I couldn't find many cartoons on the topic.

[lyndz.livejournal.com]

Just like all Americans, residents of DC
- Pay federal and local taxes
- Serve in the armed forces and make sacrifices in times of war
- Serve on juries to uphold federal laws and policies

Yet, DC residents are denied voting representation in the US Senate andthe US House of Representatives, and do not have complete autonomy overtheir own budget and local laws. Congress has the final say on DC's budget and laws.

In other words, residents of the District of Columbia have all the responsibilities of residents of states, but still cannot be represented in Congress. It is time to end taxation without representation.

Comments

[lyndz.livejournal.com]

The second sentence was about how DC is not a government-only district.

To my knowledge, it isn't true. I live in DC and have for almost four years, and I feel like if it were true, I would know about it. However, I have never even heard that before.

I do know that there is some talk about retrocession to Maryland which would supposedly solve this problem but there is generally very little support for this from residents of Maryland and DC.

[weswilson]

I didn't mean to imply it was a goverment only district, merely that it was a "service" district. The person selling hotdogs on the corner by the Lincoln Memorial is still in a service position, even if he is not directly employed by the government.

Both my brother and I attended the Naval Academy in Annapolis, so I actually know DC more intimately than any other town besides Huntsville... and I absolutely love it. It is easier for me, as a non-resident, to feel that a service sector is an acceptable situation... and I'm sorry if it seems callous. But I'm still not sure I consider it to be the kind of "no representation" kind of situation as I've seen it portrayed. Maybe it seems reasonable for me to think that the people who run the goverment, shouldn't vote as well... I'll think about it some more, and perhaps I'll change my mind.

[adudeabides.livejournal.com]

It's unlikely if the non-government workers went on strike, the Capital would shut-down. Another reason DC doesn't have state-hood is to grant it a level of control and stability to perform it's function that can't be guaranteed by a State. When the Capitol was in Pennyslvania, there was a riot outside the state house that Pennyslvania failed to do anything about, despite having the authority and capability. That was a big reason for establishing a Capitol that had the independent authority to ensure it could protect its ability to continue to function, without having to rely on a state government. Yet another argument against state-hood.

In the implausible event all non-government service workers went on strike, DC would more than likely be able to continue to function.