Correction appended
Six students sat silently in the middle of the street holding hands Wednesday when U.S. Capitol Police officers put them in handcuffs.
Demonstrating with about 20 others to kick off the DC Statehood Student Association’s last colony campaign, students marched from Kogan Plaza to the Capitol to protest the District’s lack of full representation in Congress and autonomy over its budget.
With a megaphone in hand, the group’s national president, freshman Markus Batchelor, led the rally to Upper Senate Park, chanting “this is what democracy looks like.”
“That is what hypocrisy looks like,” the ralliers shouted, pointing to the Capitol and flashing signs calling for D.C. to become the 51st state.
City advocates, pushing for budget autonomy and full Congressional representation, joined the protesters at Upper Senate Park, before the group shifted to Constitution Avenue and First Street.
But six marchers, including four GW students, were arrested at about 4:45 p.m. when they sat down near the intersection, effectively blocking off traffic.
Officers restrained the handful of students using disposable handcuffs within five minutes, after three warnings to cease the sit-down stalling traffic.
“I am honored to fight for the people, not just myself, but the people who have lived here their entire lives and gave up the right to be represented,” freshman Matt Laurinavicius, vice chair of the DC Statehood Student Association, said during the march.
Laurinavicius was also arrested, along with Patrick Kennedy, chair of the GW chapter of the DC Statehood Student Association, said.
“It all happened pretty quickly honestly. It all came in a blur. I had prepared myself a week in advance, so I kind of knew what to expect,” Kennedy said. “As soon as we got out there, the police gave us our warnings. But I knew it was all for a good cause.”
Kennedy said he and his fellow arrested protesters were released by the police within three hours, joking that “three hours was enough time to devote to democracy.”
D.C. mayors must receive Congressional approval to spend local tax dollars and D.C.’s delegate in Congress, Eleanor Holmes Norton, can serve on and vote in House of Representatives committees as well as introduce bills, but does not have the authority to vote on legislation once it hits the House floor.
The DC Statehood Student Association formed last June to engage students in the battle for the 51st state. GW launched its chapter in November, garnering about 10 active members who regularly attend group meetings among a total list of about 40 individuals.
The DC Statehood Student Association’s last colony campaign highlights the District’s lack of Congressional representation. Raising awareness within the student body is the group’s top priority, Batchelor said, because college students originate from different corners of the country and can carry the message to their home states.
“Every movement in history that has been successful has been fueled by young energy,” he said.
A national poll released Monday by DC Vote – an organization that lobbies for the District to receive full representation in Congress – found that 78 percent of the more than 1,000 individuals surveyed believed Congress should not interfere with the city’s budget.
D.C. politicians unveiled an amped up campaign for the District’s movement to become the 51st state in November, which includes creating a centralized statehood website, increasing advertising on Metro buses and making a plan to take their plea cross-country to urge state legislatures for support.
This article was updated on April 23, 2012 to reflect the following:
Due to misinformation from a source, The Hatchet incorrectly reported that five GW students were arrested during the protest. In fact, four GW students were among the six students arrested.
Speaking of hypocrisy, these morons were arrested by U.S. Capitol Police, one of many federal law enforcement agencies that keeps order throughout the District. If District residents want autonomy, are they willing to forego the significant security assistance they receive from federal police agencies?
The U.S. Capitol Police DO NOT “keep order throughout the District.” They keep order throughout the National Capitol Service Area, the immediate area surrounding the Capitol, White House, Supreme Court, and related government agencies. The Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), paid for by District taxpayers, are responsible for the rest (the vast majority) of the District’s territory.
@DC Resident: Please re-read my original comment. I said the Capitol Police is “one of many federal law enforcement agencies that keeps order throughout the District.” This is true, as a commenter below noted. I actually had the pleasure of being pulled over by the U.S. Park Police on Constitution Avenue. Moreover, the Hatchet regularly reports on GW Police receiving mutual aid assistance from federal police agencies in the area.
MPD receives funding from both DC residents and federal taxpayers.
Law student? Hah! I’m Orly Taitz, Esq.!
Good for the Capitol Police, taking out the THUG trash. It’s bad enough that this Welfare State is already adding to the deficit, but now they want to tell the people paying THEM what to do? Hope the cops round up a few more of them before all is said and done.
Thug trash? How ignorant can you be?
What would you call a group of welfare recipients trying to stop working people from getting to their jobs
Very true. If you are at work, you cannot be rabble rousing and whining.
DC Residents pay Federal taxes (like you), but do not have any representation. Don’t you think all Americans, including residents of the Capitol of the free world, deserve equal rights?
Alone time with Bubba will change some of the minds of these youths twisted by liberal professors.
