October 17, 2006
Taking Back What's Ours -- NoVA
The polling on the prohibition of gay marriage and the support for incumbent senator George Allen proves what we've always known -- Northern Virginia is becoming less and less like the rest of the state. But what to do about the polarization? Easy. Secession.
D.C. Metblogs head honcho Tom Bridge, himself a Virginian, today proposed giving the District back the Virginia lands (and then some) that originally formed part of the city but were retroceded to the commonwealth in 1847. He writes:
...perhaps it's time that Arlington, Fairfax and Alexandria severed ties with the rest of the state that uses it only for tax revenue. Perhaps it's time that these three districts join with the District at large to form a 51st state. With 5 million people in the greater DC area, this new state would be larger than Wyoming, Alabama, North Dakota and other states in population, and, due to DC and Northern Virginia's unique position in the economy as the seat of government, the site of a significant number of beltway bandit contractors, and several large international commerce hubs, the state could have an economy to rival the largest state economies.Bridge wasn't the only one making this call, though. Today on a Post online chat WTOP political analyst Mark Plotkin tossed around the idea himself:
Arlington, Va.: The Post's poll numbers were amazing! Given the split in opinions and other issues between Northern VA and the rest of the state, do you see secession coming in the near future?A little extreme a proposal for sure, but if it happens, it will finally put to rest the simmering battle between the District's "We're cool 'cause we live in the city" urbanites and NoVA's "Screw that, we're just as cool, and without the crime" residents. Finally, we'll all get to pick on Maryland together.Mark Plotkin: Secession, that's a provacative concept. I'll have to give that some play. Northern Virginia is becoming less like the rest of Virginia. It casts one third of the state's votes. George Allen lives in Northern Virginia, as does Webb. It'll be interesting to see if Webb can really pile up huge margins here.
|
Nice idea, but it still makes my colon clench everytime I have to cross the river into Virginia.
This is a fantastic idea. I've always thought this would be a great way to bring financial security and voting representation to the District. Unfortunately Richmond will never let go of the cash cow that is NoVa.
Oh well...
Considering that states have to agree to a secession, why would the VA legislature ever approve?
Perhaps N. Virginians could have the DMV create a special "No Taxation Without Representation" plate. That would really stick it to Richmond. Right? I mean, that's worked pretty well for you folks in the District...
And once again Washingtonians look to outsiders to solve their problems. What the hell would NoVa gain in this deal? If seccession were at all a possibility, why would it take DC with it?
The attitude Washington has towards NoVa is awfully similar to that of the Frat guy to the Sorority girl. It wants her heaving bosom of a tax base, but resents her for that power and treats her like crap whenever it can to make itself feel like more like a man. Maybe that's a stretch of an analogy, but the basic push/pull of desire and loathing is common.
There's about seven million people in Virginia. There's about three million, depending on how you slice it, in NoVA. And it's growing. It's more likely that over the next ten years NoVA will simply begin dragging the rest of the state kicking and screaming behind its every whim.
I'm all for secession but you may keep your colon clenching city thank you very much. The 51st state will be Northern Virginia all the way and we will create it without un-retrocessioning ourselves.
I see a state bordered (more or less) by the Shenandoah, Potomac, and Rappahannock rivers and including the following counties and cities (except maybe those immigrant haters in Herndon): Stafford, Fauquier, Loudon, Prince William, Manassas, Fairfax (County and City), Falls Church, Alexandria, Arlington. And yes I know, the farther south and west you go the more likely you are to see the good ol' Stars and Bars flapping in the wind, but we'll be rid of those dumbasses soon enough.
Wouldn't the NoVa license plate have to read, "No representation without taxation," to reflect all the times Richmond has stopped Arlington, Alexandria and Fairfax from devoting local sales taxes to Metro and other D.C.-area programs?
Great idea! Then folks wouldn't bitch and moan every time DCist covers a suburban eatery.
Only there is no "No" on the plate.
Somehow I just don't see Congress going for this.
great idea, instead of sending our $$$ to Richmond to never be seen again we can ship'em east to the same effect.
Thanks, but no thanks. I'll prefer to keep my clean and (relatively) safe streets, good public schools etc.
