATED IN DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

The location of any person in the Capital or Washington,
Douglass Commonwealth on the day after the date of the
admission of the State into the Union shall be deemed to
satisfy any requirement under any law in effect as of the day
before the date of the admission of the State into the Union
that the person be located in the District of Columbia,
including the requirements of section 72 of title 4, United
States Code (relating to offices of the seat of the
Government of the United States), and title 36, United States
Code (relating to patriotic and national organizations).

TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS

SEC. 401. GENERAL DEFINITIONS.

In this Act, the following definitions shall apply:
(1) The term ``Capital'' means the area serving as the seat
of the Government of the United States, as described in
section 112.
(2) The term ``Council'' means the Council of the District
of Columbia.
(3) The term ``Mayor'' means the Mayor of the District of
Columbia.
(4) Except as otherwise provided, the term ``State'' means
the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth.
(5) The term ``State Constitution'' means the proposed
Constitution of the State of Washington, D.C., as approved by
the Council on October 18, 2016, pursuant to the Constitution
and Boundaries for the State of Washington, D.C. Approval
Resolution of 2016 (D.C. Resolution R21-621), ratified by
District of Columbia voters in Advisory Referendum B approved
on November 8, 2016, and certified by the District of
Columbia Board of Elections on November 18, 2016.

SEC. 402. STATEHOOD TRANSITION COMMISSION.

(a) Establishment.--There is established the Statehood
Transition Commission (hereafter in this section referred to
as the ``Commission'').
(b) Composition.--
(1) In general.--The Commission shall be composed of 18
members as follows:
(A) 3 members appointed by the President.
(B) 2 members appointed by the Speaker of the House of
Representatives.
(C) 2 members appointed by the Minority Leader of the House
of Representatives.
(D) 2 members appointed by the Majority Leader of the
Senate.
(E) 2 members appointed by the Minority Leader of the
Senate.
(F) 3 members appointed by the Mayor.
(G) 3 members appointed by the Council.
(H) The Chief Financial Officer of the District of
Columbia.
(2) Appointment date.--
(A) In general.--The appointments of the members of the
Commission shall be made not

[[Page H2531]]

later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act.
(B) Effect of lack of appointment by appointment date.--If
one or more appointments under any of the subparagraphs of
paragraph (1) is not made by the appointment date specified
in subparagraph (A), the authority to make such appointment
or appointments shall expire, and the number of members of
the Commission shall be reduced by the number equal to the
number of appointments so not made.
(3) Term of service.--Each member shall be appointed for
the life of the Commission.
(4) Vacancy.--A vacancy in the Commission shall be filled
in the manner in which the original appointment was made.
(5) No compensation.--Members shall serve without pay, but
shall receive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of
subsistence, in accordance with applicable provisions under
subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code.
(6) Chair and vice chair.--The Chair and Vice Chair of the
Commission shall be elected by the members of the
Commission--
(A) with respect to the Chair, from among the members
described in subparagraphs (A) through (E) of paragraph (1);
and
(B) with respect to the Vice Chair, from among the members
described in subparagraphs (F) and (G) of paragraph (1).
(c) Staff.--
(1) Director.--The Commission shall have a Director, who
shall be appointed by the Chair.
(2) Other staff.--The Director may appoint and fix the pay
of such additional personnel as the Director considers
appropriate.
(3) Non-applicability of certain civil service laws.--The
Director and staff of the Commission may be appointed without
regard to the provisions of title 5, United States Code,
governing appointments in the competitive service, and may be
paid without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and
subchapter III of chapter 53 of that title relating to
classification and General Schedule pay rates, except that an
individual so appointed may not receive pay in excess of the
rate payable for level V of the Executive Schedule under
section 5316 of such title.
(4) Experts and consultants.--The Commission may procure
temporary and intermittent services under section 3109(b) of
title 5, United States Code, at rates for individuals not to
exceed the daily equivalent of the rate payable for level V
of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of such title.
(d) Duties.--The Commission shall advise the President,
Congress, the Mayor (or, upon the admission of the State into
the Union, the chief executive officer of the State), and the
Council (or, upon the admission of the State into the Union,
the legislature of the State) concerning an orderly
transition to statehood for the District of Columbia or the
State (as the case may be) and to a reduced geographical size
of the seat of the Government of the United States, including
with respect to property, funding, programs, projects, and
activities.
(e) Powers.--
(1) Hearings and sessions.--The Commission may, for the
purpose of carrying out this Act, hold hearings, sit and act
at times and places, take testimony, and receive evidence as
the Commission considers appropriate.
(2) Obtaining official data.--The Commission may secure
directly from any department or agency of the United States
information necessary to enable it to carry out this Act.
Upon request of the Chair of the Commission, the head of that
department or agency shall furnish that information to the
Commission.
(3) Mails.--The Commission may use the United States mails
in the same manner and under the same conditions as other
departments and agencies of the United States.
(4) Administrative support services.--Upon the request of
the Commission, the Administrator of General Services shall
provide to the Commission the administrative support services
necessary for the Commission to carry out its
responsibilities under this Act.
(f) Meetings.--
(1) In general.--The Commission shall meet at the call of
the Chair.
(2) Initial meeting.--The Commission shall hold its first
meeting not later than the earlier of--
(A) 30 days after the date on which all members of the
Commission have been appointed; or
(B) if the number of members of the Commission is reduced
under subsection (b)(2)(B), 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
(3) Quorum.--A majority of the members of the Commission
shall constitute a quorum, but a lesser number of members may
hold hearings.
(g) Reports.--The Commission shall submit such reports as
the Commission considers appropriate or as may be requested
by the President, Congress, or the District of Columbia (or,
upon the admission of the State into the Union, the State).
(h) Termination.--The Commission shall cease to exist 2
years after the date of the admission of the State into the
Union.

SEC. 403. CERTIFICATION OF ENACTMENT BY PRESIDENT.

Not more than 60 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the President shall provide written certification
of such enactment to the Mayor.

SEC. 404. SEVERABILITY.

Except as provided in section 101(c), if any provision of
this Act or amendment made by this Act, or the application
thereof to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid,
the remaining provisions of this Act and any amendments made
by this Act shall not be affected by the holding.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for
1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority
member of the Committee on Oversight and Reform.
The gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) and the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Hice) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia.

General Leave

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
insert extraneous material on H.R. 51.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia?
There was no objection.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, the United States is the only democratic country that
denies both voting rights in its national legislature and local
autonomy to the residents of its nation's capital.
As we approach July Fourth, it is long past time to apply the
Nation's oldest slogan, ``no taxation without representation,'' and the
principle of consent of the governed to District of Columbia residents.
H.R. 51 would do so, and Congress has both the moral obligation and the
constitutional authority to pass the bill.
H.R. 51 would admit the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth
into the Union and reduce the size of the Federal District. The State
would consist of 66 of the 68 square miles of the present-day Federal
District.
The reduced Federal District, over which Congress would retain
plenary authority, would consist of 2 square miles. The reduced Federal
District would consist of the Washington that Members of Congress and
visitors associate with the Nation's Capital, including the White
House, the Capitol, the Supreme Court, and the principal Federal
monuments.
H.R. 51 has both the facts and the Constitution on its side. The
Constitution does not establish any prerequisites for new States, but
Congress generally has considered three factors in admission decisions:
resources and population, support for statehood, and commitment to
democracy.
The District pays more Federal taxes per capita than any State and
pays more Federal taxes than 22 States of the Union. The District's
population of 705,000 is larger than those of Wyoming and Vermont, and
the new State would be one of the seven States with a population under
1 million.
D.C.'s $15.5 billion budget is larger than those of 12 States, and
the District's AAA bond rating is higher than those of 35 States. D.C.
has a higher per capita personal income and gross domestic product than
any State.
Eighty-six percent of D.C. residents voted in favor of statehood in
2016. In fact, D.C. residents have been fighting for voting rights in
Congress and local autonomy for 219 years.
The Constitution's Admissions Clause gives Congress the authority to
admit new States, and all 37 new States have been admitted by an act of
Congress. The Constitution's District Clause, which gives Congress
plenary authority over the Federal District, sets a maximum size of the
Federal District of 100 square miles. It does not set a minimum size.
Congress previously has changed the size of the Federal District,
including by reducing it 30 percent in 1846.
Over the last few months, the Nation, and even the world, has
witnessed discriminatory and outrageous treatment of D.C. residents by
the Federal Government.
In March, Congress passed the CARES Act, which deprived the District
of $755 million in coronavirus fiscal relief by treating the District
as a territory rather than a State. The HEROES Act, passed by the House
in May, would restore those funds.
This month, Federal police and out-of-State National Guard troops
occupied D.C., without the consent of the D.C. Mayor, to respond to
largely peaceful protests. Prior to this occupation of the city, there
had been much more looting and property destruction in other cities,
but the Federal Government did not occupy those cities. The Federal
occupation occurred solely because the President thought that he could
get away with it. He was wrong.
For me, H.R. 51 is deeply personal. My great-grandfather, Richard
Holmes,

[[Page H2532]]

who escaped as a slave from Virginia on a plantation, made it as far as
D.C., a walk to freedom but not to equal citizenship. For three
generations, my family has been denied the rights other Americans take
for granted.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself an additional 1 minute.
Congress has two choices: It can continue to exercise undemocratic or
autocratic authority over the 705,000 American citizens who reside in
our Nation's capital, treating them, in the words of Frederick
Douglass, as ``aliens; not citizens, but subjects''; or Congress can
live up to this Nation's promise and ideals and pass H.R. 51.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Majority
Leader Steny Hoyer, Majority Whip James Clyburn, Chairwoman Carolyn
Maloney, and the late Elijah Cummings, our millions of allies across
the country, and, most importantly, generations of D.C. residents and
officials who have refused to simply accept their treatment as second-
class citizens for bringing us to this historic day.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 51,
and I reserve the balance of my time.
House of Representatives,

Committee on the Judciary,

Washington, DC, June 18, 2020.
Hon. Carolyn B. Maloney,
Chairwoman, Committee on Oversight and Reform, House of
Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairwoman Maloney: This is to advise you that the
Committee on the Judiciary has now had an opportunity to
review the provisions in H.R. 5803, the ``Washington, D.C.
Admission Act,'' that fall within our Rule X jurisdiction. I
appreciate your consulting with us on those provisions. The
Judiciary Committee has no objection to your including them
in the bill for consideration on the House floor, and to
expedite that consideration is willing to forgo action on
H.R. 5803, with the understanding that we do not thereby
waive any future jurisdictional claim over those provisions
or their subject matters.
In the event a House-Senate conference on this or similar
legislation is convened, the Judiciary Committee reserves the
right to request an appropriate number of conferees to
address any concerns with these or similar provisions that
may arise in conference.
Please place this letter into the Congressional Record
during consideration of the measure on the House floor. Thank
you for the cooperative spirit in which you have worked
regarding this matter and others between our committees.
Sincerely,
Jerrold Nadler,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives,

Committee on Oversight and Reform,

Washington, DC, June 22, 2020.
Hon. Jerrold Nadler,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
5803, the Washington D.C. Admission Act. As you know, the
bill was referred primarily to the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform, with an additional referral to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
I thank you for allowing the Committee on the Judiciary to
be discharged from further consideration of the bill to
expedite floor consideration. This discharge in no way
affects your jurisdiction over the subject matter of the
bill, and it will not serve as precedent for future
referrals. In addition, should a conference on the bill be
necessary, I would support your request to have the Committee
on the Judiciary represented on the conference committee.
I would be pleased to include this letter and your
correspondence in the Congressional Record during floor
consideration to memorialize our understanding.
Sincerely,
Carolyn B. Maloney,
Chairwoman.
____

House of Representatives,

Committee on Energy and Commerce,

Washington, DC, June 19, 2020.
Hon. Carolyn B. Maloney,
Chairwoman, Committee on Oversight and Reform, Washington,
DC.
Dear Chairwoman Maloney: I write concerning H.R. 5803, the
``Washington, D.C. Admission Act,'' which was additionally
referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce (Committee).
There are certain provisions in the legislation which concern
the Medicaid federal medical assistance percentage for a
newly admitted state and fall within the Rule X jurisdiction
of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
In recognition of the desire to expedite consideration of
H.R. 5803, the Committee agrees to waive formal consideration
of the bill as to such provisions. The Committee takes this
action with the mutual understanding that we do not waive any
jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this or
similar legislation, and that the Committee will be
appropriately consulted and involved as this bill or similar
legislation moves forward so that we may address any
remaining issues within our jurisdiction. I request that you
urge the Speaker to name Members of the Committee to any
conference committee which is named to consider such
provision. Such participation will be critical to allow the
Committee to continue to work on the policy involving the
Medicaid federal medical assistance percentage for a newly
admitted state.
Finally, I would appreciate the inclusion of this letter
into the Congressional Record during floor consideration of
H.R. 5803.
Sincerely,
Frank Pallone, Jr.,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives,

Committee on Oversight and Reform,

Washington, DC, June 22, 2020.
Hon. Frank Pallone,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
5803, the Washington D.C. Admission Act. As you know, the
bill was referred primarily to the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform, with an additional referral to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce, due to provisions in the
legislation which concern the Medicaid federal medical
assistance percentage for a newly admitted state.
I thank you for allowing the Committee on Energy and
Commerce to be discharged from further consideration of the
bill to expedite floor consideration. This discharge in no
way affects your jurisdiction over the subject matter of the
bill, and it will not serve as precedent for future
referrals. In addition, should a conference on the bill be
necessary, I would support your request to have the Committee
on Energy and Commerce represented on the conference
committee.
I would be pleased to include this letter and your
correspondence in the Congressional Record during floor
consideration to memorialize our understanding.
Sincerely,
Carolyn B. Maloney,
Chairwoman.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 51, the Washington, D.C.
Admission Act.
There is a whole lot more to statehood than simply being a large and
vibrant city. Our Nation's Founders made it clear that D.C. is not
meant to be a State. They thought about it, they debated it, and they
rejected it. In fact, in those early days, Alexander Hamilton himself
proposed an amendment that would allow the District residents to have a
voting Member in the House, and that proposal was rejected.
If the majority wishes to go against our Founders, that is their
prerogative, but they should simply admit, in their opinion, the
Founders were wrong. They cannot ignore the intention behind D.C.'s
current status. The Constitution simply does not allow city governments
to become microstates with all the rights and responsibilities of full
States. The debate about the nature of Washington, D.C., is not a new
debate, but it is absolutely a settled one.
My friends on the other side of the aisle may gasp and protest in
outrage at the suggestion that what this is really all about is an
attempt to get two more Democratic Senators. That is what this really
is all about.
On our side, there is no question that we have the Constitution on
our side on this whole debate. The Constitution clearly establishes a
federation of sovereign States, and representation here in Washington,
D.C., comes from those States, the federation of those States. This
District is a unique entity. It was set apart to not be influenced by a
State, but to, in itself, be governed by those representatives of the
various States who are here.
Our Founders did not want this city, the seat of our Federal
Government, to be influenced by any other State, but that is exactly
what this proposal would do.
As James Madison expressed it himself in Federalist 43, if the
Nation's Capital City were situated within a State, the Federal
Government could be subject to undue influence of that State. That is
not the intent of our Federal Government; that is not the intent of
this District that has been set aside; and that is exactly what would
happen under this bill.
My colleagues across the aisle believe that excluding a small Federal
enclave from this new State would nullify the need for a constitutional
amendment, but that is simply not true. The original text of the
Constitution is clear.
Congress has the power to create States from two sources: a territory
or

[[Page H2533]]

an existing State that agrees to secede its territory to become a
State. Washington, D.C., is neither of these. It is the Nation's only
Federal District, and it is set aside for a specific purpose. Congress
does not have the authority to take this District and create a State
out of it. At least one constitutional amendment would be required for
that to happen.
During the markup of this bill, I personally raised these
constitutional concerns and offered an amendment to provide an
expedited procedure to deal with the constitutional amendment, but the
Oversight Committee Democrats opposed that amendment, and they opposed,
in fact, all of our amendments that were put forth.
This is not a surprise that this whole proposal has been rejected by
the American people.

{time} 0930

In fact, in a Gallup Poll last year, 64 percent of Americans reject
the idea of D.C. being a State, only 29 percent approve of it.
Granting D.C. statehood goes against not only the American citizens'
desires, but more importantly, against the Constitution itself and
certainly our Framers' original intent.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues in the House to oppose the
Washington, D.C. Admissions Act.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), chairwoman of the House Committee
on Oversight and Reform, and I thank her for the way she conducted
hearings on H.R. 51.
Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton), and my good
friend, for her years of leadership on this bill. She is not only the
author of the bill, but of this historic day for our democracy.
For the first time in a generation, the House will vote today on
whether hundreds of thousands of American citizens will finally have
their voices counted in Congress.
We will vote to honor the most fundamental principles of this Nation
and for which a revolution was launched: no taxation without
representation and consent of the governed.
I can think of no more honorable or patriotic endeavor than taking up
this legislation today to give the people of the District the same
rights enjoyed by hundreds of millions of other Americans across our
country.
The United States is a democracy, but its capital is not. The United
States is the only democratic country that denies both voting rights in
the national legislature and local self-government to the people of the
capital. That is wrong and violates everything we stand for as
Americans.
The District pays more in Federal taxes than 22 States and more per
capita than any State. Think about that. It pays more than nearly half
the States in this country, yet D.C. residents have no vote in
Congress, and that is wrong.
The people of the District have been fighting for equal rights for
more than 200 years. In 2016, an overwhelming 86 percent of D.C.
residents voted for statehood.
President Trump's recent decision to deploy thousands of Federal law
enforcement officers in D.C. against residents peacefully exercising
their constitutionally-protected right to protest, and without the
consent of the District's elected officials, demonstrated the urgent
need for full local government and congressional representation.
Unfortunately, so far, Republicans have opposed our effort, and the
President made clear exactly why: they would rather deny voting rights
for hundreds of thousands of American citizens than even consider the
possibility that representatives from the new State could be Democrats.
Now, think about that argument. They are willing to violate the core
principles of our democracy merely because they may be from a different
political party. This argument is anti-democratic and un-American.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentlewoman from New York.
Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. The questions for Republicans
are these: Do they truly believe in taxation without representation? Do
they truly believe in States' rights? Do they truly believe the Federal
Government should stay out of local affairs? If they do, then join us
and act on these beliefs today. This bill should be bipartisan.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge every Member to vote on H.R. 51 for the
soon-to-be 51st State of our great country.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would just remind the chairwoman that the entire court
system of Washington, D.C., is supported by the Federal Government.
And there is representation. This District has three electoral votes.
No other city in the country has that. There is a representative here.
It is just an amazing thing, too, that this whole bill does not even
allow elections for the new Governor that is proposed here, so the very
thing they are arguing, they reject and deny from the residents.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina
(Mr. Murphy), my good friend.
Mr. MURPHY of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in opposition
to H.R. 51.
Voting against this legislation is not an economic, racial, or a
social injustice, as my colleagues across the aisle may unfairly claim.
I have no doubt that my Democratic friends, just like Republicans, want
the citizens of Washington to have political rights like every other
American. However, let's talk about what is honest here. Let's just be
honest.
The true goal here is to have two virtually guaranteed new Democratic
seats so that D.C. can become a State. That is what it comes down to.
That is the goal.
Why do I say that? Because there is a much simpler alternative that I
am baffled that the Democrats do not want anything to do with. I
offered an amendment to this bill that would retrocede the District of
Columbia back to Maryland. That is where the land came from.

Congress ceded the west side of the Potomac, now Alexandria, from the
District of Columbia back to Virginia in 1847. So there is plenty of
historical precedent for this action.
Unfortunately, despite making total sense, my amendment was, sadly,
blocked.
If D.C. were ceded back to Maryland, citizens can vote for Members of
the House of Representatives and Senate in Maryland. They would have
congressional representation in both Chambers, with the exact effect of
statehood.
The move is simply unnecessary, when ceding D.C. back to Maryland is
a viable, cost-effective, and commonsense option.
To further nullify this debate, the District of Columbia would
require a constitutional amendment to change. The Framers of the
Constitution, as has been said before, were very clear about this. The
Supreme Court reaffirmed this in 1949.
So why are we trying to overturn the Supreme Court? One answer:
politics, pure and simple.
Even setting aside the obvious need for a constitutional amendment,
my colleagues across the aisle know that this legislation has no chance
of becoming law. It is just the majority's attempt, again, to message
bills to satisfy the base.
Let me be clear: Republicans do not want to attempt to stifle voices
or suppress representation.
If the D.C. citizens want to have representation, then cede the land
back to Maryland, because I have demonstrated it is a more hands-down,
more practical solution.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to note that the
gentleman's amendment to cede the District of Columbia back to Maryland
did not have the consent of Maryland.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Connolly), my good friend.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend, Eleanor Holmes
Norton, who is managing today's bill to right a wrong, but
unfortunately, because D.C. does not have a vote here in the Congress,
she won't be able to cast a vote on final passage of her own bill.