Good riddance, I say. These freshman probably did not consider the negative repercussions a disorderly conduct arrest will have on their futures.
I can’t speak for the freshman in the group, but I’m pretty sure they knew what the consequences were because I know the sophomore among them certainly did.
Also, it wasn’t a disorderly conduct charge. It was a criminal citation for ‘blocking passage’, and the case was adjudicated with a $35 fine. That’s less than some parking tickets, and well worth it to stand up for the people of the District of Columbia.
Please don’t pretend to speak on behalf of me. My loyalty is to the Constitution first, D.C. second.
Tom, please accept my sincerest apologies. I think you speak very eloquently for yourself.
In this case, the constitution imposes Despotic Constitutionalism on the denizens of DC (just as it did originally on blacks, women, and 18-20 year-olds). Historically, Absolute Power “in all cases whatsoever” was exerted over an unrepresented national minority in two related cases: The Declaratory Act of 1766, by the British Parliament over the thirteen colonies; and the District Clause, by the US Congress, in 1789, over the District of Colombia. This attempt to arrogate Absolute Power over others
is the very antithesis of the fundamental first principle of the American Revolution, that “just power derives from the Consent of the Governed.”
Aren’t finals coming up?
Just another example of “oh cool, a protest, let’s go.”
Do you think these kids really have a stake in the game? Are they permanent DC residents or just here for school?
Home rule was a grievous error to pacify the rabble in the wake of them trying to burn down the District in 1968. Making DC a state (“New Columbia”?) would be far worse.
Mighty presumptuous, aren’t you General Mitchell? The protest group included four D.C. natives and two other permanent residents, myself and Matt. I am registered to vote here, filed my tax return here last week.
Just because we’re students doesn’t mean we aren’t invested in the District of Columbia as our home.
Yes, you are 1/2 right. Home Rule was a bad idea because it did not give DC Residents equal rights. DC Statehood is the only way to do that. I guess you want to stick to the Constitution, rather than the Declaration of Independence that says “all men are created equal”. Every taxpaying American citizen deserves that….
Do these protesters realize how badly they reflect upon GW? It’s clear, after all, they’ve yet to learn the Constitution, which clearly proscribes DC becoming a state. If these people want to rally for DC to become a state, they ought to propose a constitutional amendment. Though, from the perspective of someone who has actually lived in DC for most of my life, statehood ranks pretty low on the list of local priorities.
Tom, I hardly think anyone’s opinion of GW is worse than it was yesterday for our actions. In fact, I feel quite confident that there are a number of District residents who are proud of GW students for engaging with the city around them and standing up symbolically for their rights.
Also, your questionable reading of the Constitution aside, we’ve already passed an amendment to extend voting rights to the people of the District of Columbia: It’s called the 23rd Amendment. People recognized a half-century ago that it was unjust to deprive citizens in the nation’s capital of a vote for president, so why in 2012 do we not have a voting voice in Congress?
Dude, seriously? The more you try arguing this the more clueless you come off. “Permanent resident”? I didn’t realize D.C. has such a classification.
Article 1, Section 8:
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square)* as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And …
As I said before, if for some reason you really consider statehood for D.C. such an important issue for your time here as a student at GW, first try and ratify a constitutional amendment. That’s how the 23rd Amendment came about; not by attention-seeking students sitting in front of traffic, blocking actual District denizens from their daily activity.
Tom, Article I Section VIII was drafted the way it was so that the federal government wouldn’t be beholden to the state that hosted the capital city for protection. It arose from an incident under the Articles of Confederation when a group of angry citizens descended on Philadelphia in revolt against the federal government and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania refused to dispatch their militia in response.
It wouldn’t take a constitutional amendment to declare areas outside of the federal core — I.E. where people live — a separate state for the purposes of full representation in Congress and full autonomy for local government.
The fact of the matter is, the Home Rule Charter Act of 1973 granting the District (limited) self-government powers was passed only after sustained activism from people like Marion Barry, Walter Fauntroy, Martin Luther King during the decade prior. Key to those efforts was the STUDENT Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, and I elucidate the word ‘STUDENT’ for your benefit.
STUDENTS.
Yes, people that do not really have a lot at stake. Nothing to lose by hanging out and “community organizing”. Not like they’re going to jeopardize their careers or anything.
Look, kids, once you get a job, ask the boss for time off to protest and see what happens.
did you explain that to the police when you decided to violate your permit and deny others their rights?
OK, so Congress should decree that there is now a separate state in the shape of a doughnut, that D.C. remains the seat of government (but no one is allowed to live there), because a college student named Patrick Kennedy says so.
Civil disobedience arrests have no negative impact on your future–way to stand in solidarity with DC residents for emancipation. This is what Democracy looks like–keep it up!
