WASHINGTON, D.C. ADMISSION ACT; Congressional Record Vol. 166, No. 118
(House of Representatives - June 26, 2020)

Text available as:

Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.


[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.

                          ____________________