Sounds great! I mean who really cares about sending their kids to UVA and getting instate tuition when we can send them to UDC?!
Actually in that case, if you are worried about in-state tuitition, DC residents can qualify as in-state for all states. ;-)
http://seo.dc.gov/seo/cwp/view,A,1226,Q,536756,seoNav_GID,1510,.asp
I agree with the poster above. The more NoVa grows and becomes a destination seperate from DC, it'll be more like other states (IL, NY) that have a deep blue city area that far vastly outstrips the rest of the state. I mean southern Illinois had counties that voted for Keyes for goodness sakes. I'd rather DC get statehood and VA going blue thanks to NoVa.
gsharch - I doubt that this new state would retain the DC benefit of nation-wide instate tuition. That is one of the benefits of DC NOT being a state.
This is far from a new idea. In fact, about 15-20 years ago, a Manassas newspaper (Journal Messenger?) created an entire fictionalized section devoted to life in New Dominion, the newest state. I don't recall if it involved incorporating DC (I don't think it did - the capitol city was Manassas), but found the effort impressive. I still have that paper somewhere in storage.
One can find that term ("New Dominion") used often in newspapers article in the 80s and 90s - with benefits for both Richmond and NoVa usually well articulated.
This has to be the stupidest idea ever. NoVa is so much better than DC in every way that we should be the ones annexing your craphole
this is all part and parcel of the intellectual masturbation and constitutional ignorance displayed by legions of "concerned citizens" advocating statehood for D.C. Take a step back, recognize the folly and futility of ever achieiving such a goal, and, God forbid, roll up your sleeves and actually do something concrete that actually helps the city and the region and impacts the lives of our poorer brethren. Picking up a hammer and sweating is so much less sexy than sitting in a coffee shop and agitating for "statehood" that it will never happen though. I should go into business selling berets and kleenex to you lot.
Richmond does indeed fleece the northern VA taxpayer every chance it gets. That fleecing would pale in comparison to the kind of fleecing that would take place if NoVa were to become part of DC.
Don't get me wrong, I love the District and in a lot of ways I would prefer to have myself associated with it than with Richmond. But why on earth would a Northern Va. taxpayer want to move from a misguided government to one that's almost completely dysfunctinoal?
This is my favorite political what-if game. Under my usual scenario, it's just Arlington & Alexandria that come along for sure, with Falls Church and Fairfax voting on it (Fairfax probably opting out in what would be one of the toughest votes they'd ever have to make). But if you just assume the borders in this post - why is anyone worried about DC government? The population that NoVA brings to the table far outweighs DC proper, so you can bet that it won't be the city council running and fleecing things . . .
Honestly, thinking about the best from each jurisdiction (along with a bit of the worst), I think it would result in a state with a pretty productive political tension . . .
~
Derek, you think Richmond is merely "misguided" when it comes to NoVA? I'd call it malicious.
Brian: You may want to consider removing Manassas from your new state. Do you really want a town that denies people business licenses because they are gay?
1. Virginia is Virginia, be it NOVA, Richmond, or Southern Virginia.
2. Virginia is not DC.
3. If anything, NOVA exists because of DC, not the other way around.
4. If you're going to complain about NOVA being a part of Virginia, then either change things in Virginia (better option) or move. Don't swoop the city into some grand Virginia scheme.
--Snobby Urbanist
Fin wins the award for my favorite post of the day.
OK, see, the thing is, if NoVa retrocedes back into DC then all those suburbanites suddenly start voting in local DC elections and before you know it, old DC has no political power to run itself anymore.
Granted old DC doesn't have a great track record on running itself, but let's not pretend this proposal wouldn't radically change how DC operates. NoVa would overwhelm the District politically.
No thanks.
Fin wins the award for my most hated post of the day. A few good points are made, but to say "recognize the folly and futility of ever achieiving such a goal" is one of the most ignorant things I've ever read.
Statehood is what will give DC (note: larger than Montana) full representation in Congress. In my opinion, anyone against that is beyond an idiot and obviously thinks it's ok to continue this tyrannical state in which citizens have no say in how the government runs their lives.
