H.R. 157 would provide for the treatment of the District of Columbia as a Congressional district for purposes of representation in the House of Representatives.
Detailed Summary
District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009 - Considers the District of Columbia a congressional district for purposes of representation in the House of Representatives in the 112th Congress and each succeeding Congress.
Applies to the District in the same manner as it applies to a state the federal law providing for the fifteenth and subsequent decennial censuses and for apportionment of Representatives in Congress. Limits the District to one Member under any reapportionment of Members.
Modifies the formula regarding the number of presidential electors to subject it to the 23rd amendment to the Constitution in the case of the District.
Increases membership of the House from 435 to 437 Members.
Provides for a reapportionment of Members resulting from such increase.
Directs the Clerk of the House to: (1) certify to the Governor of each state the number of Representatives to which the state is entitled; and (2) identify to the Speaker of the House the state (other than the District of Columbia) entitled to one additional Representative. Requires election at large of such additional Representative.
Sets forth procedures for expedited judicial review of any action brought to challenge the constitutionality of any provision of this Act or any amendment made by it.
Status of the Legislation
Latest Major Action: 3/2/2009: Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 8.
Points in Favor
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)
Points Against
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)
Visitor Comments
Mary - MI
March 2, 2009, 4:15pm (report abuse)H.R. 157, The District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009. This resolution runs totally counter to our U.S. Constitution. What next -- we give Congressional voting rights to American Samoa? D.C. is a district not a State.
S. Kincaid
March 3, 2009, 1:09pm (report abuse)When a constitutional path was attempted, in the '70s, it failed -- the DC Voting Rights Amendment was only ratified by half the states necessary. Thus, an unconstitutional path, which will almost certainly go to the Supreme Court, may be our only way.
Keep in mind that American Samoa has less than 1% of DC's population, and is not part of the contiguous US. And if indeed the Supreme Court allows the act to stand, why not voting rights for Samoans? They're American citizens too.
Martin K.
March 10, 2009, 7:06pm (report abuse)Maybe we should give Puerto Rico congressional representation next. Y'know, just to see if they like it enough to become a state.