From an editorial in the D.C. Gazette:
We agree with a number of critics of the constitution that there are serious flaws in this document and we are sympathetic to arguments that it should therefore be rejected by the voters. There are, however, several problems with this:
* Rejection will send the matter back to the constitutional convention, which has a tendency to prefer impressive rhetoric to legislative pragmatism.
* Rejection will not establish which parts of the constitution the voters deem unacceptable.
* Rejection will be viewed in some quarters as a rejection of statehood.
* Rejection will increase the chances that the statehood drive will get mired in a good old D.C. political rhubarb with everyone arguing and no one doing anything.
So, despite the problems with the constitution -- which we in no way underrate -- the Gazette urges passage of the initiative anyway. We do so with the near absolute certainty that the present constitution would never be approved by Congress and with the hope that following passage the city council will immediately move to present proposed amendments to the document that can be voted on at future general elections. These amendments should be drawn up following public hearings on the matter.
In other words, we suggest you vote for the constitution not as a final document but to get a working draft on the table that can be refined between now and when we finally become the 51st state.