=-=-=-=-=

TESTIMONY OF U.S. REPRESENTATIVE MIKE PANETTA
RENAMING PORTION OF PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE TO
PROMOTE FULL DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS THROUGH DC STATEHOOD
JANUARY 13, 2011

Thank for the opportunity to testify today on this important issue. I applaud Councilmembers Michael Brown and Harry Thomas, as well as Chairman Kwame Brown for their leadership within the Council on statehood-related issues, and I know I speak for the entire elected Statehood Delegation when I say that we are supportive of any and all attempts to raise volume on the national dialogue regarding the District’s lack of basic democratic representation in Congress and autonomy on local affairs.

Of course, I am supportive of the proposal to re-name a portion of Pennsylvania Avenue and to use the District’s gateway signs to inform and educate visitors about our unique status our beloved republic. It’s a great opportunity to promote our collective goal of statehood to thousands of people every year.

I do have some experience with this type of approach and I have long been a proponent of using the District’s buildings and infrastructure as messaging platforms. As you may recall in 2005, when the Washington Nationals were looking to secure naming rights for the RFK Stadium, I started a campaign to name the venue “Taxation Without Representation Field at RFK”. At the time we called our efforts a “grassroots campaign to name the grass.” Not only did the campaign secure thousands of dollars in pledges – only to be collected if the proposal was adopted – it amplified the message of DC’s lack of voting representation and reached entirely different audience than otherwise would not have been exposed to the issue.

Using a similar approach, in early 2006 I started a tongue-in-cheek “Olympic” committee for the District of Columbia and proceed to organize a curling team as the Winter Olympics were getting underway in Turin, Italy. I figured if other American territories with non-voting delegates in Congress could field Olympic team, then the District of Columbia should certainly have that right as well. This effort resulted in explosive media coverage on television and print publications around the world – it was even covered in TIME magazine. Granted it was seen as a good laugh, however every single story on the “Olympic” team featured the District’s lack of voting representation in Congress.

Additionally, the re-naming of District streets as a form of protest has been used in the past for other issues. For example during the Cold War, the block of 16th Street NW between L and M streets, in front of the then Soviet embassy was renamed “Andrei Sakharov Place” as a form of protest against his 1980 arrest and detention. I’m sure it pained the Kremlin to have to use that address.

The current plan to rename portions of Pennsylvania Avenue follow the same creative path of naming public spaces as a way to reach new audiences. However, given my experience in these matters, I feel a critical piece is missing. What is lacking from this proposal is the “hook” to make this worthy of sustained interest and not just a one-day local story. The question we have ask ourselves is whether or not this will move the needle on the making the District of Columbia the 51st state of the union. I think it will, but only if its done a certain way.

My suggestion is to brand the aforementioned blocks of Pennsylvania Avenue with a purely statehood-based message – perhaps labeling it as the “Avenue of Statehood”, akin to the Avenue of the Americas in New York or “51st State Way” as real-world visualization of our path towards statehood – leading us down the street towards the U.S. Capitol.

I also suggest, as part of this statehood centric plan to commission a plaque that commemorates the dates of admission of the current 50 states to the union – starting with Delaware and ending with Hawaii. The last line listed on this plaque, and one of the hooks, would be “New Columbia” with a date of admission yet to be determined. As an additional hook an American flag with 51 stars could be installed near the plaque along with signs with additional information about the campaign for DC statehood.

I urge the Council to reject any naming that does not promote statehood. Names that feature “voting rights” or “democracy” will not be clear in their intent – nor will they inspire any reaction or movement towards the ultimate goal. This is not the time to be timid, but to clearly articulate what we want.

I’d like to end my time by reminding the Council that while the adoption of this resolution is definitely a worthy cause – and has my support – it’s largely symbolic. If we are serious about achieving our goal of statehood, then we’ll need to be just a serious about finding the resources to get there. I’m well aware of the budget gaps we are facing a government, and the painful cuts to essential social services that are on the table. Yet, we need to find a way to make the necessary investment in the political future of the District. Only with a sustained investment and focused awareness campaign will be achieve our goal. I urge you to increase the funding dedicated to lobbying for statehood in next year’s District budget and to work with your own funding sources to raise additional resources for this fight.

Thank for the opportunity to present my thoughts on this issue.

##

She led the effort to reform our election laws, enacted one of the most powerful whistleblower protection bills in the country, and has worked to promote transparency and fiscal responsibility. She has been a champion of progressive causes, whether on the environment, healthy schools, civil liberties, or consumer protections from predatory practices.

