Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: (ReacTor) Five SF Scenarios Involving the US Presidential Line
 of Succession
Date: 21 Oct 2024 12:50:36 GMT
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <lnn10sFriqoU2@mid.individual.net>
References: <ve3er7$bc5$1@panix2.panix.com>
 <g1lagj1nisg9lcp7v86keo3ajmvfec6si6@4ax.com> <ve4p55$2givf$2@dont-email.me>
 <ou8dgjp2mtgu5jv93ml600u284ifrccfpn@4ax.com> <ve6frg$2o1c0$2@dont-email.me>
 <2gtfgj9p2r66h84afc2hfapm4l2gflac9b@4ax.com> <ve8vb8$37i5m$1@dont-email.me>
 <ve9vu6$3cd21$1@dont-email.me> <vebftp$3n8j2$1@dont-email.me>
 <ln2ujvFq0s8U1@mid.individual.net> <vejmnc$1a2l8$1@dont-email.me>
 <ln752kFf3t0U1@mid.individual.net> <vem0cj$1oeb0$1@dont-email.me>
 <ln9rsnFrkhqU1@mid.individual.net> <veoo5r$2afu4$1@dont-email.me>
 <lnalhfFusvU1@mid.individual.net> <vern01$2sb1f$1@dont-email.me>
 <lni03sF4ch7U1@mid.individual.net> <vf0n7u$3v2it$1@dont-email.me>
X-Trace: individual.net q+4CrGrqGrr0Tn/1Ty6ZKAv2X0oh7Ocj+UJLxOClNREyTcJJUF
Cancel-Lock: sha1:UMe9aBMgtF3TU0TSWsEVhiQ587I= sha256:J3NhugKZrgGLNZOUUbxHYdS3KTwOTGtuRELrtqyPinI=
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Bytes: 2859

On 2024-10-19, Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
> On 10/19/2024 8:04 AM, Chris Buckley wrote:
>> On 2024-10-17, William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Do the voters of DC actually have any legal rights in this?
>> 
>> Yes, but exactly where and when the line is drawn hasn't been legally
>> tested. One of the only Constitutional requirements for a state to be
>> approved is that it has to be governed by the consent of its citizens
>> (republican form of government). In practice, this has meant voting
>> for becoming a state in those questionable cases. Examples include
>> 1) the Virginia retrocession, which had to not only be approved by the
>> Virginia legislature but also the citizens of Virginia side DC (which at
>> the time meant white male residents since the major purpose of the Virginia
>> retrocession was to preserve slavery in that area),
>> 2) The Puerto Rico statehood. US Congress is currently attempting to work
>> towards a "binding referendum" for Puerto Rico that has to be approved
>> before Congress will vote on statehood.
>> 
> As I recall it is the residents of Puerto Rico that have, many times, 
> voted down becoming a state.  Which makes me wonder what the real point 
> of that proposed "binding referendum" is.

To make it different from all the previous votes! Opinion is actually
pretty evenly split in Puerto Rico, and the pro-statehood faction has
won at least a couple of those votes, though with quibbles as to the
language and process used.

Chris