Washington Post: The people of DC stand a very slim chance of beating congress

News Article

By Colbert I. King

Sometimes it's hard to choose your poison, especially when all the options are horrible. That's what it's like when the District decides to take on Congress over an issue of self-government.

The District's chances of winning such contests are small because of that pesky Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution, which gives Congress the power to "exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over . . . the Seat of the Government of the United States."

The "Seat" is us.

Still, there are times when the District simply has to mix it up with Congress. The principle of self-government -- the right of citizens to determine their own destiny -- is too precious to forfeit out of fear that our overseers might take umbrage.

Even if we may lose a battle or two, over the long run the fight to expand self-rule in the District is still worth it.

Thus, once again, we find ourselves tightening the old chin strap, girding our loins and preparing for another skirmish with Congress.

But, I must confess, I wish we weren't going to war over pot.

I would much prefer to expend our limited time, talent and treasure fighting other congressional riders that prevent us from spending our own tax dollars as we see fit. Far better to mix it up with federal lawmakers over issues such as budget autonomy, congressional voting representation and the authority to pick our judges and prosecute crime in the District.

But that is not the challenge before us. We are going to the mat with Congress over the right to get high in our homes.

And that is because D.C. residents said in November, by a 65 percent to 28 percent vote, that they wanted to legalize marijuana in the city.

It matters not that there was only 38 percent voter turnout on Election Day, meaning that 284,000 voters stayed home. More than six in 10 of the voters who went to the polls favored legalization.

So how do we find ourselves at the barricades?

In December, Congress approved a rider to its omnibus appropriations bill intended to block the legalization initiative. The city, however, is proceeding with pot legalization anyway, because its lawyers claim that flawed language in the congressional rider does not actually block legalization from taking effect. Key House Democrats also support the city's position.

The decision to proceed, however, prompted Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which has jurisdiction over the District, and Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), chairman of the subcommittee that handles D.C. affairs, to charge in a letter to D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) that allowing legalization to take effect "is contrary to law" and that to do so would constitute "knowing and willful violation of the law."

So is it time to get our kids off the street? Should we take up defensive positions surrounding the John A. Wilson Building?

Not quite. After all the Sturm und Drang, this latest dust-up with Congress is not likely to end up with Bowser and D.C. Council members in handcuffs. I predict that there will come a day when, as D.C. senior citizens talk about their joints, they have something else in mind than the state of their hips and knees. (Not an original joke, I know, but 'tis enough, 'twill serve.)

That doesn't mean the city will have the last word in this latest confrontation with Congress. Meadows conceded that it's unlikely Congress will turn to the courts on the matter of congressional intent and the District's alleged defiance. But he said, ominously, "I think it plays out on the funding side of it," adding "whether it's specifically about this or other related topics that become very difficult for D.C. to be able to address without the help and will of Congress."

You don't have to be a tea-leaf reader to know what Meadows is getting at. It's all about purse strings, baby, and who has the power to tighten or loosen them. The overseers are planning to teach ol' uppity D.C. a lesson. That underscores the need for the District to pick its fights carefully. But we shouldn't give in or give up on the protection of our right to pass such an initiative, even if the Hill tries to confiscate our money.

D.C. Council member Charles Allen (D-Ward 6) firmly contends that the city stands on solid legal ground. "This has nothing to do with marijuana," Allen told The Post. "This is about the autonomy of the District and the will of the District voters."

And yes, on those grounds, most of us local citizens will stand and fight. But let's not fool ourselves. This is all about the recreational use of pot.

I wish this latest fight for D.C. democracy was over something else.

Source