When the Democratic Party gathers in Denver next week for its national convention, the D.C. delegation will do what D.C. does best — complain about our lack of voting representation. But even as they push for the District to be given a full voting seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, a group of frustrated voting rights activists are crying foul over the Democratic Party’s failure to endorse full statehood in their national platform.

In a statement released Wednesday, the D.C. Statehood Green Party expressed their anger over the omission, which they claim was orchestrated by D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton:

DC Statehood Green Party leaders and candidates expressed concern and disappointment over the Democratic Party’s omission of DC statehood from its 2008 national platform draft at the request of DC Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton…Statehood Greens expressed special disappointment that nonvoting Delegate Norton requested that DC statehood be set aside and that Congress should instead grant the District ‘voting rights,’ which is understood to mean a single voting seat in the US House.

The Statehood Greens also aimed their rhetorical fire at the District’s three-person shadow delegation, arguing that if Shadow Rep. Mike Panetta and Shadow Senators Michael Brown and Paul Strauss don’t fight to have statehood put back into the platform, they’d be “delinquent in their responsibilit[ies].”

The Statehood Greens point out that the Democratic Party’s official position on District voting rights and statehood has taken something of a beating in recent years. While in 2000 it promised “autonomy in the conduct of their civic affairs, full political representation as Americans who are fully taxed, and statehood,” it was whittled down to “equal rights to democratic self-government and Congressional representation” in 2004, while a 2008 draft finds an even more slender call for the “benefits of full citizenship, especially the vote.”

The changing party position reflects a victory for the voting rights incrementalists, Norton first among them. In recent years, Norton, along with Republican ally Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.), have tamped down on demands for statehood, opting instead to fight first for a voting seat in the House of Representatives. The fight has gotten as far as the U.S. Senate, where it failed to overcome a filibuster late last year. The Statehood Greens have always hated the incremental approach — it’s all or nothing for them — but even Panetta seems to think it’s not the right time for it. Here’s what he told DCist via email:

As the elected Statehood Representative, my job is to advocate for full statehood for the District of Columbia. Unfortunately, the current political environment has made the chances of that goal happening in short term almost nil. I’ve been working at the grassroots level to both raise awareness of the overall issue and to get the District a vote in the House. Although far from perfect, I feel that a House vote is an attainable first step towards statehood. If the stars align in 2009, with an expanded Democratic majority in Congress and a Democrat in the White House, then we as District voters should demand much more that just a single vote in the House.

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton’s office let us know that they’d have a comment on Monday (we rushed to press, so to speak). We’ll update when she does.

Do you think Panetta is right? With a Democrat in the White House and larger margins in the Senate and House, maybe one voting seat could finally materialize and pave the way for two senators and full statehood. But if that’s the goal, argue the Statehood Greens, why not just come out and say it?