Almost two weeks ago a federal appeals court ruled that a District attempt to impose a commuter tax on the legions of out-of-towners who make their living within the city’s borders was unlawful, a violation of the powers of the U.S. Congress to oversee and regulate the District’s affairs. While the decision wasn’t unexpected — after all, like it or not, the District is fundamentally a Congressional colony — it dealt another blow to the city’s attempt to cash in on the estimated $1.4 billion that the 300,000 residents of Maryland and Virginia make here but pay taxes on there.

But District residents and officials aren’t the type to give up. Legislation introduced yesterday before the D.C. City Council would allow a referendum in which District residents would vote to repeal a ban on a commuter tax written into the city’s Home Rule Charter of 1973, would impose the tax on nonresidents, and would consider lowering the tax rate for residents to between 4 and 7 percent. The two pieces of legislation — known as the “Nonresident Income Tax Prohibition Removal Advisory Referendum Approval Resolution of 2005” and the “Income Tax Fairness Act of 2005” — were sponsored by Council-member and mayoral candidate Adrian Fenty (D-Ward 4), and supported by eight others on the council, including Linda Cropp, Jack Evans (D-Ward 2), and Kathy Patterson (D-Ward 3).

If the legislation passed and a referendum were held, a provision of the Home Rule Charter forbidding the imposition of a commuter tax would be removed, and given Congressional approval, a tax on non-residents would be introduced. Of course, therein lies the rub — regardless of how many District residents voted in favor of a commuter tax, Congress, which is granted the power to review and vote up or down on all city legislation, would be given final say on whether or not the tax were finally imposed. Maryland and Virginia would surely lobby hard against the idea, aligning traditional District home rule supporters such as Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.) squarely against the tax. Fenty, speaking on WAMU last night, argued that a strong vote in favor of the tax would help sway Congress, though others see his comments as needlessly optimistic. D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams, never Fenty’s biggest fan, referred to the referendum as “just a way to get some publicity and get some people razzed up.”

Are these measures merely more in a long string of symbolic protests the District makes before Congress concerning its second-class status? Probably. But that’s not to say they are not important. Fenty correctly assumes the power of public opinion, recognizing that an overwhelming vote in favor of a commuter tax would catapult the issue into the national public eye and place the burden of arguing against the tax and District home rule on members of Congress. And, depending on how political winds blow next year, District voting rights activists may face a more receptive audience on Capitol Hill towards the end of next year.

And then there is the obvious question of mayoral politics. Is Fenty doing this to attract attention, to claim the flag of the city’s preeminent fighter for voting rights going into next year’s mayoral race? Probably. Then again, most everyone in the city’s government is completely wed to the idea of home rule and voting rights, so had Fenty not introduced his legislation, someone else would have.

Being that many DCist readers work in the District but might reside outside it, what is your opinion on the matter? Should the District be allowed to impose a commuter tax, much like the 40 communities nationwide that currently do? Or is the District a distinct case which is just going to have to learn to live with the current state of affairs?

>>D.C. Appleseed Center for Law and Justice on the commuter tax
>>D.C. Metblogs on the commuter tax

Picture snapped by leafblower.