“Taxation Without Representation” has become the unofficial slogan of the District of Columbia. This phrase is most famously known as the motto of the American Revolution and as the justification for breaking away from the oppressive British monarchy. Why then, is this very same phrase on the license plates of cars in our nation’s capital? Today, D.C. lacks the power of self-government and has limited influence in its own legislation and its own fate. This disconnect between the US’s commitment to democracy and the state of D.C.’s government has created a movement of people dedicated to achieving the District’s statehood.

In April of 2016, the mayor of the District of Columbia, Muriel Bowser, called for a district-wide referendum to decide if D.C. should become the 51st state of the US. Emphasizing the need for the “full rights of citizenship in this great nation,” Mayor Bowser shed light upon the fact that D.C. citizens lack many of the rights awarded to individuals in the 50 official states. While D.C.’s population of 650,000 tax-paying residents makes it larger than both Vermont and Wyoming, D.C. requires Congressional approval to pass any policy or budget legislation. In addition, the District has no representation in the Senate and has only one shadow delegate in Congress, Eleanor Norton. This representative lacks the power to fully vote on any final legislation and has been stripped of many administrative abilities such as the power to sign petitions to remove legislation from a committee, a right provided to all other Congresswomen and men.

In a country founded on the principles of democracy, many question the decision to prohibit D.C. from receiving full governmental rights by achieving statehood. However, the federal government’s control of D.C. is embedded in the Constitution, making any attempt to change its status an extremely lengthy and difficult process. Specifically, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution states that “Congress shall have the Power To…exercise Legislation in all Cases Whatsoever, over of the District.” The Founding Fathers strongly believed that this was necessary because of fears that federal government employees would pass legislation bias towards the District if it was granted statehood. If those working for federal agencies lived in D.C., they may feel inclined to pass legislation that positively affects their place of residence instead of legislation that is best for the country as a whole. Furthermore, the sheer proximity of lawmakers to D.C. residents could give locals too much power to affect legislation . For example, protests in D.C. may influence sympathetic lawmakers or take attention away from the citizens who do not have the benefit of living in close proximity to their elected officials. Decades after D.C. became the capital, lawmakers were still attempting to reduce the sovereignty of the District with the passage of the District Of Columbia Organic Act of 1801, which formally gave Congress control of D.C. and stripped residents of Congressional representation.

Many of the opponents of D.C. statehood today are Republican lawmakers, something that may seem odd given the fact that a key value of the Republican Party is limiting the power of the federal government. Many have called attention to this “hypocrisy of Republicans,” claiming that the only reason Republicans want to prevent D.C. statehood is because they know that if D.C. became a state and received two Senate seats, those seats would most likely be filled by Democrats. The District has only ever elected Democrats to any citywide office since its existence, making this fear legitimate. Complications also emerge when thinking about the logistics of a transition to statehood, which would include altering many laws in the District, writing a new state constitution and more.

While there are some outspoken opponents of D.C. statehood, the arguments in favor are numerous among political figures and citizen activists alike. Mayor Bowser, one of the strongest advocates for the District’s statehood stated, “The men and women, families, veterans, seniors, and business owners [of the District] pay their fair share of taxes and they have a right to full representation.” The mayor argued that our nation is one that values autonomy and self-determination, so shouldn’t the citizens of D.C. get this same right as well? Others believe that the lack of representation in the federal government is a larger issue of civil rights, an argument especially relevant given the fact that D.C. has an African American population ofover 50%. This demographic has experienced significant governmental suppression of civil rights in the past, racializing the issue of D.C.’s statehood. Advocates at D.C.’s tenth annual Statehood Summit also use emotional appeals by discussing the fact that citizens of the District are expected to fight wars for the United States but are still not granted fair and equal representation. Since states have the ability to pass their own bills and budget without Congress approval, some activists refer to D.C. residency as a form of “second-class citizenship.”

The process to initiate D.C.’s statehood would no doubt be long and tedious, but progress is slowly being made. In 1961, the23rd Amendment was passed, giving D.C. residents a voice in presidential elections by granting the District three electoral votes. Senator Tom Carper (D-Del), one of the most avid supporters of D.C.’s statehood movement, presented the “New Columbia Admission Act” to Congress in the early 1990s, which aimed to reduce the amount of federal land in the District in hopes of allowing areas outside this reduced space to achieve statehood. While the legislation did not pass, it did draw attention to an issue that had been largely ignored in the past. Finally, in 2016, an overwhelming 86% of D.C. voters voted in favor of statehood when Mayor Bowser called for a referendum on the issue.

While many citizens and lawmakers alike are skeptical about D.C.’s ability to become a state, there are many devoted advocates in both the local and federal government who continue to fight for this cause. In 2014, the Council of the District of Columbia created the New Columbia Statehood Commission, an independent organization dedicated to “promoting statehood and voting rights to the District.” Grassroots activists are determined to continue the fight as well, with groups likeNeighbors United for D.C. Statehood and the D.C. Statehood Coalition organizing protests and supporting legislation for their cause. While the future of D.C.’s status in the federal government remains unclear, there is no doubt that the fight for this cause will rage on until definitive changes are made.