@Supportive – “Emancipation”? You live in D.C. because you choose to. It’s kind of confusing how someone could be emancipated from their own self-determination.
Tom, I’m pretty sure the multi-generational Washingtonians sitting in the back of the paddy wagon with me didn’t have a choice as to where they were born.
There should be no second class of U.S. citizens; there is no logical, emotional, or moral justification for saying that I should be deprived of certain rights just because I live on the D.C. side of Southern, Eastern, or Western Avenue when those living across the street have a voting voice in Congress and control over their local affairs.
How about instead of telling 620,000 people to move from their home in order to gain their rights, why don’t we just extend the same rights that 310 million other Americans have to those living in the nation’s capital?
They may not have had a choice as to where they were born, but they certainly have a choice where to live. Just as you have a choice to attend a school located in a U.S. state — not the seat of government.
You’re right. There should not be 2nd class citizens in America, and fortunately there are not. If voting for state representation is important to you, you have just the same ability as anyone else to live and vote in a U.S. state. I know this may come as a surprise to the Founder of the chairman of the DC Statehood Students Association, but Washington is not a U.S. state, just like Puerto Rico, Guam, or the U.S. Virgin Islands are not U.S. states.
As far as “rights” are concerned, I’m not aware of where the “right” to vote for a non-existent office derives from.
Please feel free to continue protesting and getting arrested. Lord knows you’ll have the support of D.C.’s mayor. But don’t be surprised if in 10 years D.C. is still not a state and all you have to show for your efforts is a criminal record.
In no other democratic society does “living in the seat of government” translate into “giving up citizenship rights.”
Secondly, the Constitution is an intentionally living document. Its architects explicitly state that it can and should be revised, and even tossed out altogether if it no longer works for the citizens. If the Constitution hadn’t been altered, African Americans would still be counted as three-fifths of a human being and women would not be able to vote. You should also note that as U.S. citizens we have a Constitutionally granted right to abolish our government if it is no longer democratically viable.
Putting the Constitution aside, statehood rights are most certainly a priority for District residents. Every year, Eleanor Holmes Norton attempts to introduce voting legislation with broad support from Democrats, moderate Republicans, and D.C. citizens. The hard right votes down the bill.
Tom, no U.S. citizen on U.S. soil shouldn’t have the power of self-determination in the 21st century. Period. It’s antithetical to the values of this country and the Constitution you claim fealty to.
People shouldn’t have to leave their hometown or, in my case, the place I have chosen to live, to gain equal rights under the law.
Your justification for the status quo seems to come down to the fact that the status quo exists, therefore it shouldn’t be changed. That’s frankly a weak argument, and no matter what Constitutional dodges you try to employ in justifying it, it’s those who stand in the way of equal rights for D.C. who will eventually be left in history’s dustbin.
@ Professor – The Constitution was actually meant not as the exact opposite of a “living” document. This is why amending it is so difficult. It’s meant to withstand the passions of the present to preserve the institutions of the past. It’s very purpose is stopping “change.” You’ve nonetheless made my point. The Constitution can and has been amended. If Patrick Kennedy wants to do something useful and not simply attract attention for blocking traffic, he would propose amending the Constitution. Granted, that takes hard work, so I’m guessing he’d rather conduct a feckless sit in somewhere.
Eleanor Holmes Norton’s legislation is being voted down because you can’t simply pass a law amending the Constitution.
@ Patrick, your high-minded rhetoric notwithstanding, I remain rather convinced you’re utterly clueless on this subject. What “equal right under the law” are D.C. residents specifically being denied? If you want to make yourself useful, I have a better idea: Because giving Eleanor Holmes Norton actual voting power would just be one more vote in favor of raising our taxes, why not strive for something that actually helps people? Democracy isn’t meant as an objective in and of itself, but rather a means to an end (i.e., good government). Puerto Rico is also not a state but enjoys the benefits of statehood (national defense, social programs, etc.). Why not fight for the same status so that D.C. residents, like Puerto Ricans, don’t have to pay federal taxes? What would the result of that be? A massive population influx, which would create huge economic growth. Sure, it’s not as exciting as sitting the middle of the room and grabbing some press, but unlike your method, it would actually do something helpful.
The right to vote derives from the fundamental first principle that “just power derives from the consent of the Governed.” That is from the Declaration of Independence. See also the Virginia Declaration of Rights, Section 6.
I hope your alone time with bubba changed your mind on if those people deserve to vote.
You go to jail. You go directly to jail. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200.
doesn’t make us look that bad. i think it shows gw kids actually have some balls. ya, they’re dumb freshman, but it doesn’t mean they shouldn’t stand for something
But do they really know what they’re standing for? Or is it “dude, another protest!”?