I am continually amazed at people who want to continue to deny the people of DC THE MOST BASIC RIGHTS ESTABLISHED BY THE CONSTITUTION--REPRESENTATION.
If you give up that fight, why bother with anything?
Your critique of my post is belied by your glaringly apparent lack of constitutional knowledge. The simple fact of the matter is that the "most basic rights" you are mewling about are in fact laid out in the Constitution, which in fact confers "District" status on our beloved little swamp. The Constitution ITSELF delineates this status, and if you think the other 50 states are ever going to accede to a constitutional amendment to give D.C. statehood you are even more ignorant than your initial post suggests.
my point stands - by fatuously claiming that the only thing worth fighting for is the one thing you'll obviously never be able to change you enable yourself to sit in some precious little coffee shop in Adams Morgan, railing against "the system" without ever having to look yourself in the mirror and face the fact that you're not getting your hands dirty doing the things this city actually needs done. Enjoy your cappucino.
The constitution also denied voting rights to women and blacks...people said men and whites would never allow that to change. At the time, the district was nothing more than a place politicans came for a while and there weren't many residents who weren't slaves. There was no need for 'statehood'. Slavery ended, blacks got rights, women got rights...people now live in the district. Free people who should be protected by the constitution who aren't.
I live in DC--in Trinidad (stop by to see how yuppie that is). I've never had cappucino in my life. I volunteer for 2 organizations in DC. I get my hands dirty. Doesn't mean I can't rail against the absurdity of 500,000 people being denied the right to have a voice in their government.
People like you are why big problems don't go away--you give up instead of doing the extra work on top of getting your hands dirty.
OK, so please explain your plan for getting around this:
"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress;"
People have always lived in the District and your suffrage and slavery points are strawmen. Those issues impacted the citizenry as a whole. Do you seriously think there is any hope of getting states such as Montana to willingly dilute their power in Congress? There are too many states with too much at stake to make a constitutional amendment anything approaching even a conceivable reality. I view these issues from a cost/benefit perspective. Each person has a set amount of resources to allocate, and every minute given to an issue that has no national traction chews up energy and resources that could be spent elsewhere. There are plenty of "big issues" out there that you CAN do something about, Tim. Focus on those.
Of course, feel free to continue "rail[ing] against...absurdity." It might not get a damned thing accomplished, but it sure makes a person feel cool and enlightened.
There was a poll last year asking people outside of the DC area 1. if they knew dc had no voting representation and 2. if they think that should change.
This is from memory (I heard it on NPR), but it was something like 80% said no, they didn't know DC had no voting rights and and 90% said we should.
How are the suffrage and slavery issues not pertinent? In each case exactly what you belive won't happen here happened. The group in power willingly diluted their power so as to allow for greater equality. Granted, for slavery there was a war, but men gave women the right to vote because they knew it was the right thing to do.
Do I think it will happen? I don't know. But turning my back on it isn't the answer and I truly feel it's absurd that this exists. How can this country claim to love freedom and democracy when it's denied to 1/2 million people daily? I understand what you're saying, I guess I'm hopeful that the people of American are kind, understanding and, overall, good people who just aren't aware of the fact that this exists. I do believe some sort of national campaign to inform the rest of the country could be an effective way to gain support for DC statehood. Continuing to deny it is simply not defensible in any way, so once people know, I hope a sense of decency will give way to greed. I'm not saying it will for sure, but I can't ignore it because it's wrong to the core.
Of note is the fact that I think that poll was only 1000 people and it was, of course, conducted by someone associated w/ getting DC voting rights, so the wording could have been suspect.
i hadn't noticed your snarky comment. thanks. obviously i do this to feel enlightened. it's not like i'm directly affected by this or anything. obviously i love the fact that congress gets to approve the dc budget that i help pay for and that, basically, nothing can happen in dc without congress giving it's stamp of approval.
you feel it's a waste of time. do you have representation where you live? if so you don't have much standing in determining if it's a waste of my time. if you live in the district, your intelligence is lacking somewhere if you aren't offended by the current circumstances.
Most political polls are 800-1,000 people. I don't know the details but that works out to a 3 or 4% margin of error.