She is widely known for her vigorous oversight of agencies and her relentless pursuit of a better quality of life for Ward 3 residents. She has also stood up for self-determination and legislative autonomy; for example, she was a critical voice in opposing the noxious effort to strip the District of its ability to enact gun control laws.

Mary deserves your vote because she has shown the commitment, experience, and judgment to tackle the major challenges facing DC. And I am proud to give her my endorsement. Please vote for her on November 2nd.

I support their re-election efforts as well, and look forward to working with them, and all members of the Council, over the next few years in our drive for statehood and full budget and legislative autonomy for the District of Columbia.

Below are their respective quotes:

“Mike Panetta has been tireless and innovative working for the voting rights for the citizens of Washington, DC.”
- Councilmember Tommy Wells (Ward 6)

“Mike Panetta has shown he has the energy and creativity to champion our cause for full voting rights. He’s worked hard and deserves re-election.”
- Councilmember Mary Cheh (Ward 3)

I’ve released the following statement on this, which I hope you’ll share:

“For many years Congress mandated that the District couldn’t spend our local tax dollars to lobby for statehood or expanded home rule. With those restrictions now removed, it’s painfully ironic that the Mayor’s proposed budget eliminates what modest funding there was for these efforts. If the final budget lacks any resources to fund statehood advocacy efforts, the Mayor and the Council are essentially embracing the status quo and sending a signal that we’ve given up the fight. ”

- Mike Panetta, U.S. “Shadow” Representative (D-DC)

Now, if only the people who got all worked up over proposed taxes on yoga were as passionate about this issue, we’d be the 51st state sometime next week.

In case you haven’t heard, the DC Voting Rights bill was pulled today by Delegate Norton. There was talk last week of a compromise on the gun amendment issue, but it looks like the NRA wanted too much from the District when it came to giving up local gun control legislation. I’m glad she did pull it, as it looks like the deal was getting worse all the time. I do wish that her office had floated a trial balloon privately with other District elected officials before announcing the she was agreeing to the gun amendment, as the past few days of division with the voting rights community didn’t do anyone any favors.

Here’s the statement from Delegate Norton’s office:

New Developments Force Delay on Voting Rights Bill, but Norton Already at Work on New Strategies

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) today, in light of new developments that are just emerging in both the House and Senate, has asked House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) to remove the D.C. voting rights bill from the floor schedule for now. Congresswoman Norton’s statement follows:

“After working for a full year to bring a clean D.C. voting rights bill to the House floor, while continuing to negotiate a gun compromise, I made the most difficult decision last week to begin moving forward with the D.C. voting rights bill. It appeared that despite a gun amendment, our best chance to pass D.C. voting rights was this year because the 60 Senate votes resulting from our pairing with Utah disappears after the 2010 census becomes effective, and large majorities in the House and Senate cannot be assured in the current political climate. However, new developments in both the House and Senate have now made it difficult to pass the D.C. House Voting Rights Act right now.

“First, concerning developments in the House, over the weekend, the Democratic House leadership and I were shocked and blindsided to receive an updated NRA-drafted House gun bill, which would have been significantly more harmful to the city than the Senate (Ensign) gun bill. I cannot agree to these egregious changes, not only because they make the already bad gun attachment to the D.C. voting rights bill even worse than I thought was possible, but also because the new sections will surely bring down the support we have had of anti-gun Democratic Senators. Senate Democratic support was already in doubt because some Democrats had said they would not vote for the final bill if it contained the Ensign gun amendment. I had hoped that some changes I requested in the Senate gun amendment would hold their support, but three outrageous provisions in the updated NRA-drafted House gun bill virtually guarantee the loss of some Senate Democratic support, and therefore of the D.C. voting rights bill.

