English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

13 answers

it is a district owned by the US.

We also own puerto rico and a few other island nations that are a part of the US, but are not states.

2006-08-04 03:42:31 · answer #1 · answered by Alex M 2 · 0 0

Well, at least two posters very nicely cut-and-pasted online search results from the same source - and their answers give you some basic information.

It is not unusual for national capital cities to be "capital districts," or as in Mexico City, "federal districts." They are considered "neutral territory" in which the nation's management takes place, and for which the nation as a whole is reauired to take responsibility. That means that supposedly the city structures, highways, water supplies and other features are provided and maintained at general public expense.

In practice that rarely works out.

Washington, D.C., has municipal status but is supervised by a committee of Congress. After the Marion Berry scandal, the city's finances and other operations were in such a mess that Congress appointed a special overseer and limited the power of the Mayor and City Council to address many of its problems. The current mayor has helped somewhat, but D.C. remains in a very bad way.

The situation is made worse because generating revenues to support D.C. is very hard. Most of those who enjoy the city's services do not live there. Most of the city's developed property belongs to the government and is tax-exampt. People who do own businesses in D.C., or property, or live there, shoulder a significant tax burden.

Further, they have a "representative" in Congress - but that person does not have a VOTE.

This is a situation that requires improvement and should hvae been fixed years ago. However, it is a political nightmare and so far no one has really come up with any good answers. There is a very strong movement to gain recongition of D.C. as a state, and give it proper representation in congress and more autonomy for its operation. That movement is also completely hopeless due to practical as well as political factors.

2006-08-04 11:14:38 · answer #2 · answered by Der Lange 5 · 0 0

The District of Columbia, founded on July 16, 1790, is a federal district as specified by the United States Constitution. The U.S. Congress has ultimate authority over the District of Columbia, though it has delegated limited local rule to the municipal government. The land forming the original District came from the states of Virginia and Maryland. However, the area south of the Potomac River (39 square miles or about 100 km²) was returned, or "retroceded", to Virginia in 1847 and now is incorporated into Arlington County and the City of Alexandria. After 1847, the remaining land that formed the area now know as the District of Columbia was formed exclusively from land that once belonged to Maryland.

2006-08-04 10:46:34 · answer #3 · answered by pooh bear 4 · 0 0

The District of Columbia and the city of Washington are coextensive and are governed by a single municipal government, so for most practical purposes they are considered to be the same entity (this was not always the case, though, as there were multiple jurisdictions within the district as late as 1871, when Georgetown ceased to be a separate city within the District). However, although there is a municipal government and a mayor, Congress has the supreme authority.

The District of Columbia, founded on July 16, 1790, is a federal district as specified by the United States Constitution. The U.S. Congress has ultimate authority over the District of Columbia, though it has delegated limited local rule to the municipal government.

2006-08-04 10:44:30 · answer #4 · answered by casey_leftwich 5 · 0 0

DC isn't a state so that one state never has to take more status over other states. More of the "yeah, well we should get more because the government put OUR president in OUR state. Neeener!"

Those (like Puetro Rico) COULD be a state in the U.S. if they voted on it. Last night, it failed.

2006-08-04 10:44:31 · answer #5 · answered by FaZizzle 7 · 0 0

The founding fathers didn't want the nation's capital to be in one particular state. so they created the District of Colombia, which isn't a state, to house washington d.c.

2006-08-04 10:44:00 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It's a district, and it's super tiny.

Also, consider that many states, like Pennsylvania, while considered states, are technically commonwealths.

2006-08-04 10:43:11 · answer #7 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

It is a district of the U.S. not a state, however, a part of the U.S.

2006-08-04 10:42:51 · answer #8 · answered by bin D 1 · 0 0

It is a federal area set aside to be neutral for the purpose of seating the government and its agencies.

2006-08-04 11:29:16 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

it is a district, similar to puerto rico being a commonwealth. the u.s. also controls territories. for instance, both alaska and hawaii were territories before transitioning to statehood.

2006-08-04 10:43:32 · answer #10 · answered by CALLIE 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers