U.S. Senate moving closer to giving Utah 4th seat

The Senate began debate Monday on a bill that could end more than 200 years of denying residents of the heavily Democratic District of Columbia a U.S. House seat — and give heavily Republican Utah a fourth House seat as a political counterweight.

"I think the time is long past due to have a vote and a seat for the District of Columbia, with a population of 700,000," said Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee. He asked to be added as a cosponsor, even though most Republicans have opposed the bill saying the Constitution allows House seats only for states.

The debate came as the Senate scheduled a key procedural vote on Tuesday morning to order proceeding to a final vote. Last year, Democrats fell three votes short of the 60 needed in a similar vote.

But in last year's election, three Republicans who had voted against cutting off debate lost bids for re-election: John Warner of Virginia, Gordon Smith of Oregon and Ted Stevens of Alaska.

They were replaced by three Democrats who all say they support the D.C. voting rights bill: Mark Warner of Virginia, Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Mark Begich of Alaska. So Democrats expect to finally pass the bill.

The House had passed a similar bill in 2007 by a wide 241-177 vote, so only the Senate had blocked the bill recently. The House Judiciary Committee is also expected to pass the bill again on Tuesday, and send it to the full House for a final vote.

With expected Senate passage of the bill later this week, supporters say the bill could end a situation where the United States is the world's only democracy that does not permit residents of its capital to have voting representation in its parliament.

Some steps have come through the years to give D.C. residents some voting rights. The 23rd Amendment in 1961 gave the district the right to vote in presidential elections, and the 1973 Home Rule Act provided for the direct election of the mayor and City Council. A constitutional amendment approved by Congress in 1978 that would have given D.C. a House member and two senators failed to be ratified by the states.

The new bill would permanently expand the number of U.S. House members from 435-437 after the 2010 election. One seat would go to D.C., and the other would go until the next Census to Utah because it was next in line for a House seat after the 2000 Census (when it missed an extra seat by falling just 80 people short in population).

The Senate version of the bill would require the Utah Legislature to redraw House district boundaries to create a fourth district. The House bill calls for electing the fourth Utah House member in an at-large district, meaning Utahns would each actually vote for two House members in 2010, which Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, says is unconstitutional.

Critics such as Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, oppose both bills saying the Constitution allows House seats only for states, and D.C. is not a state.

Defenders, such as Hatch, argue that the courts have allowed D.C. residents to have such rights as trial by jury even though the Constitution's wording gives it only to residents of states, so Congress can similarly choose to give D.C. residents representation in Congress.

If the bill passes as expected, a court challenge is expected. Both versions of the bill provide for expedited review of any such suit by federal courts.