I wonder, if as other posters mentioned, they realize that nothing short of a Constitutional amendment can grant DC statehood?
Actually, expatriate Americans (those living outside the fifty states — similar to DC residents, who live outside the fifty states as well) are allowed to vote absentee. There is no legitimate reason DC residents could not be accommodated similarly, by letting them each affiliate with and vote absentee in the state of their choice. And that would not require a Constitutional Amendment. Just sayin’
Brilliantly stated. Maybe they should protest to legalize bestiality or even incest. Hey, as long as long as they’re standing for something.
gwstudent, I resent being called a ‘dumb freshman’. Please allow me the courtesy of being called the ‘dumb sophomore’ that I am.
im gay
Markus Batchelor will be live on WRGW tonight at 6 pm to discuss the protest.
Listen at http://www.gwradio.com
I am SHOCKED at the vitriol in these comments. Civil disobedience is one of the most effective modes of political resistance of a democratic society. Civil rights, women’s rights, gay rights, protests against Vietnam…
I am a District resident who is overjoyed when students take up our struggles as their own. The fact that we live in the United States, pay taxes, and are denied full voting rights should be a matter of concern to every person in the nation.
I imagine, though, that the hateful comments are coming from our tiny right-wing population here. Oh, how we dread teaching these students. Not because of their politics, but because they take pleasure in hatred and mockery.
Your right to protest doesn’t supersede my right to drive down a road.
Protesters should have stayed on the sidewalk and had their message heard for a longer period of time.
Instead they appear to have gotten themselves arrested for the sake of getting arrested.
Driving on a road is a privilege, not a right. This is why a valid drivers’ license is required.
But it’s still a “privilege” that cannot be denied without due process, something these little Alinskys will never understand.
So is free speech.
Thanks for stating the obvious that these libtards just don’t understand.
These bonobama’s don’t understand that their right to free speech does not override my rights as well. They had their permit and should have stayed on the sidewalk!
“I imagine, though, that the hateful comments are coming from our tiny right-wing population here. Oh, how we dread teaching these students. Not because of their politics, but because they take pleasure in hatred and mockery.”
I’m sorry, do the names Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann and Rosie O’Donnell mean anything to you?
Your right to protest does not supersede my right to drive home. Stay on the sidewalks where your permits allow you to protest. Yeah, you’re young and excited about your cause that will never happen, maybe you are trying to impress some chick who thinks you ‘care so much you will get arrested’, who cares, stay out of the streets.
Any real lawyer would know that you cant block traffic in Maobama land
We already have 50 states, we don’t need 51. What would the name of this new gay state be, oh never mind I’ve got it, GAY
Actually it would be split into two parts- the Federal area would be the State of Insanity, and the residential part would be known as Welfare State.
The states that take more money from the federal government than the take are called ‘the South.’ DC gives more.
Only reason the south is considered a ‘welfare state’ is because of all the army bases! We are too busy protecting your dumb liberal asses!
When’s the last time you thanked a vet!?
Actually you are completely wrong. D.C. receives 6 dollars for every dollar sent to the federal government. It’s the biggest benefactor of any state/territory. And yet somehow we’re supposed to think this arrangement is “unjust.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2690371/posts
Tom, very little of that money goes to the D.C. government. It’s a reflection of federal money going to federal services that happen to be located in D.C. because it’s the capital city. D.C. residents derive no benefit from the vast, vast majority of that spending.
At the same time, as a federal district D.C. cannot tax land owned by the federal government, parkland, land owned by nonprofits, embassies, etc. The figure is something like 35%, as in the percentage of land in the District that is taxable. We can’t impose a commuter tax either, so in the words of the District’s CFO, we ‘tax the hell out of our own citizens’ to keep up with the burden of providing services to 620,000 people. That’s in addition to the federal taxes D.C. residents pay, which as your own article pointed out are the highest, per-capita, of any state/district.
And DC supports BY FAR the biggest daily influx of governement worker/commuters (from Virginia and Maryland, primarily) of ANY American city — check the Census data on commuting. The streets need to be maintained, traffic to flow, water to flow and flush, fires to be put out, free speech of demonstrators from around the country accommodated, tourists educated and entertained, national celebrations observed,… and no commuter tax may be charged. Apples and grapefruit.
Someone put that hammer on the nail!
“That nervous suffragist who wrote to ask if Mrs. Julia Ward Howe had been separated from her husband is a type of a large class of good people, who might be a little better. What they need to tone up their nerves and strengthen the weak knees . . . is a good dose of pure unadultered principle. They call themselves suffragists; but, with every breath of adverse opinion, their faith wavers. . . . All they need is thorough conviction of the right and the justice, not the expediency of woman suffrage. . . .”
