short break for a plug before i get back to voting stuff... "you don't
know what i got" (the film i edited featuring ani difranco that some
listers recently saw in NY) will be playing at the Old Greenbelt Theatre
in Maryland this sunday (near beltsville, btwn baltimore & DC). if
you're interested in the details, email me privately.
michael w yarbrough wrote:
>
> For the record, DC has 3 electoral votes, the equivalent of the smallest
> states (AK, the Dakotas, VT, MT, et al)
thanks for filling me in! i feel better now. i don't understand how we
got three with only one shadow rep, though. i guess they pretended we
have senators.
>
> --Michael, predicting a squeaker Gore electoral college victory and
> perhaps a slight popular vote loss
as good a call as any!
Kakki wrote:
>
> I'm not familiar with this at all but am interested in learning more details
> about it. (Getting interested in government and politics again after about
> a 20 year period of personal apathy and revulsion).
i personally pray that bush is not elected. about 2 years after reagan
was put in office, i stopped reading the newspaper 'cause he put me in a
bad mood on a daily basis. i don't want to be so disengaged again.
today i was working on a documentary about iraq and i had to watch a lot
of bush sr footage, which really got on my nerves. there's just
something creepy about those bushes. anyhow, i diverge...
> Why did the so-called
> Founding Fathers set it up this way in the beginning?
maybe michael can come to my rescue again? i'm sure he's got this down
better than i do. this may be a real botch job, but this is what i
remember from the last time i read about it. initially, the city of DC
had different boundaries - part of it was in virginia, part in maryland.
the "district" part of it was all fed (there's definitely some stuff in
the constitution about it, but i unfortunately don't remember that
part). later, when the boundaries moved, i think we still voted in the
other states. in the early 70s, "home rule" was determined, as the
surrounding states weren't doing much for us.
> What options or
> recourse do the DC'ers have to champion their position?
not a whole lot, as we don't have representation with clout to get the
issue on the table. a couple of years ago, there was a movement to
bring a suit against the fed based on the unconstitutional state of
affairs - i don't know if that's still alive. there have been attempts
at gaining statehood, and we do have a local statehood party (now joined
with the green party). their current strategy is to educate the nation
about our situation. a friend of mine is making a documentary on the
subject, which is being used as a teaching tool in high schools locally,
and they hope eventually, nationally. we just got new license plates
with the slogan "taxation without representation". there is hope that if
the nation becomes more aware of the situation that we'd have a better
chance of becoming a state.
> Other than
> competition, what are the Republicans' official policy stance on this issue?
can't honestly answer that question. it's a little fly buzzing around
that they need not pay attention to. and the dems certainly aren't
falling over each other to help us either - it's not an issue that
concerns their constituents and it just doesn't end up high on anyone's
priority list.
> Kakki, far from the east coast and DC
thanks again for the electorate info - i made some friends on line
voting tonight by really knowing how it works!
barbara
np: youssou n'dour, joko
