The substance of this story is irritating, but the underlying point is the truly offensive part.
A majority of the U.S. House of Representatives is supporting legislation that would repeal virtually all of the District’s gun restrictions, targeting one of the nation’s most stringent handgun bans while the presidential candidates are battling over gun limits.
Rep. Mark Edward Souder (R-Ind.) said House Republican leaders have promised him a vote before the Nov. 2 election on his proposed D.C. Personal Protection Act, which would end a ban on handguns in the nation’s capital; remove a prohibition against semiautomatic weapons; lift registration requirements for ammunition and other firearms; and cancel criminal penalties for possessing unregistered firearms and carrying a handgun in one’s home or workplace.
Souder’s bill also would deny the District’s elected officials “authority to enact laws or regulations that discourage or eliminate the private ownership or use of firearms.” The legislation has 228 co-sponsors, more than enough to clear the 435-member House.
Let’s put aside the merits of Souder’s argument about guns and consider the idea of Americans having a voice in their own government.
There are 600,000 citizens in the District of Columbia, but they are the only Americans who don’t have representatives in either chamber of Congress. They have local elected officials who represent their interests at the city level, but as this story demonstrates, Congress has the power to simply invalidate any law or ordinances local officials pass — whenever they feel like it — and the city government has no recourse.
In this case, DC officials, elected by DC taxpayers, passed a series of gun control laws for their city. Republicans in Congress have decided they don’t like DC’s limits on firearms, so they’re going to eliminate them and prohibit them from every passing similar measures again.
This from the party that touts “local control” as a central tenet of their political philosophy and from people who insist that spreading democracy throughout the world is a moral imperative.
Souder, who lives in Indiana, said this is a 2nd Amendment issue. No, it’s not. If DC’s gun laws are unconstitutional, Souder can challenge them in federal court and let a judge consider their legality. He’s chosen a different path — rewrite a local community’s gun policies because he and his GOP buddies can.
Imagine the outrage if a Dem majority in the House were to decide to change local ordinances in Souder’s home town of Ft. Wayne, Ind. What would we hear? Republicans like Souder would immediately insist that the people of Ft. Wayne are capable of making their own choices and that it’s not Congress’ place to intervene.
The hypocrisy is breathtaking.