Taxation with representation

My column for the West Bend Daily News is online.  It’s called, “Taxation with representation.”  Here’s a portion:

As you can see, the Constitution only allows the states to elect members to the House of Representatives. Irrespective of whether or not one thinks that citizens of D.C. should have their own member of the House, they are not a state and the Constitution forbids it. The only correct way for the citizens of D.C. to gain representation in the House is to amend the Constitution.

   Legislation to grant the citizens of D.C. representation in the House is unmistakably unconstitutional. No legislation can ever trump the Constitution.

   There are many issues that come before the legislature that are less clear than this one – ones where it is legitimate for a legislator, who is not a Constitutional scholar, to cast his conscience and let the Supreme Court decide the constitutionality of the matter. This is not one of those issues. Article II is excruciatingly clear to the point that anyone with a functioning frontal lobe can see that it is unconstitutional for the government to allow the citizens of D.C. to have a representative in Congress without first amending the Constitution.

   Here in Wisconsin, our senators were unanimous in violating their oaths to uphold the Constitution. Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Bucks) and Sen. Russ Feingold (D-self) both voted to cast aside their oaths and unabashedly violated Article II of the Constitution.

   This is particularly consistent with Sen. Feingold. He has a history of sponsoring and supporting legislation that violates the Constitution. The historic gutting of the 1st Amendment that is McCain-Feingold comes to mind. For someone who claims to be a maverick in support of our rights, Feingold has developed a distinguished track record of supporting legislation that undermines them.