Should the District of Columbia Be a State?

Senator Tom Carper (D-DE) recently introduced legislation to make the District of Columbia the 51st state. Do you think this is a good idea, or is statehood for the District unnecessary?

Senator Tom Carper (D-DE) recently introduced legislation to grant full statehood to Washington, DC. Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) introduced companion legislation in the House, H.R. 317, in January.

Known as the New Columbia Admission Act (S. 1688), the bill would lay the groundwork for creating the 51st state, called New Columbia, and provide residents with full voting rights in Congress. The bill would designate the areas surrounding the White House, the Capitol, the Supreme Court, and the National Mall as the seat of the federal government. The area would inherit the name “District of Columbia” and remain under the control of Congress, as mandated by the Constitution.

Carper called the situation an “injustice” and added that it was unfair that DC citizens are not able to vote.

Carper also said, “The District of Columbia is not just a collection of government offices, monuments and museums. It is home to more than 600,000 people who build lives, families, and careers here. These Americans serve in our military, die defending our country, serve on our juries, and pay federal taxes. Yet, despite their civic contributions, they are not afforded a vote in either chamber of Congress. This situation is simply not fair, and it isn’t consistent with the values we celebrate as a country on July 4th every year. Most importantly, it isn’t consistent with the Golden Rule: to treat others the way we want to be treated.”

What is your opinion? Should DC be a state? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

About the Author

Ian Smith is one of the co-founders of He has over 20 years of combined experience in media and government services, having worked at two government contracting firms and an online news and web development company prior to his current role at FedSmith.