[[Page H2534]]

Today, we are being asked to right a wrong. And you hear the
contortions on the other side of the aisle to continue to justify a
fundamental right being denied 700,000 fellow Americans who pay taxes,
who fight in our wars and serve in government, who have families, who
are Americans, but have no votes in the United States Congress. They
are bigger than five States.
They hide behind the Constitution. The Constitution was written
before they even knew where the capital of the United States would be,
before a blade of grass was touched to construct Washington, D.C. No
one at that time could have envisioned the metropolis of 700,000
Americans, let alone that they would be denied their fundamental
American right.
Let's cede it to Maryland. Two problems: Maryland doesn't want D.C.
and D.C. doesn't want to be in Maryland. The consent of the governed is
a fundamental part of the American architecture, which you conveniently
overlook.
And then there is the right to be represented, another fundamental
right denied D.C.
Mr. Speaker, it is partisan politics, yes. It is theirs. They want to
deny 700,000 people their right to representation in this body and in
the other body because of their politics, or likely politics.
When have we ever done that as America? We haven't looked at how
people would vote before we decide to incorporate them into the Union
as a State. We understood the right of people to petition to become a
State, and Congress has that power.
Let's right a wrong, especially in the post-George Floyd world, and
give people their rightful representation in the people's body and in
the Senate.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from Kentucky (Mr. Comer), my good friend and a great member of the
Oversight Committee.
Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Hice)
for his great leadership on this issue.
At a time when Speaker Pelosi is keeping Congress largely on the
sidelines, it is unfortunate that we are spending precious work time
debating blatantly unconstitutional legislation.
Not only is this measure unconstitutional and dead on arrival in the
Senate, but it should not be a priority for this body right now. Our
Nation is facing a serious need for action. We need police reform that
focuses on transparency and accountability, we need to support American
workers as States safely reopen their communities and economies, and we
need to ensure that money we have spent to fight the coronavirus is
effectively guarded against waste, fraud, and abuse.
Passing this measure today would signal a stunning lack of respect
for the Constitution. Making Washington, D.C., a State would
specifically violate the intentions of our Founding Fathers, who wanted
the national seat of government to belong to no State.
In fact, the Constitution specifically calls for Congress, not any
State government, to have authority over the District serving as the
seat of Federal Government.
Granting statehood for Washington, D.C., requires a constitutional
amendment, just as granting the District three electoral college votes
required the ratification of the 23rd Amendment.
It is time for Congress to get back to full-time work and take up the
pressing issues facing our country, not playing unconstitutional games.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Raskin), my good friend and neighbor.
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, when in the course of human events a
relationship stops working and one party experiences a long train of
abuses and indignities at the hands of the other, you scrap the old
relationship and you start anew.
It is nothing personal, but I wish our GOP colleagues in the House
and Senate could recognize that this just isn't working out anymore for
the people of Washington. The relationship you have taken for granted
for so long with the local population is dysfunctional and, frankly,
abusive.
Plainly put, the people of Washington want out.
It is not just the pepper spray and the tear gas and the rubber
bullets; it is not just crashing their churches and desecrating their
religion with your photo-ops; it is not just the use of their sons and
daughters in the National Guard to put down protests by their sons and
daughters in the streets; it is not just the threats to Federalize
their local police or the decision to overturn their adoption laws,
their marijuana laws, and their health funding choices; or your control
of their judges and prosecutors; or the constant Presidential insults
leveled against their chosen leaders; it is not that the GOP Members
who claim to be the attentive partners of the District never listen to
the people here, never go to their local meetings, don't know the mayor
or the city council or the ANC members; it is not even the $750 million
that they just cheated the people of Washington out of in the middle of
this plague.
It is something deeper. It is not just something you did.
The people of Washington have found someone and something else. They
have voted to break up this dysfunctional relationship with Congress to
start a healthy and respectful relationship with America.
In America, States make their own local policy and budget decisions
without constant tampering and interference by other people's
representatives.
In America, every political community stands on equal footing through
statehood. Each one sends two Senators to the U.S. Senate and voting
representatives to the House, delegations that guarantee no one will
push their people around.

{time} 0945

When you are a State, you help decide things like whether your
country goes to war, who will be your judges and supreme court
justices, how will your Federal tax dollars get spent, and what should
be the laws of the Nation.
The only question now is whether Congress is mature enough, is man
enough, to deal with the fact that Washington no longer wants to be
under our thumb. A mature and faithful Congress that wants the best for
all of its people is not afraid of statehood. We celebrate it. We
delight in it.
America started as 13 States, but we have exercised our powers under
Article IV, Section 3, 37 separate times to admit 37 new States, all of
them by simple legislative acts, none of them by constitutional
amendment, and each one was controversial in its own way.
I heard the gentleman say that you have to be either a territory or
formally part of another State to be admitted as a State. It is not
true. I have a one-word answer to that: Texas. It was its own
independent country. It was a republic, and people said that was
unconstitutional and Congress said: No, we are going to favor the
trajectory of democratic inclusion and political equality.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Maryland an
additional 30 seconds.
Mr. RASKIN. So every State has faced objections. They said Utah was
too Mormon, and New Mexico was too Catholic. Hawaii and Alaska, in
1959, of course, they weren't contiguous; they couldn't be admitted.
Yes, the District exists now under Article I, Section 8, Clause 17,
but the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia proposes to shrink
the Federal district the way it was shrunk in 1847 because the slave
masters of Virginia wanted the land back in advance of congressional
abolition of the slave traffic in the District.
If we can modify the boundaries of the Federal district to placate
the slave masters in the 19th century, we can modify the boundaries of
the Federal district in the 21st century to grant statehood and equal
rights to the people of Washington, D.C.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their
remarks to the Chair.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I will just remind my good friend,
listen, we share the concern if people are upset, if it is not working.
But the reality is, if it is not working, we have a system in this
government, in our system, to deal with it. And in this case, it is
called a constitutional amendment.
Why the Democrats are not presenting a constitutional amendment to

[[Page H2535]]

deal with the problem is beyond me, but it is what it is.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Gosar), my good friend.
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 51
and its affront to the Constitution.
The Founding Fathers did not intend for Washington, D.C., to be a
State. Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the United States
Constitution provides Congress with exclusive jurisdiction over the
District of Columbia. The enclave clause was included for specific
reasons, notably the fact that the operation of the seat of the Federal
Government of the United States, whose laws now affect approximately
330 million Americans, should not be impeded by local ordinances,
actions, or taxation.
The Framers of the Constitution had good reason for this concern,
having witnessed the reluctance of local authorities to police
disorderly conduct by protesters in June of 1783, conduct that forced
the adjournment of Congress and the flight of its Members to
neighboring States. We see similar situations playing out in the
streets today, right here in Washington, D.C.
Passage of this vote today violates the Constitution in two different
ways: first, withdrawing specifically enumerated powers granting
Congress control of the Federal district; and, two, ignoring the
constitutional amendment process the Framers outlined to make changes
to our founding charter.
Yesterday, I testified on my amendment to the Rules Committee, which
reaffirmed and enhanced congressional leadership over the District
provided in the District of Columbia Home Rule Act. Unfortunately, my
colleagues did not accept this amendment, which was crafted in the
spirit of the Constitution, pushing this legislation and the legal
thought behind it even further away from our founding tradition.
The last few months have been very difficult times in this country,
with unrest spanning throughout our Nation, including right here inside
Washington, D.C., itself. In the face of willful disregard for the rule
of law, it is irresponsible for this body to follow in these footsteps
by blatantly taking action against our Constitution.
The democratic and legal wisdom of our Founders is unprecedented, and
their calls for a legal charter, which granted and preserved individual
liberties and good governance, stand true today. Going against their
intentions now is neither prudent nor in the best interest of the
country.
I urge my colleagues to vote against H.R. 51.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Pelosi), the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and for
her tremendous leadership over time to remove obstacles of
participation to our democracy, whether it is a voting rights act for
all, or whether it is observing the 100th anniversary of women having
the right to vote, and whether it is about giving full participation in
our democracy to the District of Columbia.
I am proud to join her in wearing this mask. It says ``51st,'' and
that is why this legislation is H.R. 51, D.C. statehood, which I will
talk about now.
But Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton has been brilliant,
relentless, persistent, dissatisfied about the lack of full
participation for her constituents in the work of Congress. So I salute
her as the patron saint and guiding star of D.C. statehood, even before
she came to Congress, but since she came to Congress, she has worked
tirelessly and relentlessly to build historic support for this bill.
She gives us the honor of participating in this historic vote, wherein
the House of Representatives, for the first time, will vote for
statehood for the District.

D.C. statehood, Mr. Speaker, is both an official and a personal
priority for me. My colleagues have heard me say this, but I will say
it again. When I was born, my father was a Member of Congress from
Baltimore, Maryland. He was on the Appropriations Committee, and he
served as the chair of the D.C. appropriations subcommittee.
At that time, they tell me, that person would be regarded as the
mayor, unofficial mayor, of Washington because that Appropriations
Committee made all the decisions, so many decisions, for the District
of Columbia. He was a big supporter of home rule, seeing from that
perspective the unfairness of it all, a big supporter of home rule.
In any event, he did his job in a way to try to make a path, and it
passed; then later, home rule; then later a mayor and the rest; and
now, to where we are now.
Yesterday, someone said: Can you find middle ground? This is middle
ground, the status quo. We have to go forward.
I later had the privilege of serving on the Appropriations Committee,
on the District of Columbia subcommittee, and I saw the obstacles to
home rule that some in our Congress would put forth, diminishing the
self-determination that the people of the District of Columbia should
have.
Statehood for the District is about showing respect for our
democracy. It is not just about the District. It is about our
democracy, for the American people and for our U.S. Constitution, yes.
The Constitution begins with our beautiful preamble, ``We the
People,'' setting out our Founder's vision of a government of, by, and
for the people of the United States. It doesn't say, ``except for the
District of Columbia.''
Yet, for more than two centuries, the residents of Washington, D.C.,
have been denied their right to fully participate in our democracy.
Instead, they have been dealt the injustice of paying taxes, serving in
the military, and contributing to the economic power of our Nation,
while being denied the full enfranchisement that is their right.
Serving in the military, fighting, risking their lives for our
democracy, fundamental to that democracy is representative government.
They were willing to risk their lives for a principle, for a value, for
our democracy, while where they lived was being denied that full
opportunity.
Today, by passing H.R. 51, the Washington, D.C. Admission Act, to
admit the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth--State of
Washington, Douglass Commonwealth--to the Union--that would be
Frederick Douglass, from Maryland but who lived in the District of
Columbia, an abolitionist and a suffragist, actually. He was in Seneca
Falls at the Conference of Women, coming together for women having the
right to vote, so much about our democracy and voting for all
Americans.
In doing so today, we will bring our Nation closer to the founding
ideals that all are created equal and all deserve a say in our
democracy.
Mr. Speaker, I urge a bipartisan vote, I hope, again, but a strong
vote in the House for this very important legislation, legislation
important to our democracy, to our Constitution.
I thank, again, and salute Eleanor Holmes Norton for her leadership,
working with our distinguished leader, Mr. Hoyer, for whom this has
been a priority. I am proud that this is on the floor today.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time I have
remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Georgia has 18\1/2\
minutes remaining. The gentlewoman from the District of Columbia has 14
minutes remaining.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I would just say again that our
Constitution has representation here in our Capitol from the Federation
of the States, and this district was set apart, not to be a State, nor
to be influenced by one.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr.
Massie), a great member of the Oversight and Reform Committee.
Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Speaker, if there is a constitutional way to turn
D.C. into a State, this bill is not it. This bill is a farcical
exercise in legislative virtue signaling because it contains a fatal
constitutional flaw.
Let's talk about what this bill doesn't do. This bill doesn't
magically convert all of D.C. into a State. This bill doesn't create a
new State containing a city called D.C. Because both of these clearly
violate the Constitution.
Some overly clever legislative artists think they have found a new
loophole, a way to create a State in D.C. without violating the
Constitution. What this bill does is it seeks to shrink the city

