District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009

Floor Speech

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA HOUSE VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 2009 -- (Senate - February 25, 2009)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, as chairman of the District of Columbia subcommittee, I rise today in support of S. 160, the District of Columbia Voting Rights Act of 2009. I vote to enfranchise thousands of District residents and to affirm my commitment to the fundamental right of all Americans to participate in our great democracy.

Despite our Nation's founding principle of ``no taxation without representation,'' District of Columbia residents lack full representation in Congress. They have sent sons and daughters to war in defense of our country, and they have paid Federal taxes in support of our Government. Despite this, the distinguished Delegate from the District of Columbia lacks a vote on the floor of the House of Representatives.

Fair voting representation is fundamental to our democracy. I understand the challenges facing the District's residents, and I sympathize with its trouble to attain voting representation in Congress. I also understand that this will be an ongoing discussion. I am sensitive to the concerns raised by my colleagues on the constitutionality of our actions.

Legal scholars have testified before the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee that Congress does have the constitutional authority to extend a vote to a District Representative in the House. I believe this legislation is constitutional, but ultimately it is the role of the courts to decide.

Our representative democracy is based on the principle that citizens of this country should have a say in the laws that govern this country. If citizens disagree with the laws, they have the power to vote for different representatives. By extending this core principle to the District of Columbia, I believe this bill would be a decisive step forward for the rights of DC residents.

AMENDMENT NO. 575

Now I wish to address the pending Ensign amendment.

Today, we are addressing voting rights. Now is not an appropriate time to cloud the debate with amendments on gun control. Last year, when this gun issue was brought up on the Senate floor before being considered by the committee, I joined 10 of my colleagues in a letter to the majority leader asking that the bill follow Senate procedures and be referred to committee before consideration on the floor.

As the chairman of the subcommittee charged with the oversight of the District of Columbia, I am familiar with the debate on DC's gun policies. Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court in the Heller decision struck down the District of Columbia's gun ban. Since then, the DC City Council has taken necessary steps to comply with the Supreme Court's decision, including the passage of legislation to address issues raised by the ruling. I do not believe any congressional action is needed to help DC comply with the Heller decision, but, more importantly, this is not the appropriate time to consider and vote on this issue.

I am not against gun ownership. I am for self-determination. I strongly encourage my colleagues to give the District of Columbia and its citizens the opportunity to vote on and establish their own rules regarding gun control. It would be ironic if we were to with one hand finally give the people of the District voting representation but on the other hand take away their right to self-determination by forcing them to adopt a gun control policy on which they were unable to vote. I, therefore, urge my colleagues to vote no on the Ensign amendment and all related amendments.

I am proud to lend my support for the underlying bill. I urge my colleagues to vote in support of voting rights for the residents of the District of Columbia and to reject any amendment that would abridge those rights or is not germane to the issue at hand.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source