A Constitutional Amendment for Statehood?

[TexasTowelie]

A new House Joint Resolution has been proposed.

H.J.Res. 42 would introduce “an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to provide that a new State may only be admitted into the Union upon a vote of two-thirds of each House of Congress.”

The resolution was introduced by Tom McClintock (R-CA). It currently has four co-sponosrs:

Jeff Duncan (R-SC)
Ashley Hinson (R-IA)
Barry Moore (R-AL)
Tom Rice [R-SC)

McClintock explained his motivation in a tweet: ““The attempt to create a state from the District of Columbia is a brazen abuse of power with the obvious intention to pack the U.S. Senate. I introduced H.J. Res. 42, a constitutional amendment to require a 2/3 vote for the admission of states. Such reform would assure that new states are only created with bi-partisan consensus.”

Read more: https://www.puertoricoreport.com/a-constitutional-amendment-for-statehood/

[left-of-center2012]

1. Isn't there already something in the Constitution regarding statehood?

So this would be a 'nothing burger'?

[TexasTowelie]

2. Statehood has typically done on a majority vote rather than a two-thirds supermajority.

When Alaska and Hawaii were admitted into the union the conventional wisdom at the time was that Alaska would be Democratic while Hawaii would be Republican. Alaska was admitted with only 56% of the House, so if this proposed legislation were in place back then the U.S. would only have 49 states.

I would say that the legislation is more than a "nothing burger" and that is another attempt to maintain control when the populace does not support the GOP.

[thucythucy]

4. More evidence that DC statehood is past due.

GQP opposition is just one more reason why DC statehood is an excellent idea.

The people of DC deserve to be represented. What was that old slogan? Oh yeah.

"Taxation without representation is tyranny."