Fin - However correct you may be about the Constitutional basis for denying District citizens Congressional reprensentation; it doesn't change the fact that you're a nasty, smug asshole.
i don't want all those whiteys from NOVA trying to steal my thunder. i like being a snobby urbanist.
yeah, but I'm a nasty, smug asshole that knew what he was getting into when he moved to D.C. - it's not like the situation is a new one.
It's not so much of NOVA people stealing my thunder as much as them accepting the fact that they live in Virginia, and NOT DC. If they don't like it, they can either change things or move.
The article is written from the point of NOVA seceding and then calling itself a 51st state with DC. Considering that most people that live in DC don't really care about NOVA except for the instances when their friends or jobs are there, most DC people also don't care whether or not a few million NOVA people are getting their political way or not. Of course, pushing the liberal agenda as a whole in Virginia is important to the leftist yahoos in DC as it is in any other state, but for the sake of NOVA people? Naw.
--Snobby Urbanist
Fin - how about all the people who's families have lived here for generations? They exist. They should just be inherently screwed? Maybe everyone should abandon DC?
yeah, but I'm a nasty, smug asshole that knew what he was getting into when he moved to D.C.
Would you like a medal or a chest to pin it on?
In a perfect world, the citizenry as a whole would vote for the best interests of the collective, and Hillrat would come up with something approaching an argument instead of resorting to puerile ad hominem attacks. I'll readily admit that I get carried away with the insults, for which I apologize, but I at least present some substance along the way.
Back to the main point - I've lived in NE D.C. for ten years now, and in that time I've been exposed to countless agitations for statehood for D.C. with absolutely zero progress made on the issue. To argue that this issue is anything other than tilting at windmills at the expense of issues that can realistically be addressed is armchair sophistry.
"Would you like a medal or a chest to pin it on?"
Hillrat, the resident DCist internet tough guy. Thanks for proving my point, troglodyte.
I disagree. Guess that's really it--difference of opinion on what's possible.
I can appreciate that, Tim, and I apologize for the apoplexy in some of my comments. It still stands, though, that I've not seen anyone point to anything resembling even a degree of substantive progress on the issue. After ten years of direct exposure to that failure it doesn't strike me as unreasonable to view the statehood movement as about as effective as the trotskyists who hang out at politics and prose planning the new order.
And it's well founded to think that way...there's lots of anecdotal evidence to back you up. I just can't let go of something that is so obvious (that DC statehood should happen, not that you or I should expend effort to make it so) and, in my opinion, impossible to argue against short of saying "I'm a greedy pig who refuses to let other Americans have the same rights I do". Which, if that's their opinion, then I question their values and how on earth they can call themselves Amercian. A big part of why this country exists is exactly this issue.
DC as it exists now used to be part of Maryland. Politically DC has more in common with MD than it does with the Commonwealth to its south. DC statehood people should focus their efforts on returning to whence they came, it has a heck of lot better chance than getting the required backing to become a state. That still remains the only viable path for DC, which would finally garner them 2 representatives and a their voice in the election of the MD Senators. But thats too rational for these people since they have developed blinders that make them unable to see any other path than direct statehood.
As a VA resident (Arlington) as much as I have issues with Richmond they would pale to the issues I would have with the incompetance of the DC government. I like the fact that I have responsive police and fire, some of the best schools in the country (at all levels) accessible to me and my future children, and that there is some level of responsiveness to my input at the local level.
Momentarily getting off all the hatred, I'd rather retrocede the District back to Maryland. It wouldn't require a constitutional amendment (if it did, then the retrocession of Arlington and Alexandria to Virginia was unconstitutional and thus they are still part of the District), and the District has a lot more in common with Prince George's and Montgomery than it does with Arlington and Alexandria, never mind Fairfax.
Plus, the District is a part of Maryland, geographically, and recognizing that would make it possible for local police to more effectively deal with criminals who jump back and forth across the District line to deter pursuit.
I think we can all agree that we out here in Great Falls are richer and better educated than DC.
Hillrat, the resident DCist internet tough guy. Thanks for proving my point, troglodyte.
