Bipartisan Team Introduces Voting Rights Bill

Bill Would Expand House From 435 to 437 Seats

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) teamed up with Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.) today to introduce a bill that would for the first time give the District a full vote in the House, a sign of bipartisan cooperation that advocates of D.C. voting rights hailed as a breakthrough.

Read the Story: Bipartisan Team Introduces Voting Rights Bill (Post, May 11)

Norton was online Thursday, May 11, at 4 p.m. ET to discuss the legislation.

A transcript follows.

____________________

Ward One, Washington, D.C.: I'm thrilled to see that there's some movement on voting rights for District residents, but I'm also concerned - will focusing on the House mean that the (perhaps even more weighty) matters of senators and budget authority fall off the table? Or is this more of a piecemeal, slowly-slowly approach?

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: Remember it takes two houses to to pass a bill. But I will never give up on our Senate seat, not because they have more weighty matters but because they have a great deal more latitude to produce for their constituents. I have secured a promise from Congressman Davis to allow a vote on my bill for full representation. The No Taxation Without Representation Act -- before the vote on our new bill, the Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act, I don't have the votes for my bill but I secured a promise for that vote in order to send an unequivocal message that equal citizenship means what it says -- equal citizenship.

As for budget authority, if you mean D.C.'s freedom from congressional oversight over its local budget I have already got us part way there without a vote. D.C. no longer has to come mid-year for authorization to spend money collected since the last appropriation. Tom Davis has cosponsored a D.C. budget autonomy bill with me for full budget autonomy and has promised that we can have a hearing before Congress adjourns.

_______________________

Eckington, D.C.: What changes will we immediately see as residents of the District of Columbia if we were to be given a vote in the House?

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: I have always said that the vote does not determine what a member is able to do for her constituents if she establishes herself and garners allies. Although Democrats have been in power only four of the 16 years I've been in Congress, I have been able to get significant legislation such as the D.C.-only $5,000 home buyer credit and the tuition grant bill that allows our students to go to any state supported college in the country and to local and regional private schools.

The vote is important to establish the full citizenship of D.C. residents in the eyes of the Congress and to assure their inclusion in all aspects of the life and proceedings of the House of Representatives.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: As much as I want D.C. to be represented in Congress, something sounds fishy about adding an at-large representative for Utah. Is it fair or smart to add a different form of representation for one state, so that people in Utah have 2 representatives in the House?

Is this a temporary compromise condition, until the next census, or is this intended to be permanent?

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: No, there has never been an increase in voting representation without party equivalence. Witness the most recent states to enter the union, Alaska and Hawaii. That's why a seat for a Republican state was essential to get Democratic and Republican support. The at-large seat is to assure no manipulation through redistricting in Utah as occurred in Texas and two other states last year.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Dear Del. Norton,

Would you just automatically assume the full powers of a representative or would we have the honor of voting for you in a special election?

Thanks!

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: Good question. I believe the bill allows for automatic transfer if the bill is passed before the end of this session but I will have to check on that.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: In your view, how would the political climate have to change in order for the District to acquire two senators?

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: The Senate jealously guards its small numbers. It will take more than a change in political climate; it will take a great deal of strategic thinking that I have begun to do when I have thought the matter through more specifically I will speak to constituents about these plans. Meanwhile, we all must focus on trying to get passage at least of the House bill before Congress adjourns.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Given that AN Commissioner Andy Mick opened his campaign recently by denouncing your lack of action on the FAIR bill, would you say the timing of this morning's announcement was a sheer coincidence?"

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: Tom Davis and I reached agreement in March as he will be the first to confirm. Then began a series of consultations with relevant Democrats and Republicans and staff work by three different congressional staffs. Not until a bill was produced, scrubbed by the staffs of all the members involved, could we announce agreement. My goal was to announce the agreement before this coming Saturday, May 13, because I never run on voting rights as the paramount issue. I run on a pressing congressional issue that affects D.C. in addition to always running on voting rights as well.

This year I am running on getting legislation that would help D.C. and similar school districts rebuild their schools and therefore am kicking off at 12 noon at Bane where I attended school myself.

Thus, you can see, except for my campaign theme related to the D.C. public schools, most of the timing for release of the agreement reached almost two months ago was out of my control.

_______________________

Washington, D.C. : What will the increase in the number of seats in the House do to national politics?