“Suppose you try the methods of the mental science people in this matter? Go into a quiet room, sit down, close your eyes, and repeat to yourself: “Taxation without representation is tyranny.” Say it over and over till the idea is fully assimilated. Then, when some one tells you that a woman out in Colorado sold her vote for a piece of chewing gum, or that some other woman does not darn her husband’s stocking, or that Mary A. Livermore never made a loaf of bread in her life, just shut your eyes, ask yourself “What connection is there between this eternal truth and that petty bit of gossip?” If you have half as much sense as you ought to have, you will be able to answer yourself, “None whatever.””
“If every woman suffragist in the land were divorced from her husband, still “Taxation without representation is tyranny,” and woman suffrage is right. If every woman suffragist were a poor housekeeper and a neglectful mother, still “Taxation without representation is tyranny,” and woman suffrage is right. If all womanly loveliness were embodied in the remonstrants and all womanly unloveliness in the woman suffragist, still “Taxation without representation is tyranny,” and woman suffrage is right. The eternal principles of truth and justice are to be our guides and not the fleeting circumstances that seem to confute these principles. . . .”
–Lida Calvert Obenchain
Source: The Woman’s Journal (February 29, 1896)
@Tom, you were really doing a great job of cloaking the political bent of your argument in high-minded constitutional terms until you slipped in the line about Eleanor Holmes Norton being another vote for a tax increase.
That pretty much confirmed the basis of your argument, which is that you don’t want D.C. getting a vote because it would be a Democratic one. I find it unfortunate that the issue for you boils down to the Democratic/Republican paradigm as opposed to one of equal rights.
As to the rest of your arguments, they boil down largely to putting the cart before the horse. I, as a citizen of a federal district without a voting voice in Congress or a state legislature, can’t propose a constitutional amendment.
When D.C. voting rights amendments or legislation have come up in the recent past, they have been blocked or outright voted down. ‘Stunts’ like civil disobedience raise awareness and, taken together, put pressure on those in power to address inequities. That’s what we’re trying to do.
If you want to dismiss our efforts as ‘feckless’, that’s fine, but again you have yet to explain why D.C. shouldn’t have control of its own affairs or a voting voice in Congress. Your answers boil down to ‘move somewhere else’, or ‘the framers (?) didn’t intend for it to be so’, both of which are shallow arguments for depriving people of the rights of citizenship in the 21st century and a poor cover for your political agenda.
I’m not cloaking anything. I’m just pointing out an obvious reality you’re evidently blind to. Usually people object to “taxation without representation” because they don’t like taxation. But I guess you’re one of the few who is just dying to the have the ability to vote to levy higher taxes on yourself. You could just as easily go into Maryland and complain that, unlike D.C., you’re being forced to participate in the U.S. Congress and you want the same “rights” enjoyed in D.C.
Why can’t you propose a constitutional amendment? People do it all the time. In fact, a local professor is advocating for something he calls the “Federalism Amendment”: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124044199838345461.html
If preserving the Constitution is considered “shallow” but sitting in the street like a teenager throwing a temper tantrum is somehow high-minded, I’m quite comfortable being classified as shallow.
But seriously, if you want to help preserve D.C.’s non-statehood status, keep doing what you’re doing. The more you talk/write, the more clear it is what a joke this campaign is.
Tom, the vast majority of D.C. residents I talk to don’t object to the ‘taxation’ part of ‘taxation without representation’. Certainly your fabled founders didn’t go to war with Britain solely because they were taxed.
I’m not chomping at the bit to impose higher taxes on myself or any other D.C. residents. In fact, as a state we would be free to impose a commuter tax on people coming to work in D.C. right now, potentially raising up to $2 billion a year and allowing for the tax burden on D.C. residents to be lessened.
The only thing you’re ‘preserving’ is an outmoded view of the principles that underlie the Constitution, and that puts you in the same class of people that opposed the 15th, 19th, 23rd, and 26th amendments. You say I should propose a constitutional amendment for statehood, but based on everything you’ve said, you would be opposed to that anyways. You also haven’t addressed the legislative option I put forth for statehood with anything other than a dismissive personal attack.
I’m comfortable with how I represent GW and the people of the District of Columbia in fighting for statehood, I know my compatriots are as well, and I’m hopeful that you will be open-minded to the cause in the future. Have a great day, and thanks so much for giving me a distraction from my term paper.
My “fabled founders”? So you oppose the Constitution and the founders of the United States? That will sure make your movement popular. “Strike a blow against America’s founding! Support DC statehood!”
