Akaka Statement at Hearing on Equal Representation in Congress: Providing Voting Rights to the District of Columbia
Statement
Akaka Statement at Hearing on Equal Representation in Congress: Providing Voting Rights to the District of Columbia
Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you for holding this hearing. It's a good opportunity to provide some clarity on a complicated but critically important issue.
We are here today to discuss a fundamental right of all Americans - the right to be represented by a voting member of Congress. As we all know, this is a right the District of Columbia currently does not have. Constitutional scholars, fellow members of Congress, civil rights advocates, and citizens of the District of Columbia will testify this morning, providing much needed perspective on the importance and impact of voting rights legislation for DC.
I do not take this issue lightly. Hawai'i was just a territory when I was born. Almost 50 years ago Hawai'i became the 50th State in the Union and was only then offered full rights and privileges, including full representation in Congress. So, I understand the struggle and challenges facing the citizens of the District.
Three amendments to the Constitution deal specifically with the extension and protection of voting rights for Americans. More than 500,000 citizens in our nation's capital - - some here in this room - - pay federal taxes, fight in our military, and defend our Constitution. However, because they live inside the District and not in a State, they are denied a full voting member of the House.
Some argue that the 23th Amendment provides Congress the authority to give DC voting rights. Others argue that Article 1 of the Constitution prevents it saying it applies only in areas defined as a "State." The courts have supported actions that treat the District as a state in other matters. Why not this one?
I am not an attorney or a judge. Where the law is said to be ambiguous, we should seek clarification. As a legislator of more than 30 years, the separation of powers is clear to me. We should not attempt to preempt the judgment of the Courts. The judicial branch should have the opportunity to interpret the legislation.
Today is not the first day of this discussion and certainly not the last. But it is a clear and decisive step forwards. And I look forward to taking action on this matter.
Source