>>>Did anyone watch Obama's address to Congress?
>>>
>>>OK, now this dude had moved into the category of outright liar. No earmarks? Hahahahah....the average American will burp, pull the tab on a new beer, and move on. But the truth is that the latest spending bill has between $4 Bn and $8 Bn in earmarks depending the interpreter,
>>>
>>>Now they're pushing through a bill to give the District of Columbia voting representatives. Seems fair, right? But it's UNCONSTITUTIONAL, The only way legally to do this is through a Constitutional Amendment. But, golly gee, that would be inconvenient to Congress do we'll just overlook that aspect.
>>
>>I don't think that's quite correct. As I understand it, DC could be retroceded back to Maryland by an agreement between Congress and the State of Maryland. Then DC citizens would have full voting rights restored and no amendment to the constitution required.
>>
>>If I were a DC citizen, I'd much prefer a different option. Remember the Boston Tea Party? I think DC citizens should be excluded from having to pay tax since they don't have proper representation.
>>
>DC people already have representation in US Congress (one delegate in the House, proportional to population). Senate representation is reserved to states (two for each) as it is written in the USA Constitution.

That's right, but I was pointing out that in order for DC to have Senate representation, a constitutional amendment is not required. All they need is to have congress and the state of Maryland agree to retrocede DC back to Maryland. Doing that is constitutionally allowed without an amendment of any sort.

To make DC a state and get representation that way, is an altogether different issue as is giving DC a voting representation in the Senate without being a state.