[[Page H2536]]

of D.C. into a tiny city, and then creates a State from the territory
that is left over.
The problem with that is there is the 23rd Amendment to the
Constitution that gives the city of D.C. presently three electoral
votes. Paradoxically, the bill itself acknowledges the constitutional
flaw within because it contains an expedited procedure to vote on the
repeal of the 23rd Amendment in this Chamber and the Senate Chamber.
The problem is, the bill keeps plowing forward and would create a new
State, even if the 23rd Amendment is not repealed. This creates the
farcical situation where the few residents, which are the residents at
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the First Family, would control three
electoral votes. This is crazy.
So, I urge my colleagues to vote for the Constitution today and vote
against H.R. 51.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, the last thing we have to be concerned about
is whether or not the 23rd Amendment will be repealed, and the bill,
H.R. 51, contains an expedited procedure for that.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr.
Hoyer), my good neighbor and good friend, the majority leader of the
House of Representatives.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I am going to leave my mask on, not only
because it is the safe thing to do for all of you--not for me, for
you--but also because it represents the best of America.
I am from Maryland. Maryland was a slaveholding State. I represent
the district that probably had the most slaves, along with my friend
from the First Congressional District.

{time} 1000

In fact, there were many sympathizers for the Southern cause that
would have had Marylanders join the Confederacy. They were, of course,
wrong. But I want to tell my friends from those States that withdrew
and whose States tried to destroy the Union that they ought to remember
that this Nation took them back without condition with full citizenship
and the right to vote. Surely we can do the same for our fellow
citizens.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill, and I thank
Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton in her extraordinary quest keeping her
eye on the prize to make sure that the citizens she represents have
full citizenship and have our respect. I am proud to stand with her in
supporting statehood for the people of the District of Columbia.
On this mask, there is a drawing of the outline of the District of
Columbia. That is Maryland before the 1789 and subsequent actions. That
was Maryland. I daresay, there is not a Marylander who voted on that
secession of that land for the Capital of the United States who thought
to themselves they were disenfranchising those who lived in that
District.
I want to thank Mayor Bowser, with whom I have been proud to work to
move this issue forward with the leadership of Delegate Holmes Norton.
I made clear when we announced that the House would consider this bill
today that the people who call our Nation's Capital home have been
disenfranchised and shortchanged too long.
Martin Luther King said: How long?
Too long.
Not only have the residents of one of America's most historically
African-American cities--let me repeat that--historically, it is one of
our largest African-American cities. It is not exclusive. It is a
diverse city. Very frankly, it does not make a decision, if you don't
vote for us, we will not allow you to vote.
Hear me: If you don't vote for us, we will not allow you to vote.
But President Trump says that my friends on the other side of the
aisle, Mr. Speaker, would be foolish to vote for this bill. Why?
Because we are too Democratic and we wouldn't vote for you.
What do you think the North would have done with the 11 States that
tried to destroy the Union if we had said: You are not going to vote
for us, so you can't come back--at least, you can't come back with
voting rights, and we will keep you as subjects, not as citizens?
I hope every Member who represents one of those States thinks about
that proposition as you vote to exclude 706,000 of your fellow citizens
from full participation in our democracy.
Not only have the residents of one of America's great cities been
prevented from having full citizenship, but they have also been
shortchanged in the money that we give them. Just recently, COVID-19,
we gave them 40 percent of what we gave Wyoming, an entity 200,000
people smaller than the District of Columbia.
I see no heads shaking on the other side of the aisle, Mr. Speaker. I
see no agreement on that.
Should we say Wyoming is too small and that we ought to exclude
Wyoming, it is not big enough to be a State?
Yet Wyoming, more than 10 times smaller than the State of Maryland
and, as opposed to 40 million people in California, 500,000, one-
eightieth of the size, have two United States Senators.
Stand up if you think Wyoming ought not to have a vote.
I see no one standing.
This constitutional argument is a Don Quixote windmill argument.
These are 706,000 American citizens. At the same time, their elected
leaders can be overruled by Congress and by the President when it comes
to local issues, as we saw when President Trump ordered Federal law
enforcement and the National Guard to suppress peaceful and legitimate
protest against the killing of Black men and women in encounters with
the police and with others. George Zimmerman comes to mind and Trayvon
Martin.
This is about human rights. This is about democracy. This is about
our Nation being better than that.
I see my colleague from Maryland shaking his head. We disagree.
The people of D.C. deserve not only real self-government, but also
full representation in the Congress of the United States.
Are these 700,000 people less than the 500,000 people in Wyoming?
If we ask somebody to come to the District of Columbia and work for
our government, is the condition that they lose their citizenship, that
they lose their full voting rights? Is that the condition we put on
them? If so, I respectfully disagree with my colleagues who believe
that is what America is about.
That is what this historic legislation would do, admit Washington,
D.C., as the 51st State. That would provide residents of the District
of Columbia with a voting House Member and two Senators, as every other
group of Americans who lives in a jurisdiction called a State has the
right to have.
It would right a historical wrong to ensure that our Founders' vision
of representative government will be enacted for all Americans, no
longer excluding the 706,000 in the District of Columbia.
The House will take action today to make the District of Columbia a
State. It is an historic day.
Be on the right side of history. So many voted against the Civil
Rights Act of the 1960s and years thereafter. They were on the wrong
side of history.
The gentleman is absolutely right. Somebody mentioned it was
Democrats. We were a segregationist party. And guess what? We said we
do not want to be that kind of party, and Hubert Humphrey got up in
1948 in New York at a Democratic convention and said that we need to
come out of the dark shadows of slavery and segregation into the bright
sunlight of justice and equality.
Yes, I understand that was our party. We said to them: We do not want
to be that party.
Don't you be that party. Don't you have Lincoln turn over in his
grave and say: That is not our party.
Yes, I heard the gentleman over there. Sadly, in the denial of
democracy, the Republican-led Senate has indicated, Mr. Speaker, it
will not act, just as it has not acted on 275 bipartisan bills that we
have sent to the United States Senate. They will not act.
The majority of the Senate is elected by 18 percent of the American
people. That is unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, because this is more than
just a local issue for the District of Columbia. It is a civil rights
issue for our country, as yesterday was a civil rights issue for our
country.
It is something that ought to concern all Americans, because when
some Americans are denied the full rights and representation of
citizenship, it diminishes the meaning of citizenship for

[[Page H2537]]

all. Statehood is not merely a status; it is a recognition by the rest
of the States of the sovereign equality of the people who live there
that they are part of the main, not simply an island, as the poet
reflected, and that they cannot be treated as lesser by their fellow
citizens.
By admitting Washington, D.C., as a State, we will admit what we
already know to be true: that its people are our fellow Americans,
equal in their pursuit of happiness and their enjoyment of the full
rights and privileges of American citizenship, including representation
in the Congress of the United States.
Our patriot forebears in the 18th century used to cry out, ``No
taxation without representation.''
The citizens of Boston stole some tea, a criminal act, and they threw
it into the Boston Harbor. Why? They said: Because we will not be taxed
without representation and that King George cannot tell us what to do
without consulting us.
Be on the right side of history. Washington residents correctly still
use that battle cry in the 21st century. Let us make it ring true at
last. Let us make our Union of States a more perfect one by adding to
its number as we have 37 times consistent with the Constitution.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand up for America, stand up
for democracy, and stand up for the premise of America that every
person counts. Vote ``yes.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Trone). Members are reminded to address
their remarks to the Chair.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I feel like the arguments on the
other side of the aisle are so weak that they respond by yelling
louder.
We have just heard a great, passionate speech about something that is
totally irrelevant. In fact, the point was highlighted that the
condition for statehood is not population; otherwise, we would not have
States like Wyoming or Alaska or other States that were ever admitted.
That is not the issue. The issue was that Washington, D.C., was set
apart as a seat of government not to be the same as the federation of
States that our Constitution grants us.
Mr. HOYER. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HICE of Georgia. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much for his
respect.
Is the gentleman aware that the District of Columbia was reduced in
size historically a while back so that the land was reduced?
This is what is happening here. There is clear precedent for doing
this.
I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Roy), who is my good friend and a great leader.
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for
yielding.
I appreciate the opportunity to address this important issue and the
question the gentleman from Maryland just asked. I hear the question.
Yes, their District boundary lines have changed in the past, but what
the majority wants to do today is fundamentally alter what Washington,
D.C., is. That is what is at stake here.
I would love to hear the gentleman from Maryland expound on his
support and belief in our electoral college since, suddenly, my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle have a newfound respect for
the power of States and the importance of States. I would love to hear
them expound on that.
I would love to hear my colleagues on the other side of the aisle
talk about what is critical about community and about respecting the
ability of people to live differently in order for us to agree to
disagree, to allow Texas to be Texas, California to be California. I
would like love to hear my colleagues on the other side of the aisle
expound on these principles.
This is about power. That is what this is about. Let's make no
mistake about it. D.C., I do not believe, should become a State--and I
use that word importantly, should not become a State.
We can talk about the constitutional infirmities with what the
majority is trying to do. My colleagues are doing that, and they have
laid that out.
The Constitution speaks to creating the Federal city in Washington,
D.C. The Founders wanted to do that for a reason. We wanted this seat
to be completely unintertwined and separated from other States. We
wanted it to be special and unique and not subject to the powers and
the struggles that go on about the people in a certain State. That is
what is at stake here.
I would note that my friends, Mr. Raskin, Mr. Connolly, Mr. Hoyer,
and Mr. Beyer, are the first to rattle--the very first to rattle--if we
dare go down the road of potential shutdown, if we dare go down the
road of limiting the size and scope of the Federal Government. Why?
Because the jurisdictions they represent are wholly and heavily
dependent on this Federal Government.
I am a proud Texan dating back to the 1850s, but I grew up in Loudoun
County, Virginia, and went to the University of Virginia. When I grew
up in Loudoun County, it was 80 percent dirt roads. There was one
stoplight in my entire school district. It was a rural county fully
separated from Washington, D.C., and now it is the richest per capita
county in the United States of America because leviathan grows.