If there’s a sure-fire way of taking a hydrogen bomb to the local economy, it’s a “commuter tax.” Thanks, but no thanks.
I appreciate your attempts at mind reading, but it’s pretty silly to say that because I support the preservation of America’s Constitution I must therefore oppose the 15th, 19th, and a few other select amendments you’ve produced from your derriere.
Why don’t you just explain what it is you’re actually trying to accomplish? Is statehood the end in itself? Just being able to have a vote in Congress — that’s all you care about? Or is there some specific issue you’re concerned about? Because chances are there’s a more effective way to go about it than what you’re doing. At the risk of sounding cynical, one voice amongst 436 isn’t going to produce a whole lot of change.
You’re right: I would oppose such an amendment. That’s because I support a better idea, which I laid out above. Give DC more autonomy and don’t make us pay federal taxes at all.
Tom,
I think that this Constitutional reference you keep pointing to is weak. With the idea that the US Constitution is not a living document, than we would still have slavery, no vote for women, etc. Would you have opposed those amendments as well? A lot of people did oppose those changes, but we look back at those opponents as being politically motivated, small-minded and wrong.
I think you are right that you disagree with people in DC politically, but that should not preclude our ability to become a state so we can gain our equal rights.
Paying taxes to the federal government, to the country we both feel is the greatest in the world is OK with me, so that is why I am not working for DC residents to stop paying federal taxes.
Washington DC is Governed Without Consent. That is known as Tyranny.
As a disenfranchised D.C. resident, I just want to say thank you to students who stood up for the right of D.C. residents to have the same right to self-government that all other Americans have. For over TWO CENTURIES D.C. residents have been denied the right to self-government merely because they live in the capital of the United States. Until this stain on America’s claim to represent freedom and democracy is erased by admitting the residential and commercial parts of D.C. as the 51st state, the United States can not claim to truly be a democracy for all of its people.
RIGHTS, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT RIGHTS! THEY LIVE IN AMERICA THEY DON’T HAVE TO PAY TAXES THEY DON’T HAVE TO VOTE OR DO JURY DUTY, THEY ONLY HAVE TO COLLECT A CHECK AND LIVE FOR FREE!
Funny, my wife was on Jury Duty today in DC, I paid my Federal and DC taxes this week and I did get a check, but it was from my full-time job, rather than from welfare. But why let the facts bother you when you can stereotype people?
DC Statehood Now!
iiflb: No need to shout, your ignorance is plenty apparent even if you speak softly. DC residents pay taxes like any state, serve on juries and in the military, just like everyone else. Do your homework before you make a fool of yourself again… for your own sake. Please?
Sadly, I thought this was a poorly written and composed article.
The sixth and seventh paragraphs did not clearly explain the sequence of events leading up to the arrests. Both of these paragraphs needed stronger editing/revision.
My guess is that the students/protestors were charged with a civil offense akin to “obstructing traffic,” that is likely to be settled by paying a fine. It’s also possible they could be charged with “failure to obey a police officer” as they did not heed the warnings to remove themselves from the intersection.
“Law Student” and “DC Resident” made earlier comments touching on the jurisdiction of the US Capitol Police vs. the Metropolitan Police Dept. While a GW student in the 1970′s-1980′s I served as a MPD reserve officer, and can tell you first-hand of the overlapping responsibilities of at least 10 uniformed police agencies having jurisdiction in the District of Columbia. For the record, they are:
1) Metropolitan Police Dept
2) US Capitol Police
3) Library of Congress Police
4) US Park Police
5) WMATA (Metro Transit) Police
6) Federal Protective Service
7) US Secret Service Uniformed Div.
8) Washington Aqueduct Police
9) AMTRAK Police
10) Supreme Court Police
Officers from these agencies have police powers everywhere in the District of Columbia. WMATA Police officers carry police commissions in DC, Maryland and Virginia, enabling them to carry out their responsibilities anywhere in the WMATA service territory. US Park Police officers patrol parks and monuments in DC, as well as the Baltimore Washington Parkway and roads in Virginia, as well as in the Gateway National Recreation area in the NY/NJ area and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area in Northern California.
The overlapping jurisdictions / responsibilities of these agencies are governed by the principle of “primary jurisdiction” and via MOUs (Memoranda of Understanding) among the agencies.
For example, if a Metro Transit police officer sees an assault in Dupont Circle, she will respond, make an arrest, and preserve the crime scene until the US Park Police, which has primary jurisdiction there, arrives.
Conversely, if a citizen advises a US Park Police on patrol in Dupont Circle of a serious traffic accident several blocks away, that officer will likely respond to the scene, call for whatever assistance is needed (e.g., an ambulance) and maintain the situation until the MPD arrives.
