Presentation Title

Modern Day Taxation without Representation

Presenter Information

Zoya AnsariFollow

Faculty Mentor

Joon Kil

Start Date

17-11-2018 9:00 AM

End Date

17-11-2018 9:15 AM

Location

C151

Session

Oral 1

Type of Presentation

Oral Talk

Subject Area

behavioral_social_sciences

Abstract

One of the basic principles of revolutionaries in 1776 was the notion of “no taxation without representation”, a phrase cried out in writings in an attempt to ignite fellow colonists. Today, citizens of D.C. argue for equal representation, utilizing the slogan on posters and license plates in protest(Mark 2001: 14). The modern day capital district of the United States lacks the same voting representation the colonists so valiantly fought for, effectively creating an institution in which the citizens of D.C. lack basic congressional representation. While there are a multitude of causes which influence statehood, there are three defined factors that bar D.C. from achieving representation: Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution, the Founding Fathers’ original intent for the capital, and modern partisan opposition. The constitutional clause has had lasting consequences, seen through Adams v. Clinton in 2000 and the 2006 Fair and Equal Voting Rights Act. Additionally, modern day opposition is present on both sides of the political aisle, as both Democrats and Republicans, on the basis of party power, have rejected bills to grant D.C. statehood. These rejections were argued on the basis of the clause as well as the original intent of the creation of the district, outlined by the Founding Fathers. The subject of statehood has become more prominent recently, with more bills and amendments being proposed, which makes it important to understand why representation has not been granted yet.

Summary of research results to be presented

The District was not categorized as a state for the purpose of allowing the federal government’s full authority over the territory. This has led to Congressional acts meant to further its power over D.C.. To formally exercise their constitutional power, Congress enacted the Organic Act of 1801, splitting the District into charter cities, and explicitly stated that it would be under control of the federal government. It also dictated that the citizens were no longer residents of Virginia or Maryland, leaving them unable to vote. Regarding the Founding Father's intent, D.C. was formed to create separation from state influence and to be able to defend themselves. The Pennsylvania Mutiny of 1783 set such precedent, as eighty citizens became extremely unhappy due to taxes and advanced upon Congress. The third variable I researched was modern partisan bias. Due to the nature of D.C.’s demographics, Republicans do not favor the District gaining congressional representation. John Kasich confirmed this notion, stating that Republicans fear D.C. voting rights: “What it really gets down to if you want to be honest [it’s] because they know that’s just more votes in the Democratic Party”. However, Democrats also may oppose granting statehood: the “District of Columbia Fair and Equal House Voting Act” for Congressional representation was created by a Republican Representative from Utah in collaboration with the Democratic D.C. delegate but was still denied by Democrats as it would give Republicans another seat in exchange.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Nov 17th, 9:00 AM Nov 17th, 9:15 AM

Modern Day Taxation without Representation

C151

One of the basic principles of revolutionaries in 1776 was the notion of “no taxation without representation”, a phrase cried out in writings in an attempt to ignite fellow colonists. Today, citizens of D.C. argue for equal representation, utilizing the slogan on posters and license plates in protest(Mark 2001: 14). The modern day capital district of the United States lacks the same voting representation the colonists so valiantly fought for, effectively creating an institution in which the citizens of D.C. lack basic congressional representation. While there are a multitude of causes which influence statehood, there are three defined factors that bar D.C. from achieving representation: Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution, the Founding Fathers’ original intent for the capital, and modern partisan opposition. The constitutional clause has had lasting consequences, seen through Adams v. Clinton in 2000 and the 2006 Fair and Equal Voting Rights Act. Additionally, modern day opposition is present on both sides of the political aisle, as both Democrats and Republicans, on the basis of party power, have rejected bills to grant D.C. statehood. These rejections were argued on the basis of the clause as well as the original intent of the creation of the district, outlined by the Founding Fathers. The subject of statehood has become more prominent recently, with more bills and amendments being proposed, which makes it important to understand why representation has not been granted yet.