{time} 1015

It is because leviathan continues to separate from the real Americans
out there--the people throughout the entire country who are not being
represented by this body.
If we want to talk about representation, then let's talk about this
body doing its job to represent the people, the forgotten man. The
American people are tired of watching their country burning to the
ground, statutes being toppled, people getting killed in the streets.
And we are spending time here today on an unconstitutional effort to
create a State out of a Federal city that the Constitution contemplated
being separated so that it could be unique and be the power seat of
this great country.
Mr. Speaker, that is what this is about.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Maryland State (Mr. Sarbanes), my good friend, that
ceded land in perpetuity out of which the District of Columbia was
formed.
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, our colleague across the aisle a moment ago talked about
the District of Columbia being special. There is nothing special about
being second class, which is what has happened to the residents of the
District. For two centuries, the people of the District of Columbia
have been disenfranchised, denied fair representation, excluded from
our great democratic experiment. Over 700,000 residents--who just like
my constituents and your constituents--work hard, pay their taxes, and
contribute every day to the betterment of our society. Yet, they do not
have an equal voice in this Chamber.
Mr. Speaker, it is time to remedy this great injustice. Eleanor
Holmes Norton should have the same opportunity that every one of our
Members does: To see her name on that board for every vote, to walk
into the well and cast her ``yea'' or ``nay'' on behalf of the
constituents she represents.
We thank Congresswoman Norton for her service and for her tireless
fight to bring dignity to the residents of Washington, D.C.
House Democrats committed to this moment when this body passed H.R. 1
more than a year ago. We observed then and we reiterate today: There
are no constitutional, historical, financial, or economic reasons why
the 700,000 Americans who live in the District of Columbia should not
be granted Statehood.
At a time when Americans of all political stripes are demanding a
greater voice and participation in the political town square, the
residents of D.C. are being forcibly kept out of the town square by
this bizarre and indefensible anachronism.
Today, we are declaring enough is enough. It is time to give a voice
and a vote to the residents of the District of Columbia.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 51.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, to somehow try to paint a picture
that D.C. is a second-class city is absolute absurdity. Without
question, this is the most influential city in this country--perhaps in
the world.

[[Page H2538]]

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Grothman), my friend.
Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, first of all, a little comment, maybe
clearing things up. I will point out to everyone in the room that when
we say the Pledge of Allegiance, the phrase ``to the Republic for which
it stands'' is in the pledge. And I think we all remember the memorable
comment of Benjamin Franklin at a time around when the Constitution was
drafted. He talked about he was giving us ``a Republic, if we can keep
it.''
Now, at the time the Constitution was drafted, our forefathers did
include a district, which would be the capital for the country. Our
forefathers put together the United States and reached a compromise
between the 13 States. They realized at the time it would be ridiculous
to break apart a State and give it two Senators, like all of the other
States. In part, that is because it is so different and has such a
different interest in the States.
All of the States, the 50 States, to a variety of degree, have been
given an amount of agriculture. There is virtually no agriculture--
maybe no agriculture--maybe somewhere there is a greenhouse or
something in the District of Columbia. There is no manufacturing. There
is no mining or logging. Or if there is, it is so tiny we can barely
see it.
Mr. Speaker, it is a unique city because it is based on government
jobs and tourist jobs connected to people coming and visiting those
government buildings. It is not like any other State out there. If it
were to become a State, its representatives would have spent all their
time almost devoted to getting more money for the city. And already the
Federal Government puts a great deal of money into the city. You
couldn't complain that they do not have enough funds for their schools
or their city. I believe their schools are somewhere in the top--if you
considered it a State--somewhere in the top three or four in the
country, as far as funding per person.
Mr. Speaker, it would make no sense, say, for Wisconsin to break off
and give two Senators to Milwaukee and give two Senators to the rest of
the State. Milwaukee is not a State.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Kelly).
Ms. KELLY of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R.
51.
For more than 200 years, Americans living in the District of
Columbia--many of whom serve the people of this great Nation as public
servants--have been denied the right to self-government. That is a
founding principle of our great Nation.
Mr. Speaker, today, D.C. is home to more than 700,000 Americans and,
yet, they have no voting Members of Congress and no voice in the
Senate.
Establishing Washington, Douglass Commonwealth would not create our
Nation's smallest State by population, nor would it be reliant on the
Federal Government to survive.

There are States with smaller populations and many other States that
are far more dependent on Federal assistance.
Despite paying more in total Federal income tax than the residents of
22 other States, D.C. is continually treated like a territory instead
of a State in funding bills. These calculations starve the local
government of the funds they rightly deserve.
Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues listen to the voice of our Founding
Fathers, who we keep hearing about. ``No taxation without
representation.'' Well, D.C. pays its taxes. It deserves a voice in
Congress. And let's be clear about who is playing politics.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Gohmert), my good friend and a great leader.
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, it is amazing to hear people that have been
trained in the Constitution disregard it so. But we are taught at law
school the ability to rationalize absolutely anything. But the fact is,
Article I, Section 8, there is not one of the 37 States that have been
brought in by Congress that is addressed in the Constitution like this
district is. And it says specifically--this is the right of Congress--
``To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such
District (not exceeding 10 miles square)''--that is this one--``as may,
by cession of particular States and the acceptance of Congress, become
the seat of Government of the United States.''
And if you go back and look at Federalist Paper 43, you look at the
debate at the time, they understood. We have had the capital in New
York City. We have had it in Philadelphia. And that is dangerous.
Because it means if you are surrounded by a State and the capital is
part of that State or in the middle surrounded by the State, then
pressure can be brought to bear that would be so unfair. Look at the
debate. That is why that is in there, to protect that.
Mr. Speaker, now, one of the things that we agree on is that it is
wrong to make the residents of the District of Columbia pay income tax.
I have been filing a bill since 2008, I think it was, that would
eliminate the Federal tax. None of the territories--who also don't have
full voting Members of Congress--pay Federal income tax. D.C. shouldn't
either. That is a legislative fix we can do.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time is
remaining for each side?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Georgia has 9 minutes
remaining. The gentlewoman from Washington, D.C. has 10 minutes
remaining.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I say to the gentleman, paying Federal
taxes, that says everything about the desire of citizens of Washington,
D.C. to be equal, that we are quite willing to continue to pay Federal
income tax.
And I appreciate his amendment. We have rejected his amendment
because we want to be full citizens. That means paying our share.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from the Virgin
Islands (Ms. Plaskett), my good friend.
Ms. PLASKETT. Mr. Speaker, as a Member representing the territories,
I would rather pay taxes than have the treatment that this body gives
to those that live in the territories. I believe it is the greatest
scam and an okey-doke that you have allowed us not to pay taxes and
hold that against us to ask for our equal treatment. So keep paying
those taxes and you will get your Statehood one day.
Mr. Speaker, the United States territories that I represent are also
not on equal footing with the rest of the Nation. There is no
representation in the U.S. Senate. No equal voting representation in
the House of Representatives. Unlike D.C., we cannot vote for
President. We know what it is like to be part of the greatest country
in the world but not a full participant, and it feels incomplete.
As Americans, we strive to be productive citizens and an asset to the
Nation. Statehood for D.C. is a matter of fairness that has been slow
in coming. This city, built by African Americans with the use of forced
labor, contributes more in Federal taxes on a per person basis than
many States. It is a punishment to Americans living in the capital,
including those working in policy or public service for the good of the
Nation, to be disenfranchised when they establish a home in the
District.

This body changed the boundaries in the 1800s to ensure that slave
owners could keep their slaves. We have changed the boundaries in the
committee to allow for the Federal city to still exist and the
residents of D.C. to become a State. It has been done by this body
before. Don't make it seem like it is something that can't happen
again. At this very moment, citizens across this Nation are clamoring
for change, equality, and justice. With one vote, we can deliver that
for the people of D.C.
Mr. Speaker, it is time to do what is right and allow the people of
this city to feel whole, to feel complete, to feel like they matter.
Support H.R. 51.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, it certainly can happen. It just
requires a constitutional amendment.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr.
Harris), my good friend.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I hope America is watching what is going on
on the floor today, and they are paying careful attention to this
debate.
We hear speaker after speaker from the other side of the aisle say
things like, ``It has been done before.'' The majority leader: ``Clear
precedent.''
Yeah, there is clear precedent. We know the person who was in the
Chair just before comes from the State that actually was the clear
precedent: In

[[Page H2539]]

1847, when retrocession occurred. You know, my colleagues on the other
side of the aisle say this isn't politics. This is about getting voting
rights. This is about things like this. I would suggest that perhaps
the people watching go to Wikipedia and see what the history is about
the support for retrocession back to Maryland.
Mr. Speaker, because, you see, this is not Congress's land. This is
Maryland's land. Maryland gave it to the United States for the sole
purpose of a permanent, Federal enclave. The nerve of hundreds of my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle thinking it is their land. It
is Maryland's land. And if you want voting rights, it is simple: Do
exactly what occurred in 1847 and give the land back to Maryland.
But, whoa, wait a minute. That is not what this debate is about,
because retrocession has been proposed many times with no Democrat
supporters. In fact, the majority leader was in Congress when these
bills were proposed. If what he really wants is voting rights, he
should have cosponsored the bill.
Mr. Speaker, you know that if retrocession occurs, every single
resident--except those ones in the White House--because of the
amendment to the Constitution they actually get three electoral votes
under this proposed legislation, every single one of those residents
would have representation in Congress. And, yes, Eleanor Holmes Norton
could sit in Congress representing people from the State of Maryland.

