Rural community representation is important for Virginia and the United States.
Our communities have unique needs and special interests. This applies in agriculture, health care and many other fields.
Virginia’s Ninth District is overwhelmingly rural.
This contrasts with other urban and suburban parts of the Commonwealth, like Northern Virginia.
I usually hear people express their concerns that politicians in Richmond and D.C. promote the interests of Northern Virginia at the expense of the rest of the state, primarily our rural communities.
These concerns simmered during the recent Democratic Party’s redistricting push in Virginia. Richmond Democrats sought to reduce Republican representation in the U.S. House from 5 seats to 1 seat.
To do so, the proposed districts would force many rural communities into districts dominated by Fairfax County.
Northern Virginia’s political power would grow even more!
Fights over representation extend across the Potomac River where Democrats want to make D.C. the 51st state.
In 2021, I voted against Democrats’ H.R. 1 which endorsed D.C. statehood.
I also voted against Democrats’ H.R. 51, the Washington, D.C. Admission Act, which granted D.C. statehood under the name “Washington, Douglass Commonwealth.”
I will continue to oppose partisan efforts that create two new seats in the U.S. Senate for the Democratic Party.
However, one proposal in Congress would impact D.C. representation and its influence on the Commonwealth.
The Make DC Square Again Act sets in motion the process for Arlington County and the City of Alexandria to retrocede to Washington, D.C.
Some argue that this move is the constitutional return of two jurisdictions back to is its rightful place.
In 1790, Congress passed the Residence Act.
This established a District of Columbia to serve as the capital seat of the national government starting in 1800.
This act had to comply with Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the U.S. Constitution, which in part stipulates that Congress has the power to:
“exercise exclusive Legislation…over such District (not exceeding ten Miles Square) as may…become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State…”
In order to establish this capital in D.C., Virginia and Maryland each consented to cede land.
The 1789 Virginia General Assembly, which composed of members like Patrick Henry, signed an act that ceded area south of the Potomac River.
As President Washington outlined in his proclamation defining the boundaries of the District of Columbia, the 10-square mile boundary would be the permanent seat for the U.S. government.
These boundary lines remained in place for many years until the 1840s, when slavery was among the matters complicating Congress.
That decade, Congress voted to abandon the 10-square mile arrangement and give the area south of the Potomac to Virginia.
While Virginia accepted the retrocession, I believe legal issues on this matter may remain.
Revival of the D.C. square concept debate today creates conflicts within Democratic circles. National Democrats continue to advocate for D.C. statehood.
I believe renewal of the D.C. square bolsters those who want D.C. statehood.
I think that is wrong and constitutionally questionable because the District of Columbia was set up to be a federal district, not a state, by the framers of the Constitution!
They specifically wanted a seat of government which owed allegiance to no state.
Thus, I think the proper solution is to retrocede the rest of the D.C. square to Maryland, reserving a small federal District of Columbia where the small number of voters would be allowed to vote in Maryland.
I have a bill that will give representation to D.C. residents without accommodating Democrats’ partisan demands to create a 51st state.
My Washington, D.C. Residents Voting Act retrocedes D.C. proper to Maryland. Every D.C. resident would become a Maryland resident and have Maryland representation.
Accordingly, these residents would access voting members in both the U.S. Senate and U.S. House.
Meanwhile, a new, condensed D.C. would consist of federal properties such as the White House, U.S. Capitol and U.S. Supreme Court.
My bill would unlock for Maryland a very similar process that Congress and Virginia exercised in the 1840s.
As a result, the D.C. square would be effectively buried in history.
This may turn the page on D.C. representation, but it will not change my resolve to fairly represent and protect the interests of rural communities in Virginia.