These sorts of incidents occur every day in DC, and each officers from each agency knows that the first rule is to exert common sense, protect human life, and stop crime. Sorting out jurisdiction takes a back seat to taking the right action at the right time.
Until the 1600 block of Pennsylvania Ave NW was closed to vehicular traffic some years ago, the MPD had primary jurisdiction for the roadway, the Park Police for the sidewalk in front of the White House (as well as Lafayette Park), and the Secret Service Uniformed Division starting at the metal fence around the White House. If, for example, the MPD engaged in a high speed chase starting in Georgetown of a vehicle thought to have been involved in a robbery there down Pennsylvania Ave, and the vehicle jumped the curb on to the sidewalk in front of the White House, hit several pedestrians, and then struck the White House fence, the “primary jurisdictions” of three police agencies would have been involved in sorting out the resulting mess. In my own experience, that meant a lot of paperwork to complete for every officer involved.
I really do wish the Hatchet’s editors paid more attention to the syntax and structure of articles “printed” (I read the online edition) in the paper so events are described clearly and accurately.
Thanks for taking my thoughts in to consideration.
Andrew Karp CCAS BA ’82 MA ’86
Sonoma CA
http://www.sierrainformation.com
No, thank you for informing us of your degrees.
Talk about self absorbed, who puts their degrees in their signatures?
Typical libtard. Pukes out some unreadable nonsense and then brag about how much money they spent to be ignored.
Alumnus Curmudgeon, let me begin by granting that the truth is generally more complicated than a brief comment on a website would make it appear. Yes, there are a huge number of law enforcement agencies in DC, something like 34, if I recall correctly. You are right that the Capitol Police would not be forbidden from operating outside the NCSA when necessary — it would be crazy to do otherwise. I was taking exception to Law Student’s suggestion that federal law enforcement and federal dollars is what keeps order in DC — particularly when Law Student makes no mention of MPD. Law Student’s words fit a common narrative that insists DC residents derive all kinds of benefits that more than make up for anything we lack. Having recently served on a federal jury that convicted a drug ring operating in one of the city’s worst neighborhoods, I recall listening to testimony from a lot of law enforcement, both MPD and Prince George’s Co. Police (one murder took place there) who conducted these investigations, not any of these other federal forces (it became a federal case involving the FBI after a cooperating witness was murdered). The federal forces play a key role around the Capitol — and I’ll grant that the Park Police do handle a bit of the same kind of crime that MPD does given where PP operates. But when the vast majority of DC residents need police help, they call on MPD. As DC’s Chief Financial Officer can testify, DC has been financially self-sufficient for many years. DC gets less federal funding than many states, and the funding it gets is for the same kinds of programs (Medicare, Medicaid, fed highway pgm). So, finally, in response to Law Student’s question, “is DC willing to give up” the security assistance and have MPD take up the slack in any of these overlapping jurisdictions? Yes, willing AND able.
these savages already have too many rights, the cia or the fbi had the right idea when they distributed AIDS and crack cocaine in the 80′s, let’s hope they get it right next time
Thanks for not shouting. Taken your meds lately? |They might help you get over the conspiracy theories…
I am truly dismayed at many of the shameful, hateful and downright offensive comments made on this thread. They almost make me ashamed to be a GWU alumnus.
First, I put my name, GW degrees (and dates I earned them) at the bottom of my GW Hatchet posts because it is a common practice when participating in internet based, professional, discussion forums.
I am not ashamed to let people know who I am (unlikely, apparently, others who are posting on this thread) and providing the date ranges during which I was a GW student helps provide some “historical context” for the comments I make.
And, if you take a look at the web site URL I also provided in my last post, you’ll see that I am far from “ignored” in my profession/industry, nor am I “ignored” by my GW graduate school professor who annually invites me back to campus to give a required seminar on statistical computing for doctoral candidates in the School of Business.
All of this is, however, irrelevant to the topic of the story. Some GWU students (and others) were arrested during a recent demonstration in support of granting statehood to the District of Columbia. They engaged in a minor act of civil disobedience, were arrested for minor traffic offenses, presumably paid their small fines, and went home.
This is nothing unusual in DC. In fact, during my time with the MPD it was common for the police commander on the scene to ask when the protestors wanted to be arrested or if they could please hold off blocking the street because an ambulance needed to get through the intersection.
The time of the arrest was negotiated to provide the protestors with the publicity they wanted while avoiding unnecessary use of force by the police. The whole thing was a carefully choreographed “act” between police and protestors that worked to the satisfaction of all concerned.
Should DC become a State? Well, maybe yes and maybe no. That was the topic of this protest and the resulting story, which unfortunately has led to a disappointing display of truly odious comments by others.