Oh dear boy, flattery will get you nowhere.
Exactly what point is it that I allegedly proved on your behalf?
Half the legislators in Richmond would probably jump at the chance to join Rhodesia...can't see much in DC that would appeal to that gang of peckerwoods. I feel badly for my friends across the river, but if I were them, I'd be packing my bags and getting the hell out of that benighted state and its creationist redneck government.
I do not support the statehood movement for the very reason that is demonstrated by Tim's arguments. He conflates representation with statehood. You can make a principled argument that Washingtonians deserve Congressional representation, which should be made. You cannot, however, make a principled argument that DC deserves to be a separate state (in fact it would be easier to come up with principled argument why it shouldn't be a separate state, namely the incompatabilty between a sovereign state government and congressional dominion over the seat of government). There are no principles involved in what areas of land are or are not states. They are the product of compromise and historical accident.
I will only support a statehood movement that admits that it has no principled argument on its behalf and is simply grabbing for power. As long as it plays the bait-and-switch of conflating representation with statehood, I will not support it.
"Oh dear boy, flattery will get you nowhere."
Christ almighty, Hillrat, do you have a copy of "Internet Arguments for Dummies" or something? That link only goes to establish that you're as much of a classless thug in real life as you are on teh interweb. Way to needlessly trumpet the most banal trappings of "masculinity," though. Are you compensating for a micro penis, or do you just have some girl parts down there, too?
I understand the adverse reaction to move to a transfer of power from Richmond to DC, but do the NoVA people honestly think that a unified DC would do a worse job representing their local interests, all thing considered? I'm thinking about Metro funding, a unified taxi system, and a diversification of income from tourism and other areas. Sure, this will never happen, but let's dream of what could be in the future, including a complete reshaping of the local government through statehood, and I think the option becomes a bit more appealing. This is one big metropolitan area with a large number of common interests, which at the moment are nearly impossible to align.
"Metro funding, a unified taxi system, and a diversification of income from tourism and other areas."
Well dedicated Metro funding is a done deal for VA. Va's taxis are already way better than DC's, plus they use meters. And how would forming a new state spread tourist dollars to NoVa?
Again I ask, if secession were at all possible for NoVa, what could it possibly gain by bringing DC with it?
Fin - You deride, "the most banal trappings of 'masculinity,'" but in the very next sentence you resort to hackneyed dick jokes and gender based insults; what's more banal than that?
Just trying to speak your language, Mr. Bad Ass call attention to myself rugby guy. All of your retorts remind of second graders making chewing sounds at one another. And I bet that's the first time you've had both an insult about microphalli and a comparison to salamacis directed at you, but like any mouth breathing rugby player you misapprehended it. But keep on keepin' on with the imagined superiority and toughness, you tough guy, you!
I have to admit, hillrat, rugby turns me on too!
http://static.blogo.it/calcioblog/VinnieJones.jpg
Why would you want to dilute DC's character like that?
Northern Virginia is affluent due to its proximity to the federal government, which is located where? At least acknowledge the teat in your mouth if you're going to whine about what taking in DC would do to your tax base.
NOVA's a series of suburbs and planned communities. Try to tell me with a straight face that it has close to what the District has to offer in terms of culture and entertainment.
"Northern Virginia is affluent due to its proximity to the federal government, which is located where? At least acknowledge the teat in your mouth if you're going to whine about what taking in DC would do to your tax base."
I don't know, where is the federal government located? Because last time I checked the Pentagon, CIA, NSA, and hosts of government facilities are located outside the District. Seeing as NoVa has benefited the most from national security spending, why do they owe DC thanks? And moreover, if it owes the federal government for its affluence, what does that have to do with the local DC government?
And if you want to get into a game of acknowledging "the teat" [sic] in your mouth before complaining, then perhaps Washingtonians should acknowledge that DC itself has the collective federal tax returns of the nation in its mouth before it complains about how aghast they are at the actions of tourists on escalators.
"Seeing as NoVa has benefited the most from national security spending, why do they owe DC thanks?"
Maybe because DC houses the federal government, the entity that doles out those contracts? You answered your own question.
