Press Release: Norton Releases Testimony in Advance of Today’s Rules Committee Hearing on D.C. Statehood Bill

News Release — DC Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton

June 24, 2020

Contact: Sharon Eliza Nichols

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) released her testimony in advance of today’s Rules Committee hearing on her District of Columbia statehood bill, H.R. 51, the Washington, D.C. Admission Act, where she will testify on behalf of House Democrats. Members of Congress will be the only witnesses at the hearing. The Rules Committee will then vote on the rule that sets the parameters for consideration of H.R. 51 on the House floor on Friday. The Rules Committee will meet virtually at 11 a.m. today, Wednesday, June 24, 2020, to consider H.R. 51 and four other bills. The meeting will be streamed live on rules.house.gov. When the House passes H.R. 51, which has 226 cosponsors, on Friday, it will be the first time either chamber of Congress has passed the D.C. statehood bill.

Norton’s testimony, as prepared for delivery, follows.

Testimony of Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton

Committee on Rules

H.R. 51, the Washington, D.C. Admission Act

June 24, 2020

Mr. Chairman, I am speaking for the Committee on Oversight and Reform, as well as for myself, in strong support of H.R. 51, the Washington, D.C. Admission Act, which would admit the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth as the 51st state and reduce the size of the federal district. Congress has both the moral obligation and constitutional authority to pass H.R. 51. If the House passes H.R. 51, which has 226 cosponsors, on Friday, it will be the first time since the creation of the District of Columbia 219 years ago that either chamber of Congress has passed a bill to grant statehood to D.C. residents.

The United States is unique among democratic countries in denying both voting rights in the national legislature and local autonomy to the residents of the nation’s capital. Adding insult to injury, D.C. pays more federal taxes per capita than any state and pays more federal taxes than 22 states, and D.C. residents have fought in every American war, including the Revolutionary War.

It is fitting that the House will take up H.R. 51 between Juneteenth and Independence Day. H.R. 51 would end for D.C. residents the nation’s oldest slogan, “no taxation without representation,” and apply the principle of consent of the governed to D.C. residents.

H.R. 51 has both the facts and Constitution on its side. The Constitution does not establish any prerequisites for new states, but Congress generally has considered three elements in admitting them: population and resources, support for statehood, and commitment to democracy.

D.C.’s population of 705,000 is larger than those of Wyoming and Vermont, and the State of Washington, D.C. would be one of seven states with a population under one million. D.C.’s $15.5 billion budget is larger than those of 12 states, and D.C.’s triple-A bond rating is higher than those of 35 states. D.C. has a higher per capita personal income and gross domestic product than any state. Eighty-six percent of D.C. residents voted for statehood in 2016. D.C. residents have been fighting for voting rights in Congress and local self-government for 219 years.

The Constitution’s Admissions Clause gives Congress the authority to admit new states, and all 37 new states have been admitted by an act of Congress. The Constitution’s District Clause, which gives Congress plenary authority over the federal district, sets a maximum size of the federal district of 100 square miles. It does not set a minimum size. Congress previously has changed the size of the federal district, including by reducing it 30 percent in 1846.

Under H.R. 51, the new state would consist of 66 of the 68 square miles of the present-day federal district. The reduced federal district, over which the Congress would retain plenary authority, would consist of two square miles. The reduced federal district would consist of the Washington that Members of Congress and visitors associate with the nation’s capital, including the White House, the Capitol, the Supreme Court, the principal federal monuments, and the federal executive, legislative, and judicial office buildings located adjacent to the National Mall and the Capitol.

The major difference between H.R. 51, as introduced, and the Rules Committee print, which is identical to the statehood bill passed by the Committee on Oversight and Reform in February, is that the Rules Committee print addresses transition matters. Historically, Congress has provided new states with transition assistance, including after admission, and the Rules Committee print would provide the new state with transition assistance. The Rules Committee print would increase the size of the House of Representatives permanently to 436. The Rules Committee print would clarify which laws apply in the reduced federal district, and that the D.C. National Guard, which is controlled by the President, would become the national guard of the reduced federal district and remain under the President’s control. The new state would have its own national guard, just like all the other states.

Since the Committee on Oversight and Reform passed the statehood bill in February, the nation, and even the world, has witnessed the discriminatory and outrageous treatment of D.C. residents by the federal government as perhaps never before. In March, Congress passed the CARES Act, which deprived D.C. of $755 million in coronavirus fiscal relief by treating D.C. as a territory rather than a state. And just this month, federal police and out-of-state National Guard troops occupied D.C., without the consent of the D.C. mayor, to respond to largely peaceful protestors. Prior to this occupation of D.C., there had been much more looting and property destruction in other cities, but the federal government did not occupy other cities. The federal occupation of D.C. occurred solely because the President thought he could get away with it here. He was wrong.

For me, H.R. 51 also is deeply personal. My great-grandfather Richard Holmes, who escaped as a slave from a Virginia plantation, made it as far as D.C., a walk to freedom but not to equal citizenship. For three generations my family has been denied the rights other Americans take for granted.

Congress has two choices. It can continue to exercise undemocratic, autocratic authority over the 705,000 American citizens who reside in our nation’s capital, treating them, in the words of Frederick Douglass, as “aliens, not citizens, but subjects.” Or Congress can live up to this nation’s promise and ideals, end taxation without representation, and pass H.R. 51.

Mr. Chairman, I want to close by thanking Committee on Oversight and Reform Chair Carolyn Maloney for her leadership on D.C. statehood, as well as you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership on D.C. statehood.

###