23rd Amendment

"Section 1. The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct:

A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelth article of amendment.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."

It is good that Washington DC has now some representation in the Congress. Still, since they do not have the status of a state they are not really represented, only in the election of the president. Therefore, they still have no say in any political issue addressed in the congress.
I personally do not understand why one sets up a city as the capitol of a country (which became it therefore not historically) and not have it part of a state or a state itself?

"The 23rd Amendment

Posted: Aug 04, 2010 5:04 PM Updated: Aug 06, 2010 9:57 AM

By Tim Guidera
SAVANNAH, GA (WTOC) – Washington D.C. is the site and seat of most American governmental activity.
But the nation's capitol did not even have a say in who occupied the White House until the 23rd Amendment was passed.
Unlike the 50 states, the District of Columbia does not have members of the House of Representatives or the Senate. And before 1961, its residents were not able to participate in presidential elections. But the 23rd Amendment provided that vote, while including Washington D.C. in the electoral college but only as the equivalent of the country's smallest actual state.
"It's interesting that its population is actually larger than at least one state,'' said Georgia Southern University Political Science professor Patrick Novotny. "And one of the studies done not too long ago said that Washington D.C. Residents are 19th or 20th in the nation in terms of taxes that they pay. So, they certainly pay a good share as so many Americans do. So at least for presidential elections, the Distric of Columbia can weigh in with their three electoral votes.''
It was simply an oversight by the founding fathers that deprived Washington D.C. residents the right to participate in presidential elections. They voted for the first time in 1964, the 45th presidential election in America's history."

Source: http://www.wtoc.com/global/story.asp?s=12927299

This article shows, that Washington DC does not have equal representation even in the presidential elections. Why can't it be determined how many electors DC has with the same method as with the other states- population. If I would be an American citizen working in Washington DC, I would, if it is possible, live in a surrounding state to actually have the chance to vote for the federal representation.



Katie Couric id right in poiting out that DC people pay taxes and do not receive the right to vote. To me, the most important part of thsi video is the citation about defending democrcy elsewhere in the world, whereas it is not fully developped in the own country. This, to me, shows that this issue has to be addressed to actually be authentic in those so-called wars for freedom.