D.C. Statehood: Bad Idea

There are numerous principled reasons to oppose D.C. statehood. But, really, no arguments are more applicable than the ones offered by the Founders, who created a federal district for the distinct purpose of denying it statehood. First, because they were concerned about the seat of federal power being controlled by a hostile or intrusive state government. Second, because they knew that if the capital were in a state — much less its own state — the people would vote to grow and accumulate federal power. Both situations were incompatible with the proper separation of powers and state rights.

Today, though, Democrats want to localize one of the only things in the Constitution that is actually federalized — while federalizing everything else. All of it for power.

About the Author

David Harsanyi

David Harsanyi is a senior writer at the Washington Examiner.

Featured Tags

There are numerous principled reasons to oppose D.C. statehood. But, really, no arguments are more applicable than the ones offered by the Founders, who created a federal district for the distinct purpose of denying it statehood. First, because they were concerned about the seat of federal power being controlled by a hostile or intrusive state government. Second, because they knew that if the capital were in a state — much less its own state — the people would vote to grow and accumulate federal power. Both situations were incompatible with the proper separation of powers and state rights.

Today, though, Democrats want to localize one of the only things in the Constitution that is actually federalized — while federalizing everything else. All of it for power.