00:00a non-voting delegate, the representative from the District of Columbia, Eleanor Holmes Norton.
00:05Four minutes. Ladies recognized.
00:13I thank my good friend for yielding to me, and I strongly oppose this radical,
00:18undemocratic, and paternalistic bill, as do the three top local elected
00:26District of Columbia officials, Mayor Muriel Bowser, Council Chair Phil Mendelsohn,
00:32and D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwab. I ask unanimous consent
00:40to insert into the record their joint letter opposing this bill.
00:46Before I discuss the substance of this bill, I want to discuss democracy and the lack of it
00:53in the District of Columbia. D.C. residents who have all the obligations of American citizenship
01:01have no voting representation in Congress, and Congress has the ultimate say on local D.C.
01:08matters. While my Republican colleagues are correct that Congress has the constitutional
01:16authority to legislate on local D.C. matters, their assertion that Congress has a constitutional
01:24duty to do so is simply wrong. Legislating on local D.C. matters is a choice.
01:32As the Supreme Court held in 1953, and I'm quoting, there is no constitutional barrier
01:40to the delegation by the Congress to the District of Columbia to full legislative power,
01:47end quote. D.C.'s local legislature, the Council, has 13 members. The members are elected by D.C.
01:56residents. If D.C. residents do not like how the members vote, they can vote them out of office.
02:04That is called democracy. Congress has 535 voting members. The members are elected by
02:13residents of their states. None are elected by D.C. residents. If D.C. residents do not like how
02:22members vote on local matters, they cannot vote them out of office. That is the antithesis of
02:30democracy. The merits of this bill should be irrelevant, since there is never justification
02:38for Congress legislating on local D.C. matters. However, I will discuss the bill. This bill would
02:45be the biggest rollback of D.C. self-government in a generation. This bill says the D.C. Council
02:53may not, and here I'm quoting, enact any act, resolution, or rule to change any criminal
03:04liability sentence in effect on the date of the enactment of the D.C. Crimes Act of 2024,
03:12end quote. This provision, which does not define the term criminal liability sentence,
03:19is as poorly drafted as it is offensive. It takes away D.C.'s authority to increase or
03:27decrease statutory criminal penalties. If D.C. wanted to increase penalties for violent crime,
03:34it could not do so. This bill could even be construed to prevent D.C. from establishing
03:43any new crimes at all. This bill also reduces the maximum age of eligibility for D.C.'s
03:55Youth Rehabilitation Amendment Act of 1985. D.C. is not the only jurisdiction to have
04:04such a so-called young adult offender law. Alabama, Florida, Michigan, New York,
04:11South Carolina, and Vermont have such laws. The sponsor of this bill is from
04:18one of those six states. The Revolutionary War was fought to give consent of the governor and to end
04:29to end taxation without representation, yet D.C. residents cannot consent to any action
04:35taken by Congress to pay full federal taxes. Indeed, D.C. pays more federal taxes per capita
04:41than any state and more total federal taxes in 20 states. If House Republicans cared about
04:49democratic principles or D.C. residents, they would bring to the floor my D.C. statehood bill,
04:54H.R. 51, the Washington, D.C. Admission Act, which would give D.C. residents voting representation
05:02in Congress and full local self-government. Congress has the constitutional authority to admit
05:08the state of Washington, D.C. It simply lacks the will.
05:18Reserves. Gentleman from Florida is recognized.