{time} 1030

This is a pure political ploy. That is why none of my colleagues from
Maryland are going to vote against this bill today. That is why none of
my colleagues from Maryland have put in a retrocession bill. That is
why all of my hundreds of colleagues across the aisle are going to
pretend this is Congress' land. This is not.
The Constitution is clear. If this land is given back to Maryland,
Maryland has to accept.
Well, the argument is that Maryland doesn't want it back. That is
interesting. I sat in the Maryland legislature with my colleague, who
is sitting across the aisle right now. If our representatives from
Maryland are so concerned about getting voting rights, it is very
simple. Go to their colleagues in the Maryland General Assembly, fully
controlled by the Democrats, and say: ``Let's take it back. Let's give
those 700,000 people voting rights.''
Mr. Speaker, that is the correct approach. Don't steal this land from
Maryland.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, important to note that Maryland permanently
ceded the land that now is part of the District of Columbia. You can't
get back what you permanently ceded.
And it is important to note that we have had several Members from
Maryland speak.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr.
Mfume).
Mr. MFUME. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the distinguished Delegate,
the congressperson from Washington, D.C., for her steadfast leadership
on this.
I had the opportunity to work with her predecessor back in the late
1980s in this Chamber, Delegate Walter Fauntroy, who passed the torch,
and the Delegate has done a great job.
It took 27 years to get this vote back onto the floor. I was there in
1993 when we came up short. Today, I am hoping and praying that this
bill passes.
I want to congratulate you on that and to remind others that this is
not going to go away because, at the end of the day, this is really
about taxation without representation, one of the original 27 colonial
grievances filed against the King, which was a major cause of the
Revolutionary War.
So when people in Boston had the Tea Party and threw tea in the
Boston Harbor in December of 1773, they were making a statement and
setting an example for people across this Nation to understand that we
just can't tax people without allowing them to be represented.
You have heard the great discussions, the cogent points about the
fiscal side of this, that D.C. residents pay more taxes per capita than
any other State, that they pay more general taxes than 22 States, that
they have a budget larger than 11 States, and a bond rating better than
almost 30 other States.
I have heard this discussion when it comes to fiscal matters about
the constitutional federation of States, the great words of Hamilton
and the Federalists and the Federalist Papers. I understand that.
But one thing we have to remember when we raise Hamilton and talk
about the Federalists is that their stated belief was the Constitution
was meant to evolve, that it was a living document. That is not my
impression. That is the impression and the opinion of the Federalists.
If that were not true, I could not be here as a descendant of a slave
without the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments. The distinguished woman
couldn't be here. She had not the right to vote under the Federalist
Papers. Alaska and Hawaii, when I was born, were not States.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, the Constitution can change by
amendment only.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr.
Brooks).
Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I will never vote to give
Washington, D.C., separate statehood status. Washington, D.C., is a
city, not a State. Its population is roughly one-seventh that of
Alabama.
To add perspective, giving D.C. statehood is the equivalent of giving
Jefferson County, Alabama, or the Tennessee Valley separate statehood
status. That is nuts.
History is in order. The District of Columbia originally was 100
square miles, 10-miles square. Part of D.C. was in Maryland; part was
in Virginia.
In 1847, the Virginia part of the District of Columbia was given back
to Virginia, leaving only the Maryland portion of D.C. still in D.C.
These former D.C., now Virginia, residents gained the right to vote
on U.S. Senators once Senators became elected rather than appointed.
If D.C. residents want to vote on U.S. Senators, fine. That can be
done by following historical precedence and giving the residential
portion of D.C. back to Maryland, keeping the Federal Government
portion, the Capitol, White House, monuments, The Mall, Federal
buildings, and the like in D.C.
But this option won't be offered by Democrats because they don't care
one twit about D.C. residents voting on U.S. Senators. Rather, their
goal is to have two more guaranteed leftwing Senators.
If offered, I will vote to return residential portions of D.C. to
Maryland, thus giving D.C. citizens the power to vote on Maryland's two
U.S. Senators. That option is consistent with historical precedence.
But I will never vote to give a single middling-size city the same
political power as one of America's great 50 States. I will never
support this sham that is motivated by crass partisan political power,
not a desire to let citizens of the District of Columbia vote on U.S.
Senators.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have
remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from the District of
Columbia has 5\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Waters), my friend and the chair of the Financial
Services Committee.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support H.R. 51, the Washington,
D.C. Admission Act, which would end centuries of taxation without
representation and make Washington, D.C., the 51st State.

And nobody is giving back anything. Washington, D.C., is the home to
more Americans than two States, and more than 46 percent of its 700,000
residents are Black.
Make no mistake, race underlies every argument against D.C.
statehood, and denying its citizens equal participation and
representation is a racial, democratic, and economic injustice we
cannot tolerate.
It must be acknowledged that the chance to right these wrongs with
today's vote would not be possible without my good friend, Eleanor
Holmes Norton. We were both elected at the same time, and she has been
dogged and consistent every single year since then in her fight for
this bill and D.C. statehood.
I am so pleased to join my friend in today's milestone vote, and I am
hopeful that Eleanor's long effort will finally give D.C. the rights
they deserve.

[[Page H2540]]

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers. I am
prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North
Carolina (Mr. Butterfield).
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I thank Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton
for her years of leadership on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, from 1910 through 1970, thousands of African Americans
from my district, and from your district, Mr. Hice, migrated to
Washington, D.C., seeking employment and better opportunities than
existed in the segregated South. They work and worship, and they pay
their taxes. They own and operate businesses here in D.C. They teach in
the public schools. They are Capitol Police. They clean our offices.
I know very well that some of Ms. Holmes Norton's ancestors
originated in my congressional district.
Mr. Speaker, D.C. residents pay the highest per capita Federal income
taxes in the country. They pay more Federal taxes than residents of 22
States. It is a grave injustice that they don't have representation in
this body.
It is time to say to the citizens of this city that they, too, are
American citizens and deserve to be part of this great Union, with full
rights of citizenship.
What they don't need to hear on this floor today is for Members to
say, ``I will never vote for D.C. statehood.'' That is irresponsible.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Johnson).
Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, Article IV, Section 3.1,
provides that new States may be admitted by Congress into this Union.
There is absolutely no requirement for a constitutional amendment.
I was born and raised in Washington, D.C., spending my formative
years in this great domain, and I grew up knowing that my parents paid
taxes but had no voting representation in Congress.
It was paradoxical that I learned in school that the cries of
patriots, ``No taxation without representation,'' did not apply to the
people of this great domain.
We obeyed the same laws and paid the same taxes as our fellow
Americans, but we had no hope in taking part in the governance of
America.
I thank the Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton for keeping hope alive.
I am here today to say that it is time to end the legal
disenfranchisement of a population larger than the States of Vermont
and Wyoming. This vote is long overdue, and I intend to vote in favor
of D.C. statehood, and I encourage my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
Mr. HICE of Georgia. May I inquire as to how much time I have
remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Georgia has 4 minutes
remaining.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Michigan (Ms. Stevens).
Ms. STEVENS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my esteemed and tireless colleague
from the District of Columbia, Congresswoman Holmes Norton.
In this very Chamber, we have, throughout our Nation's history, long
debated statehood for many lands and many people, and adding new States
we have.
In 1837, Michigan statehood was passed by Congress as the 26th State
and signed by President Jackson, who proudly stated Michigan was
``admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the original States
in all respects.''
In 1959, as we added Hawaii to the Union, the Secretary of the
Interior declared: ``The great statehood of Hawaii will be granted and
prove to the world . . . that we practice what we preach.''
Now, as we add Washington, D.C., and recognize the over 700,000
people, hundreds of thousands of Federal taxpaying people, to this
Union, we reaffirm, we restore, and we continue to flourish our
democracy that manifests to promote the general welfare.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have
remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from the District of
Columbia has 1\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I want to give all acknowledgment to
the outstanding gentlewoman, Eleanor Holmes Norton.
President Washington said: ``The Constitution is the guide which I
will never abandon.'' Nothing in the Constitution says that we cannot
make the Washington State the Douglass Commonwealth. Frederick Douglass
said there is no power without struggle.
The sons and daughters of Washington, D.C., laid down their lives for
this country in World Wars. They stand for this country in service to
this government. Why are we denying them their rights?
Alaska has 700,000-plus people. There is no population requirement.
Make Washington, D.C., a State now.
Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Committee on the Judiciary, as
an original cosponsor of the legislation, I rise in strong and
enthusiastic support of H.R. 51, the ``Washington, D.C. Admission
Act,'' which declares the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth,
to be a State of the United States of America, and declares its
admission into the Union on an equal footing with the other States in
all respects whatsoever.
George Washington, the nation's first Chief Executive, and the
President of the Constitutional Convention which met in Philadelphia,
said: ``The Constitution is a guide which I will never abandon.''
The action we are taking today to admit the State of Washington,
Douglass Commonwealth, as the 51st state of the Union is consistent
with the authority vested in the Congress by the Constitution in
Article IV, section 3, clause 1.
The Constitution does not specify a minimum population or acreage
test that a state must meet to gain admission to the Union, rather
leave the determination to be made in the sound judgment of the
Congress, which admitted Wyoming which has more than 200,000 fewer
persons than the District of Columbia, and Alaska, which had only
224,000 persons when it was admitted as a state in 1959.
Mr. Speaker, in doing passing this legislation, we remove a stain
that has blighted our nation for more than 200 years.
I thank Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, my colleague and the
representative of the 706,000 residents of the District of Columbia,
for her tireless and relentless efforts in shepherding this legislation
to the floor today.
Mr. Speaker, in his famous 1857 oration in Candaigua, New York, the
great abolitionist, Frederick Douglass, said: ``If there is no struggle
there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet
deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the
ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the
ocean without the awful roar of its many waters.''
The vote we are about to cast today is long time in coming but shows
that struggle can lead to progress, that truth crushed to earth shall
rise again, that justice cannot be denied.
Today, we vote to end two centuries of shame and correct an injustice
to the citizens of the District of Columbia.
Mr. Speaker, let us not lose sight of one indisputable and shameful
fact: over 700,000 people living in the District of Columbia lack
direct voting representation in the House of Representatives and
Senate.
Specifically, the citizens of the District of Columbia pay more in
federal taxes than 22 states and pay more in federal taxes per capita
than any state.
The District of Columbia's population (705,000) is larger than the
populations of Wyoming and Vermont, and seven states had populations
under one million in the last census.
The District of Columbia's annual budget ($15.5 billion) is larger
than the budgets of 14 states.
The District of Columbia has a higher per capita personal income and
gross domestic product than any state.
District of Columbia residents have fought and died in every American
war, including the Revolution itself, and almost 200,000 District
residents have served in the military since World War I alone.
Approximately 30,000 veterans live in the District of Columbia, and
it should be noted that during the Vietnam War, 243 District residents
were casualties of war, a casualty figure greater than that observed by
10 different states.
So, Mr. Speaker, it is undisputable that residents of the District of
Columbia serve in the military, pay billions of dollars in federal
taxes each year, and assume other responsibilities of U.S. citizenship.
But for over 200 years, the District of Columbia has been denied
voting representation

[[Page H2541]]

in Congress--the entity that has ultimate authority over all aspects of
the city's legislative, executive, and judicial functions.
Mr. Speaker, if a person can be called upon to pay federal taxes and
serve in the armed forces of the United States, then he or she should
at least have the opportunity to vote for a representative who could at
least cast a symbolic vote in this chamber on critical matters facing
our nation.
Issues like war and peace, equality and justice.
And tear-gassing peaceful protestors in Lafayette Square exercising
their First Amendment rights.
Mr. Speaker, taxation with representation is tyranny.
H.R. 51 would create a state from essentially the eight hometown
wards of the District of Columbia and provides that the new state would
be equal to the other 50 states in all respects, and that the residents
of the State of Washington, D.C. would have all the rights of
statehood, including voting representation in Congress and full local
self-government.
Under the legislation this new state would have no jurisdiction over
the reduced federal district, which would consist of the area that
Members of Congress and visitors associate with the capital of our
country: the U.S. Capitol, the U.S. Supreme Court, the White House, the
principal federal monuments, and the federal buildings and grounds
adjacent to the National Mall and the U.S. Capitol.
It is unconscionable that 700,000 Americans are being unconscionably
denied a vote and a voice in the most important legislative body in the
world.
As a supporter of freedom, democracy, and equality, I believe that it
is long overdue for the citizens of the District of Columbia to have
representation in the House and the Senate to advocate for their
interests on vital matters coming before the Congress of the United
States.
Mr. Speaker, it is wrong that we must be reminded daily by license
plates in the District of Columbia that ``Taxation without
representation is tyranny.''
The people in Boston felt so strongly about this in 1775 that they
rebelled in Boston Harbor, launching the ``Boston Tea Party.''
The principle that political authority derives from the consent of
the government is no less applicable when it comes to the District of
Columbia.
Let us be clear, there is no dispute that hundreds of thousands of
American citizens reside in the District of Columbia.
We all agree that universal suffrage is the hallmark of a democratic
regime, of which the United States is the world's leading exemplar.
None of us believes it is fair that citizens of the District of
Columbia pay federal taxes, risk life and limb fighting wars abroad to
protect American democracy and extend the blessings of liberty to
people living in foreign lands.
In short, there is no moral reason to deny the citizens of the
District of Columbia admission as a state in the United States and the
right to full representation in Congress.
The only question is whether Congress has the will and the
constitutional authority to do so.
Congress has always had the constitutional authority but for much of
the last 200 years, it has not had the will.
Let us change that, beginning today with our vote to pass H.R. 51,
the Washington, D.C. Admission Act.

