Statement Of Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.),
Chairman, Senate Committee On The Judiciary,
On Consideration Of
S. 1257, The “District Of Columbia House Voting Rights Act Of 2007”
September 17, 2007

This month the Judiciary Committee marked the 50^th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act of 1957 with a hearing.  Congressman John Lewis, a courageous leader during those transformational struggles only decades ago, gave moving testimony reminding us that “we in Congress must do all we can to inspire a new generation to fulfill the mission of equal justice.”  While we are observing this golden anniversary, it is fitting that the Senate turn to this important voting rights measure, the “District of Columbia House Voting Rights” Act. 

I am a cosponsor of this bipartisan legislation to end the unfair treatment of District of Columbia residents and give them full representation in the House of Representatives.  I thank the Majority Leader, Senator Reid, for bringing this timely issue to the Senate for consideration. 

In April, the House of Representatives worked in a bipartisan manner to pass their version of a voting rights bill for the District of Columbia, led by Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton.  As a young lawyer, she worked for civil rights and voting rights around the country.  It is a cruel irony that upon her return to the District of Columbia and election to the House of Representatives she does not yet have the right to vote on behalf of the people of the District of Columbia who elected her.  She is a strong voice in Congress but the people of the District of Columbia deserve a vote, as well.    

This is not the time for further delay.  It is the Senate’s turn to do what is right.  The Senate bill would give the District of Columbia delegate a full vote in the House.  To attract Republican support, the bill offsets that vote for D.C. by according Utah an additional representative in the House, as well.  This is an effort to provide political balance.  With it or without it, I support representation for the District of Columbia.

I believe that the legislation that we are considering today is within Congress’s powers as provided in the Constitution.  I agree with Congressman Lewis, Congresswoman Norton and numerous other civil rights leaders and constitutional scholars that we should extend the basic right of voting representation to the hundreds of thousands of Americans residing in our Nation’s Capital.  They pay federal taxes, defend our country in the military and serve on federal juries.  They are citizens no less than the citizens of any State.  Their votes should count.  They should be represented.

In May the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on this legislation.  We heard compelling testimony.  Retired Chief Judge Patricia Wald testified that this legislation is constitutional and highlighted the fact that Congress’s greater power in accordance with the Constitution to confer full statehood on the District certainly contains the lesser power to grant District residents voting rights in the House of Representatives.  She also reminded us that Congress has exercised this authority in the past without a rigid adherence to the constitutional text when it granted voting rights to Americans abroad – in their last State of residence – regardless of whether they are citizens of that State, pay taxes to that State, or have any intent to return to that State.  Her former colleague on the D.C. Circuit, Ken Starr, echoed her conclusion that this legislation is constitutional.

Congress has repeatedly treated the District of Columbia as a “State” for various purposes.  Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton testified that although “the District is not a State,” the “Congress has not had the slightest difficulty in treating the District as a State, with its laws, its treaties, and for constitutional purposes.”  Examples of these actions include a revision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that broadened Article III diversity jurisdiction to include citizens of the District even though the Constitution only provides that federal courts may hear cases “between citizens of different States.”  Congress has also treated the District as a “State” for purposes of congressional power to regulate commerce “among the several States.”  The Sixteenth Amendment grants Congress the power to directly tax incomes “without apportionment among the several States.”  That constitutional provision has been interpreted also to apply to residents of the District.  In fact, the District of Columbia pays the second-highest federal taxes per capita, yet has no vote in connection with how those dollars are spent.  The local license plates say a good deal and remind us of our heritage when they say “Taxation without Representation.”

In 2005, President Bush praised the Iraqi people for exercising their democratic right to vote, and he noted that “by participating in free elections, the Iraqi people have firmly rejected the anti-democratic ideology of the terrorists…[a]nd they have demonstrated the kind of courage that is always the foundation of self-government.”  Unfortunately, the President does not speak so enthusiastically about voting rights for the American citizens living literally in his backyard.  It is disappointing that the Bush Administration has threatened to veto this legislation. 

I understand that opponents of this voting right bill are considering a filibuster to prevent its passage.  In a recent column in the Washington Times, former Maryland Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele and former Congressman J.C. Watts, two Republicans, voiced their strong support of this legislation and reminded Senators that the last time a voting rights bill was filibustered was 50 years ago.  Despite Senator Thurmond’s record-setting effort, the Senate rightfully passed the Civil Rights Act in 1957 and followed up with the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts in 1964 and 1965.  I hope the Senate does not return to the days when it filibustered voting rights for its African-American citizens.   

In an editorial, The Washington Post on Monday observed, “This cloture motion is technical, but how the senators vote is entirely about principle.  It is simply not right that U.S. citizens who live in the Nation's Capital are denied basic representation in their government. That a procedural gambit would be used to prevent a redressing of this wrong is inexcusable.”

This is a historic vote that holds great significance within the civil rights community and for the residents of the District of Columbia.  I urge Senators to do what is right and to support cloture on this measure.      

Last year, Congress showed bipartisanship to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act.  We fought for the fundamental civil rights of all Americans and united as a Congress behind its noble purpose.  Let us not backslide today.  No one’s right to vote should be abridged, suppressed or denied in the United States of America.  Let us move forward together and provide full voting rights for the citizens in our Nation’s Capital. 

# # # # #