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: One of my conditions for supporting the bill was an increase of two, not just one seat. Otherwise, Democrats and Republicans in the Midwest and northeast, for example, might have felt threatened because some of them fear losing a seat as a result of the next census.

Two other important conditions for me were 1) a mark-up of the bill not only in the Government Reform Committee but especially in the Judiciary Committee, the committee of jurisdiction and 2) no partisan gain or disadvantage by either party.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Hi there, and thank you for being here today. I am thrilled that you have changed your position and are supporting Rep. Davis' bill. Can you explain why you changed your stance? I know that you are facing a challenger this year, who supports the Davis bill. Did that play a role in your shift?

Either way, thank you for coming around. The times are too important for D.C. residents to continue to have absolutely zero voice.

Thanks.

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: Make sure you see my answer to a previous question.

It is important to note that I have always supported the House Vote Bill; however, I could not sign on to the original Davis bill until I had taken the necessary steps to assure the support of Democrats as well as Republicans. Democrats had been burned by the first mid-decade redistricting in our history and we're also concerned about Utah's notorious reputation for gerrymandering.

The at-large seat was important to bring Democrats over and I had to make sure that we made the most of this opportunity. A mark-up in the Government Reform Committee alone would have been almost useless because the Judiciary Committee mark-up is essentially all that counts for a voting rights bill to move.

I had only my own support with which to bargain. Holding my support for only my bill only until the conditions I have mentioned had been met was the incentive to meet those conditions.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Will your seniority still be valid?

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: Yes, my seniority does not go away. There's been no break in my service.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Dear Del. Norton,

Two questions: Will there be an identical bill introduced into the Senate?

Where do you see this legislation engendering the most resistance: the House, the Senate or President Bush?

Thanks

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: Good question. I have already spoken with the chief sponsor of my full voting rights bill, Sen. Joe Leiberman and have asked him to introduce this bill, the new Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act, with a Republican co-sponsorship.

If the bill passes the House which is the only house affected, I see no reason why the Senate would not pass it as well, particularly since the Senate is not affected. The president would have no reason to oppose this bill if it passed both houses because he, too, is not affected.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Is it within our home rule power to amend the D.C. Code to have elections of our "state"-level Superior Court and D.C. Court of Appeals judges?

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: Unfortunately no. However, following the financial collapse in D.C. in the 1990s, D.C. gave up certain state costs including court costs. The city will probably not be able to select its own judges until it can pay for them and for its court system.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: With your seniority in tact what is the likelihood of you chairing a committee should the democrats gain power?

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: I will chair a subcommittee if the Democrats regain power.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Great News!

Just curious: Is the co-sponsorship of the bill to create a full-fledged House seat for D.C. and a new House seat for Utah a way of balancing a heavily Democratic voting district with a heavily Republican voting district?

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: Yes, because historically party equivalence has been the only way to increase the number of seats.

_______________________

Fairfax, Va.: Why wasn't this thought of by the people who wrote the Constitution?

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: The framers of the Constitution believed that the first congress would give District residents, all of whom had been a part of either Maryland or Virginia, their full voting rights. Congress has failed the framers and D.C. residents for more than two centuries.

_______________________

Southeast, D.C.: Delegate Norton:

If it took a constitutional amendment to get D.C. representation in the electoral college, how can you add a voting member of the House without another amendment? Don't members of the house have to be elected by a state?

And if Congress can require that Utah elects their additional member at-large, why can't it do the same for all members from all states?

Isn't there a constitutional problem with this bill?

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: Good question. Tom Davis and I have had the mater thoroughly vetted by constitutional scholars of the first rank in both parties. Truthfully, consitutional opinion is divided but not according to party. The at-large seat is required only until the next census and would probably be constitutional as a way to implement and accomplish the bill if the bill itself is constitutional as I believe it is.

_______________________

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton: These have been really good and tough questions that should be asked and answered and I thank those who asked them for helping to clarify many issues that are on the minds of others just like those of you who have written in. My only regret is that so many of you wrote it became impossible to answer all of your questions. But I am thrilled that there is so much interest in the bill.

I invite you to visit my Web site to read my total remarks. They aren't very long but they offer some additional insight into how and why we got to this agreement. Also, my remarks contain a few personal words about why this bill means so much to me that I have never revealed before. Please go to Eleanor Holmes Norton.

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.