While I agree with Jong Eun Lee in his Feb. 23 column "D.C. voting needs creative solution" that D.C. voting rights is a tricky issue, I do not believe he fully understands what the actual argument is about and what the consequences of retrocession would be. It is true that in the 19th century, the Virginia part of D.C. was given back to Virginia, but there were many reasons for that. To start, the residents of Alexandria did not like being kicked out of Virginia (Alexandria was a city before the Republic) and Arlington was just farms and undeveloped land that was not worth much. Alexandria was also a slave-trading center and abolition in the District was being discussed at the time. Finally, the Residence Act of 1790 prohibited federal offices from being located in Virginia. In short, it made political and economic sense to cede the land back to Virginia.
An argument for retrocession today makes very little sense. Lee doesn't propose how Maryland would absorb the 600,000 District residents. How will the legal, educational and social service systems of D.C. be reworked to be compatible with Maryland law? Most likely, they would have to be scrapped and rebuilt. What would happen to the same-sex couples, who enjoy more privileges in D.C., when they become citizens of Maryland? Who would pay for all of this? It is in the state's interest to have D.C. and the federal government pay for the transition, while it is in D.C.'s interest to have Maryland and the feds pay for it. Let's not forget, this discussion was originally about congressional representation. With the addition of 600,000 residents all at once, Maryland would need a new congressional district. Where is that seat going to come from?
The real discussion needs to take place on exactly what Article I means. Congress has the authority over the District, which in my view, means Congress can define what that authority is. Congress has done so by passing various home rule legislation; legislation that did not require a constitutional amendment. Simply assuming a constitutional amendment is the only solution to this problem is not giving full thought to the argument.
Bryan Woerner College of Arts and Sciences, Class of 2004