“The existing Senate gun bill eliminated important gun safety laws in the District, but the changes in the House gun bill would directly proliferate guns throughout the District. First, the District would be barred from prohibiting or even unduly burdening the carrying of firearms by persons, either concealed or openly, in public, an unthinkable provision for both hometown D.C. and official Washington. Second, the bill would permit the District of Columbia police chief to issue concealed carry licenses and severely limited the chief’s discretion to refuse to do so. To make matters even worse, I also learned yesterday that we will have difficulty defeating a potential Republican motion to recommit, using their right to offer one amendment on, the gun bill. We believe that such an amendment would allow persons to carry firearms, either concealed or openly, without permits, taking away even the police chief’s limited discretion to deny such permits. Consequently, a person in the District would be able to walk on the streets carrying an assault weapon slung over her shoulder or with concealed weapons. Third, the District of Columbia would not be able to prohibit guns in city-controlled buildings or structures, unless they had certain security measures to identify and exclude unauthorized or hazardous persons or articles, such as guard posts, metal detectors, or card-based or biometric access devices. Under this provision, for example, D.C. might not be able to ban guns at public and charter schools, recreation centers, and many other public buildings that do not have such security measures. Fourth, residential or commercial building owners in the District would not be able to prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms by tenants. Considering that almost all of the commercial space in the District of Columbia is leased and that most residential housing here is leased, almost every commercial office building, as well as all rental housing units, could be filled with persons possessing guns. These provisions are so over the top, they are unworthy of serious consideration.

“Concerning developments in the Senate, even if we had not faced this new, unexpected NRA-drafted House gun bill, we were surprised last week by the vocal and strident opposition of Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) to the House version of the D.C. voting rights bill, and today’s statement by Susan Collins joining in opposition (R-ME). I admire and have worked closely for many years with Senator Hatch on many issues, including the D.C. voting rights bill. Senator Hatch has argued forcefully and with great principle that Constitution permits Congress to grant the District a House seat. We have always known that Senator Hatch opposed Utah’s temporary additional fourth being elected at-large, as opposed to redistricting, but we had hoped to be able to reconcile the House and Senate bills, as well as to encourage Republican Senators to support the D.C. House voting rights bill on principle. However, we did not anticipate Senator Hatch’s harsh opposition to the House bill on at-large grounds, nor did we expect him to ‘filibuster and vote against this bill, and…urge…Senate colleagues to do so as well.’ Senator Hatch’s filibuster of the bill almost surely will have the support of his Republican colleagues, leaving us without 60 votes.

“With the invaluable and indispensible leadership of DC Vote, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and coalition of legions of allies I have fought a fight that is part of my DNA as a third-generation Washingtonian, whose great grandfather settled here as a runaway slave from Virginia. Our city cannot give up now, and we are fortunate to have the continuing strong support of our Democratic leadership. We have begun to develop new strategies to get a voting rights bill through the Congress that can pass, but I will have public meetings before bringing forward new approaches to achieve voting rights. We have developed a strategy for advancing budget and legislative autonomy this year.

“As I said last week, gun forces have the votes to take out our gun laws on another bill, and be assured that they will try to do so. I have successfully fought them off four times in the past until they came upon the voting rights bill. I will return to the trenches where I have always fought for my hometown to do all I can to turn back these aggressors. At the same time, I am full of promising ideas about how to move forward not only on voting rights but on every right D.C. residents are entitled to as American citizens. I ask only that my constituents work with me to achieve these goals.”

Since many people indicated a desire to serve on more than one subcommittee, the committee has decided to hold the inaugural meetings of the subcommittees in succession on TUESDAY, January 19, 2010 in ROOM 120 of the John A. Wilson Building:

4 – 5 PM Subcommittee on NATIONAL STATEHOOD DAY AND STATE OUTREACH

5 – 6 PM Subcommittee on STATE HALL MEETING

6 – 7 PM Subcommittee on PROMOTIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY

These meetings are open and all interested people are welcome to participate.  So there is some idea of the number of people planning to attend, please RSVP by to Amy Bellanca at  abellanca<at>dccouncil.us

Thanks –  I hope I’ll see some of you on the 19^th.

UPDATE: According to the Office of the Secretary, the details of the grant are not ready for release. Stay tuned for a future update regarding the procedure and timing. In the meantime, get your thinking caps on…

The following grant notice was distributed last week at the Statehood Stakeholders meeting.  I don’t have more details beyond what’s listed below, but I  have messages into the Office of the Secretary to get more specific information regarding the process for submitting proposals, deadline, etc. I’ll be sure to post them as soon as I know more.

You may remember that Mayor Fenty and the  DC Council eliminated many appropriation earmarks in the last budget, and many non-profits, including DC Vote, saw annual allocations from the city dry up. It’s good to see that the Council put some money taxpayer money back into this fight, and even better to open it up to other organizations as opposed to a non-competitive earmark.

Here’s all the information I have so far:

COMPETITIVE GRANT FOR DC VOTING RIGHTS AND STATEHOOD FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010

“…The Office of the Secretary of the District of Columbia may issue competitive grants to one or more organizations with a history of promoting DC voting rights and statehood in the District in an amount not to exceed $250,000.”