Proponents of statehood for DC may find how Australia handles this issue very instructive. Their 1901 Constitution is remarkably similar to the US Constitution in many respects.
Under their constitution the ACT (Australia Capital Territory) has an elected local legislature located in Canberra, the federal capital city. It has as many seats in the Federal Parliament and Federal Senate (also in Canberra) apportioned to it as if it were one of the six States in the Commonwealth. The same arrangement holds for the Northern Territory, of which Darwin the the capital city.
This arrangement seems to work quite well in Australia. Whether it would be politically palatable in the US is another question. As a point of reference, the ACT is about the size of the State of Delaware, and has several towns in it besides Canberra. In contract, the City of Washington in the District of Columbia have coterminous boundaries
Thank you, as always, for taking my thoughts in to consideration.
Andrew Karp
(Usually proud to be a GWU alum)
Sonoma, CA
http://www.SierraInformaton.com
Listen here Karp! You forgot 1 agency in your list of uniformed police agencies. What about the George Washington University POLICE Department?!?!?!
What’s that you say? They’re not a real police department? Well I guess your right….have my statement stricken from the recorder
“To Apathetic To Care”
Everyone’s entitled to their opinion, and they have the right to protest. D.C. is not a state because the framers who built it wanted the federal government to remain neutral to states and not be run by one, which is why the seat of the federal government is a federal district and not a state. For many political reasons this will not change any time soon, and it is hardly the next great civil rights issue. It’s not really a civil rights issue to begin with, all political.
Here’s a plan. Give the people voting rights, and here’s how.
Dissolve the “D.C. Government” and cut up the District. Create a Federal core overseen by a Congressional committee and run as Federal land, with some tenants (GW, World Bank/IMF, etc) able to lease land in that core due to their proximity. Much of the Southeast would go to Prince Georges County, MD, which it borders. The town of Georgetown, Montgomery County, MD would again exist, along with much of the Wisconsin/ Connecticut Avenue corridor also becoming Montgomery County, along with most of the Northeast that abuts that county. The Watergate would now be in Arlington.
@Pyro311. Do me a favor and calm down.
The GW Campus police is a “special police” agency whose officers are commissioned by the MPD. The police agencies I mentioned in a previous post are created by Acts of Congress.
GWUPD officers have police power comenusuate with that of an MPD officer only while on duty and on property owned by the University.
They may conduct a “citizens arrest” or assist the MPD in making arrests in limited circumstances, such as when they observe an in-progress crime off campus or see that an MPD officer needs assistance. They may not use their police powers off campus except under these limited circumstances. The same holds true for all other “special police” agencies in the District of Columbia.
No, can we all just calm down a bit, please?
Thanks, and chill out!
Andrew
Karpy, I was being facetious with my comments. I have a friend that works with UPD….ugh what a miserable job.
Must really suck to be a rat working at UPD, waddling around campus, feeling all self important, but knowing, that in reality, you are just Paul Blart.
What is a typical day like? “URGENT! OPEN CAN OF BEER IN SECTOR 6! IN HOT PURSUIT! TRANSMIT A 10-13!”
“Dispatch, we have a student at the corner of 19th and F thinking about marijuana, going in for the kill…got missile lock on him…”
“We have a subject in FSK Hall who is in possession of a mattress without a tag and an iPod full of songs whose licenses he is unable to produce…”
“OH MY GOD! HOLY SHIT, A FIRE! RUUUUNNNN!!!!!!”
Thank you to all who participated in the march, the rally and the arrests! I was there and had no idea the students were going to put their bodies on the line…but the tradition of civil disobedience is a time-honored tactic for bringing attention to noble causes. We don’t have to wait for the students’ courage and commitment to be validated by time…I know now that I was in the presence of modern day Martin Luther Kings, Jrs., Fannie Lou Hamers and Gandhis – not just fighting for themselves but for the promise of the nation as a whole. Thank you!
I am so proud of the students from at least four area universities, some of whom are not from the District of Columbia, who offered themselves for arrest in support of D.C. Statehood. This is an issue, as a former Combat Engineer Officer, that tears at my heart. Young men and women from D.C. die in defense of America, and their blood is no different than the blood of those from the states. Yet, when they come back home, more recently from places in the Middle East, in the shadow of the Washington Monument they become branded as second class, not worthy of equal footing with all other Americans. I have studied this issue for more than four decades, since I came here from Indiana. My Law Review Article, Towards Equal Footing debunks all the hyths about D.C. becoming a state, some of them published on these pages. I urge anyone truly interested in a more perfect Union to go to the UDC Law Review and explore what I have written. Thank you.