Dana Milbank [“Ruined by one-party rule,” op-ed, July 15] and Joyce Conrad [letters, July 24] both mentioned retrocession of all or part of the District to Maryland as a possible way to provide congressional representation, and freedom from congressional meddling, for the city. Maryland has been uninterested in retrocession in the past. If it continues to be uninterested, an alternative would be to offer the District to any other state that wants it, on whatever terms could be worked out.
Surely some of the other 49 would have reasons to want the District. Some might want another congressional delegate, some might want to add wealthy residents, some might want increased diversity. Where is it written that state boundaries have to be contiguous? Maryland is not the only possible “home” for the District of Columbia.
Loading...
Comments