Arlington was farm country 30 years ago. Its viability depends on DC.
Also, sic all you want, teat's not misspelled or used incorrectly.
You got me on the teat thing. I just completely misread that.
Nonetheless, DC does not house the entire federal government. And my point was that of the agencies giving out the most money to NoVa, most of them are not situated in the District.
And Arlington was not even close to a farming community 30 years ago. Consistent with my above point, Arlington became mostly what it is today because of WWII spending and more specifically, the construction and staffing of the Pentagon.
Which all is beside the point when you return to your original point that somehow NoVa should be grateful to DC residents for the largess of the federal government, which is wrong. DC and the federal government are not the same thing, a point most DC natives will never fail to tell you. If NoVa should feel obligated to chip in more money to anything, it should be to the federal government, not the DC government.
What the hell. Who uses words like apoplexy on a blog?
Seriously. And referencing to "girl parts" makes you seem like a complete jerk.
I have girl parts, and I am eloquent. Gee thanks.
And although I reside in DC I am forced to vote in my great home state of Louisiana because I want it to actually count in some way. The fringe benefit is that I add a speck of blue to a horrifyingly red parish.
Oh and while you are discussing stereotypes (instead of the actual subject of the article). Here is a feast:
I live in NW.
Likes: politics and prose, tryst, cappicino, ethiopian food, Jon Stewart, skeet shooting, hanging out on the bayou, jazz, pontificating, and most of all : belittling self indulgent closeted boojy assholes.
Dislikes: Not wanting to vote where I live because I want it to count. Having to spend days playing phone tag with the LA Secretary of State's office so they don't disenfrancise my liberal ass.
Oh, and I know that I spelled very creatively in the last post. Oh well:)
Girlygrumbles, if you live here, you SHOULDN'T be voting somewhere else. In part because there's no reason for a District resident to have a say in how Louisiana is governed, and in part because the more people who vote here in the District, the more glaringly obvious it is that the current representation structure in the city is absurd.
Mt. Pleasant:
Thank you KINDLY for your advice. I so very much needed it. However, I should mention that I am considering going back home for grad school, so I have no reason to change my registration right now. And as far as the whole "Wah Wah Wah maybe if all of us register in DC they'll finally listen to us!" thing, that seems to be a rudimentary way to solve this issue. I, for one, don't think that some grand merger with Virginia is necessary. In every western nation in the world, the citizens of their capitals have the right to vote and be properly represented. Anything else is just ridiculous.
If I were the absolute-power in these United States, I would break off most cities on the east coast with Metro-Areas exceeding 2 million into their own 'states'. Boston could spin off from Massachusettes and the western part of the state could merge with Connecticut and/or Rhode Island.
NYC and Philly, along with their New Jersey suburbs would become Metropolitan-States, giving upstate NY and the rest of Pennsylvania a chance at revival out of their unfortunate industrial apocylypse.
In DC's case, I would merge the Baltimore metro along with it. The state could be called 'Mid-Atlantica' and be composed of Washington/Baltimore/Baltimore County/Arlington/Alexandira/Fairfax/Montgomery/Loudon/Prince George's/Howard/Anne Arundel with it's capitol at Annapolis. These areas are economically and socially intertwined, as much as hard-core natives of either city would hate to admit it. Residents of any of these municipalities would benefit from coordinated development and transportation planning. As the population continues to grow, this would only become more and more true. The state would have over 8 million residents, which would make it one of the 15 largest states in the union.
The remaining Maryland counties would be merged with West Virginia, Delaware or Pennsylvania, depending on their location.
These, along with a Metropolitan-State for Los Angeles would make 55 states.
In DC's case, I would merge the Baltimore metro along with it. The state could be called 'Mid-Atlantica' and be composed of Washington/Baltimore/Baltimore County/Arlington/Alexandira/Fairfax/Montgomery/Loudon/Prince George's/Howard/Anne Arundel with it's capitol at Annapolis. These areas are economically and socially intertwined, as much as hard-core natives of either city would hate to admit it. Residents of any of these municipalities would benefit from coordinated development and transportation planning.
abe - You are going to make a certain blogger go retarded with rage.