{time} 1045

Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I am intrigued listening to my
colleagues waxing eloquent about the divine creation of the District of
Columbia. Give me a break. It was old-fashioned horse trading between
Hamilton, Madison, and Jefferson like the declaration of enslaved
people being three-fifths of a person without being able to vote for
themselves, just simply power for White people.
It is time to recognize the reality of what I think was a corrupt
bargain and give the District of Columbia the statehood it deserves.
Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my
time.
Despite the passionate arguments that we have heard today regarding
H.R. 51, the plain truth is that Washington, D.C.'s status as the
Capital of the United States is exactly as our Founders intended.
To be clear, Washington, D.C., is a vibrant and special city holding
a unique position in our Nation's Federal system. Our Nation's Capital
does not exist within one State, and therefore, it is free from the
influence of any State. That is exactly the intention of our
Constitution and our Founders.
But not only is the Constitution proposal going to be a violation of
our Constitution, but practically speaking, D.C. is not prepared
financially and otherwise as a microstate.
Currently, Washington, D.C., only raises about half of its annual
budget through local taxes, despite the fact that they have some of the
highest taxes in the Nation. This shows a lack of financial readiness
for the responsibility of statehood.
Congress has already dealt with this in the past, and D.C.'s
financial situation, we bailed it out in the 1990s after 20 years of
troubled self-rule.
The majority's bill does not take into account how these budgetary
shortfalls would be remedied or how the taxpayers would be relieved.
Statehood first, the details later, that is the majority's proposal.
In seeking to gain an extra two seats in the Senate, Democrats would
strip this great historic city of its special status and make it a
shell state. The Democrat's statehood proposal leaves us with a State
in name only, and a tiny remnant of a Federal district. This is far
from the intent of our Founding Fathers.
We live in a federation, a federation of States. I would say there is
no one who is a greater supporter of States' rights than I am, but
because I believe in States' rights, I cannot support this city
becoming a State.
D.C. is simply not equipped to shoulder the burden of statehood. If
Democrats were serious about granting representation to the citizens of
D.C., they would consider retroceding the land back to Maryland, as has
been proposed, but that has been rejected over and over. If D.C.'s
citizens rejoin Maryland, they would gain the Senate and House
representation that supposedly is what this bill is after.
But this statehood proposal is about politics all dressed up in noble
arguments about disenfranchising and taxation without representation.
It is just a big sham.
The Constitution is clear. A new State can be formed from Federal
territories or from existing States with their permission. But the
current Federal district is not an existing State, nor is it a
territory. It is unique, and our Framers specifically crafted the
Constitution with a maximum size for the District, so as to prevent it
from becoming a State.
We have been over this time and again, but H.R. 51 changes the clear
intentions of our Founders. By making the District a State, we are
going exactly against the intent of our Framers and the intentions of
our Constitution. The Framers crafted our Constitution with the direct
intent that we would have a unique district, the seat of our Federal
Government that is not influenced by a State. That is what we have, and
that is what we need to keep.
H.R. 51 disregards the Constitution, and we cannot take this lightly.
I ask my colleagues to oppose this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from the District of
Columbia has 30 seconds remaining.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
This bill allows our country to live up to its claim to be a
democracy. We stand out as the only democracy which denies democracy to
the residents of its own Capital City.
Our claim to world leadership is marred until, with this bill, the
residents of our Capital are equal in citizenship to the citizens of
every Member of the House of Representatives.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of
H.R. 51, the Washington, D.C. Admission Act--a bill long overdue and
exceedingly necessary.
This is a measure that I have supported since my inaugural term in
the House of Representatives, 27 years ago, when I cosponsored
Representative Holmes Norton's second-ever statehood bill. Her
continued leadership and tenacity on this issue as the Delegate from
Washington, D.C. is nothing short of extraordinary, and it is because
of her efforts that today we vote on a statehood bill for the first
time in almost three decades.
For too long, the over-700,000 residents of the District of Columbia
been denied voting representation while still paying taxes, serving in
our military, and adhering to federal laws. Think of that--here, in the
greatest legislative and deliberative body in the world, we routinely
prevent hundreds of thousands of our

[[Page H2542]]

citizens, half of which are African American, from having their voices
heard. The admission of D.C. as a state and redesignation as the
Douglass Commonwealth will not only extend rights and liberties to its
residents but, in doing so, honor the memory of the iconic abolitionist
and D.C. native Frederick Douglass.
Mr. Speaker, as over half of the Members of the House of
Representatives are already cosponsoring H.R. 51, I do not doubt that
it will pass. I urge those remaining who have not cosponsored this bill
to stand on the right side of history and support this bill.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of D.C.
statehood. Today's affirmative vote in the House of Representatives to
admit the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth as the 51st state
in the Union is long overdue for the more than 700,000 disenfranchised
American citizens who currently live in the District of Columbia. This
is the first time a chamber of Congress has voted to approve D.C.
statehood. I have long been a proponent of D.C. statehood and was the
only member of the Virginia delegation to vote for D.C. statehood the
last time it came before the House in 1993. And during my service as a
member of the Virginia House of Delegates, I introduced the resolution
for Virginia to ratify the Constitutional Amendment to grant full
Congressional voting rights to the District of Columbia. Unfortunately,
neither my resolution nor the Constitutional Amendment were ultimately
successful.
Today's vote marks a historic victory for the indefatigable advocates
for statehood including my colleague, Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes
Norton, who has been a tireless advocate for the disenfranchised
citizens of our nation's capital. Supporting D.C. statehood is about
our nation's core constitutional principles of self-determination,
opposition to taxation without representation, and giving an equal
voice to all Americans regardless of where they live. I hope my
Republican colleagues in the Senate put aside politics and pass this
bill and finally end the historic injustice that has persisted for more
than 200 years for the people of Washington, D.C.
Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R.
51--the Washington, D.C. Admission Act--introduced by my colleague,
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton. This bill would not only establish the
District of Columbia (``D.C.'') as the 51st state of the United States,
but it would also grant long overdue voting representation at the
federal level to the residents of D.C.
I remain committed to the principles this country boasts: democracy
and representation. Since 1801, the residents of D.C. have been denied
federal representation. They pay their taxes and have fought and died
in every American war, yet those armed service members and their
families are deprived of the freedoms they have fought to protect.
Statehood is the only remedy that provides full representation in
Congress for the residents of Washington, D.C.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1017, the previous question is ordered
on the bill, as amended.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.

Motion to Recommit

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to the bill in its current
form.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Keller moves to recommit the bill H.R. 51 to the
Committee on Oversight and Reform with instructions to report
the same back to the House forthwith with the following
amendments:
Page 3, insert before line 1 the following:

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:
(1) The admission of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth as a
State under this Act requires the President to issue a
proclamation prior to the new State's admission to the Union.
(2) To assure the interests of the rest of the Nation that
up until now have had shared ownership of the Nation's
capital through their representation in Congress, this Act
requires the constitution of the new State of Washington,
Douglass Commonwealth to contain certain provisions before
the President issues a proclamation recognizing it as a new
State in the Union.
(3) This Act provides as a precondition of admission that
the new State require in its State constitution that the
State does not require a fee or assessment in order to carry
a concealed firearm in the state.
(4) This Act provides as a precondition of admission that
the new State prohibit in its State constitution any statute,
ordinance, policy or practice that prohibits or restricts any
government entity or official from enforcing national
immigration laws.
(5) This Act provides as a precondition of admission that
the new State prohibit in its State constitution, in order to
protect the history and integrity of so many of the Nation's
monuments and landmarks that will exist within the boundaries
of the new state of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, any
law that alters or affects any of the authorities of Federal
planning commissions.
(6) This Act provides as a precondition of admission that
the new State require in its State constitution that the
State enact and enforce laws to prohibit the destruction of
any property of the United States within the State and laws
to prohibit the destruction of any military memorials within
the State.
(7) This Act provides as a precondition of admission that
the new State require in its State constitution that the
State enact and enforce laws to prohibit secession from the
State or the obstruction of law enforcement officers.
(8) This Act provides as a precondition of admission that
the new State prohibit in its State constitution any use of
State taxpayer funds for campaign activity for public office.
(9) This Act provides as a precondition of admission that--
(A) the new State require in its State constitution that
the new State ensures dedicated and priority funding for law
enforcement and public safety; and
(B) the Mayor provides a certification to the President
that the District of Columbia has enacted laws providing for
adequate and permanent funding of law enforcement and public
safety.
(10) This Act provides as a precondition of admission that
the new State require in the State constitution that the
State will continue to participate in the Scholarships for
Opportunity and Results program under the terms and
conditions in effect as of the date of admission.
Page 6, line 18, strike ``The President'' and insert
``Subject to subsections (c) and (d), the President''.
Page 7, insert after line 2 the following:
(c) Revisions to State Constitution.--The President may not
issue the proclamation under subsection (a) until the Mayor
provides the President with a written certification that the
District of Columbia has adopted each of the following
amendments to the State Constitution:
(1) Right to concealed carry.--An amendment that prohibits
the State from requiring a fee or assessment in order to
carry a concealed firearm in the State.
(2) Sanctuary city status.--An amendment that prohibits the
State from having in effect a statute, ordinance, policy, or
practice that prohibits or restricts any government entity or
official from--
(A) sending, receiving, maintaining, or exchanging with any
Federal, State, or local government entity information
regarding the citizenship or immigration status (lawful or
unlawful) of any individual; or
(B) complying with a request lawfully made by the
Department of Homeland Security under section 236 or 287 of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1226 and 1357)
to comply with a detainer for, or notify about the release
of, an individual.
(3) Authorities of federal planning commissions.--An
amendment prohibiting the laws of the State or members of
executive offices of the State from acting to alter or affect
any of the authorities of Federal planning commissions,
including the National Capital Planning Commission, the
Commission of Fine Arts, or the National Capital Memorial
Advisory Commission, as such authorities are amended by
section 324 of this Act.
(4) Prohibiting destruction of federal property and
military memorials.--An amendment requiring the State to
enact and enforce laws to prohibit the destruction or the
attempted destruction of any property of the United States
within the State and laws to prohibit the destruction or the
attempted destruction of any structure, plaque, statue, or
other monument on public property within the State
commemorating the service of any person or persons in the
armed forces of the United States.
(5) Prohibiting secession from state or obstructing law
enforcement officers.--An amendment requiring the State--
(A) to enact and enforce laws to subject any person who
incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion,
secession attempt or claim, or insurrection against the
authority of the State or the laws thereof, or gives aid or
comfort thereto, to a fine or a term of imprisonment of not
less than 10 years, or both, and to prohibit any such person
from holding any public office in the State; and
(B) to enact and enforce laws to make it a felony to
obstruct a law enforcement officer, and to provide that a
person commits such a felony if the person willfully hinders,
delays, or obstructs any law enforcement officer in the
discharge of his or her official powers or duties.
(6) Prohibiting use of taxpayer funding for political
campaigns.--An amendment requiring the State to enact and
enforce laws that prohibit any revenue collected (or
otherwise generated or procured) by the State from being used
to finance, directly or indirectly, any candidate, or
candidate committee supporting a campaign, for election for
public office.
(7) Requiring dedicated and priority funding for law
enforcement and public safety.--To protect the life,
property, and

[[Page H2543]]

welfare of the citizens of the State and visitors from other
jurisdictions by ensuring the adequate and continued funding
of law enforcement and public safety agencies--
(A) an amendment requiring the State Chief Financial
Officer, or the equivalent State official, to appropriately
prioritize law enforcement and public safety in the State
budget and in the administration of the State's cash
management and payroll operations; and
(B) an amendment prioritizing access to the State budget
emergency and contingency reserve funds, or their
equivalents, to assure uninterrupted spending to cover the
operational expenses related to law enforcement and public
safety.
(8) Participation in opportunity scholarship program.--An
amendment requiring the State to continue to participate in
the Scholarships for Opportunity and Results program under
the terms and conditions in effect as of the date of
admission.
(d) Budget Certification for Funding of Law Enforcement and
Public Safety.--The President may not issue the proclamation
under subsection (a) until the Mayor provides the President
with a written certification that the District of Columbia
has enacted laws sufficient to provide for a dedicated source
of locally-raised revenue to provide adequate and permanent
funding for law enforcement and public safety agencies to
enforce the laws of the State and protect the life, property,
and welfare of the citizens of the State and visitors from
other jurisdictions.
Page 85, line 10, strike ``shall apply as follows:'' and
all that follows through line 24 and insert ``shall apply
with respect to the State of Washington, Douglass
Commonwealth and the Capital in the same manner and to the
same extent as such chapter applied with respect to the
District of Columbia as of the day before the date of the
admission of the State into the Union''.
Page 86, line 6, strike ``four citizens'' and insert ``five
citizens''.
Page 86, line 11, strike ``four citizen members'' and
insert ``five citizen members''.
Page 87, line 2, strike ``means the'' and insert ``means
the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, the''.
Page 87, line 10, strike ``and the State of Washington,
Douglass Commonwealth''.
Page 87, line 13, strike ``Limiting application to the
capital'' and insert ``Clarifying application to the national
capital''.
Page 87, line 20, strike ``the term `Capital' means'' and
insert ``the term `National Capital' means''.
Page 88, line 3, strike ``Capital'' and insert ``National
Capital''.
Page 88, line 5, strike ``Limiting application to capital''
and insert ``Clarifying application to national capital''.
Page 88, line 9, strike ``Limiting application to capital''
and insert ``Clarifying application to national capital''.
Page 88, line 14, strike ``Capital'' and insert ``National
capital''. In the matter proposed to be amended by paragraph
(2) of section 324(c), insert ``National'' before ``Capital''
each place it appears in the heading and the text of the new
paragraph (2) of section 8902(a) of title 40, United States
Code.
Page 88, line 15, strike ``Capital'' and insert ``National
Capital''.
Page 89, line 6, strike ``Capital'' and insert ``National
Capital''.
Page 89, line 12, strike ``Capital'' and insert ``National
Capital''.
Page 89, line 23, strike ``urban fabric of'' and insert
``urban fabric of the State of Washington, Douglass
Commonwealth, and the''.

Mr. KELLER (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent
to dispense with the reading.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his motion.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to talk about how for over 200 years
lawmakers have come from every State in the Union to work and live in
this District.
The city was not meant to be a prize of conquest like the ancient
walled cities of Europe. It was not meant to be the hub of trade like
the early American cities. Above anything, it was meant to represent a
center of the federation created by our Constitution.
The city is tied to the idea of the American Republic, a living piece
of collaboration, the star on the map representing the 50 stars on the
flag.
With the creation of a 51st State of Washington, Douglass
Commonwealth, a State the size of a small county, that collaboration
will be gone. The majority believes it is a small price to pay for two
Senators.
Republicans need assurances that the interests of our constituents
will be reflected in this new State that will have undue influence over
the Nation's Federal Government.
So, my motion contains reasonable additions to H.R. 51 that will
require the President to ensure certain amendments to the State
constitution are incorporated before granting statehood. These
provisions reflect the entirety of the Nation's views, not just those
of cities controlled by Democrats.
There is provision that prohibits the former capital from being a
sanctuary city. These are provisions that prohibit taxpayer funds being
used for political campaigns. These are provisions to protect
Americans' Second Amendment rights. These are provisions that provide
full funding for law enforcement, that prohibit the destruction of our
national monuments, that prohibit the creation of so-called autonomous
zones.
Since early entry of new States into the Union, Congress has required
that constitutions of the new States reflect certain considerations
before granting admission. Nevada and West Virginia were required to
prohibit slavery. Various Western States were required to prohibit
polygamy.
These requests do not violate the Supreme Court's equal footing
doctrine, but the idea of the State of Washington, Douglass
Commonwealth containing wholly within it the entirety of the Federal
Capital does, in fact, violate this doctrine.
A State with a controlling influence over the Nation's Federal
Government and Capital is simply not on equal footing with the other 50
States. It is above them.
A vote for the majority's design for D.C. statehood is a vote for
D.C.'s superiority. The Founders recognized the status of Washington,
D.C. House Republicans do not support deviation from their vision.
However, if the Democrats insist on creating this new State, it is
only fair that it be established as a State with policy values that
more closely reflect the rest of the country.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this motion to recommit, and
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the motion
to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to reject this
weak and unconstitutional motion to recommit.
The motion proposes to condition the admission of Washington,
Douglass Commonwealth on either the imposition of the whimsical policy
preferences of the minority or simply banal restatements that the State
will follow Federal law, which, obviously, it must do already under the
Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. All of the States must.
But the paradigm example here, and the thing that really appears to
be really on their mind, and I am glad we at least have boiled it down
to this issue, is they want to make sure that the new State doesn't
come in without an amendment written by the people of Washington, D.C.,
saying that they will not charge people a fee for carrying a concealed
weapon.
Now, that is not in the U.S. Constitution, and it is not a matter of
Federal law obligating the 50 States to do it, so you cannot
selectively impose that on the new State of Washington, D.C. That is
the equal footing doctrine, which the Supreme Court has emphasized
repeatedly throughout our history, that every new State that we have
granted admission to since the original 13, all 37 have entered on the
exact same plane of political and constitutional equality as the
original 13.
So, they want to impose their various policy preferences on different
things, like concealed carry weapons and so on.
If you want to do that, then try to pass it for the entire country,
and it would apply within the new State, as well. I don't think you can
do it constitutionally, but that is a separate matter. Or, resign your
seat from wherever you happen to be from. If you are from Georgia,
resign your seat in Georgia, move to the new State, and then campaign
as a Member of Congress from here or campaign for Governor or State
legislator in the new State and get them to change their law because
that is a matter of local policy.
I would think that the great champions of federalism and State rights
would want to allow every State to make a decision for itself.
Mr. Speaker, a number of things have been said that need to be
corrected.

[[Page H2544]]

For one thing, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy) said that we should
legislate for the real Americans, and he is going to speak for the real
Americans, not the people who live in Washington. I would hope he would
reflect on that and issue an apology to the people of Washington, D.C.
But it seemed that the logic of the argument was that the only people
who live here are Federal employees, and they are different from the
rest of America.
Now, think about that for a second. In the first place, the
overwhelming majority of Federal employees do not live in Washington,
D.C. As far as I could tell, less than 8 percent of Federal employees
live in Washington, D.C., which means 92 percent of them live in our
States in the rest of America.
Should those people be disenfranchised? Should people who work for
the post office lose their right to representation in Congress? Should
members of the Armed Forces be disenfranchised? The Supreme Court
already said no in Carrington v. Rash. Check it out.
So, the overwhelming majority of Federal employees don't live in
D.C., and the overwhelming majority of people who live in Washington,
D.C., and are the constituents of Representative Norton are not Federal
employees. They do other things.
Yes, they are real Americans, too. They are bus drivers. They are
schoolteachers. They are businesspeople and entrepreneurs. I mean, come
on, get real, be serious, get out and meet the people in Washington.
The gentleman from Georgia said Washington, D.C., was set aside in
the Constitution as a Federal district, and that was echoed by the
former judge from Texas. But here, our friends just advertised their
unfamiliarity both with the Constitution and with American history.
The Constitution does not fix the geographic site of the so-called
seat of government, the district that is set aside for the seat of
government. That is why after the Constitution was adopted, the capital
was in New York for a while. It was in Philadelphia for a while. Before
that, it was in Trenton, New Jersey. It was in Princeton. It was in
Annapolis. We have a whole room in Annapolis set aside for where
Congress met.
So the idea that you can look up the Constitution and see the
boundaries or the map of Washington, D.C., is just absurd.
Now, does Congress have the authority to modify the boundaries of the
Federal district as proposed by Ms. Norton? Of course it does. We voted
to do that in 1846 at the behest of a couple hundred slaveholders in
Virginia who were afraid that this Congress would follow the advice of
Representative Lincoln from Illinois, who said abolish the slave
traffic in Washington, D.C.

{time} 1100

And they were afraid it was going to happen, so Alexandria,
Arlington, and Fairfax county were given back to Virginia, and it was
perfectly constitutional. And there is no legal authority to the
contrary in any way.
If we can modify the boundaries of the Federal District to placate a
couple hundred slave masters from the 19th century, we can modify the
boundaries of the Federal District to grant statehood and political
equality for the people of Washington, D.C.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution
965, the yeas and nays are ordered.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question
will be postponed.

____________________