Numerous proposals have been introduced to change this situation, including legislation and constitutional amendments, returning the district to Maryland, and making it into a new state.

In 1783, a crowd of disbanded Revolutionary War soldiers angry about not having been paid gathered to protest outside the building where the Continental Congress was meeting.

Moreover, given the capital's planned location, many delegates assumed its permanent residents would primarily consist of slaves unable to vote in any case.

In 1790, Congress passed the Residence Act placing the District on the Potomac River between the Anacostia and Conococheague Creek with the exact location chosen by President George Washington.

[4] In the 1950s, as part of the more prominent Civil Rights Movement, interest emerged in giving the District full representation.

As a compromise, the Twenty-third Amendment was adopted in 1961, granting the District some votes in the Electoral College in measure to their population, but no more than the smallest state.

The Commission reiterated the following recommendation to the United States: "Provide the Petitioners with an effective remedy, which includes adopting the legislative or other measures necessary to guarantee to the Petitioners the effective right to participate, directly or through freely chosen representatives and in general conditions of equality, in their national legislature".

That elections of members to serve as representatives of the people, in assembly, ought to be free; and that all men, having sufficient evidence of permanent common interest with, and attachment to, the community, have the right of suffrage, and cannot be taxed or deprived of their property for public uses without their consent, or that of their representatives so elected, nor bound by any law to which they have not, in like manner, assented, for the public good.VII.

He wrote, "No right is more precious in a free country than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the laws under which, as good citizens, we must live.

The primary objection to legislative proposals to grant the District voting rights is that some Constitution provisions suggest that such an action would be unconstitutional.

Unlike residents of U.S. territories such as Puerto Rico or Guam, which also have non-voting delegates, citizens of the District of Columbia are subject to all U.S. federal taxes.

For example, in Loughborough v. Blake 18 U.S. 317 (1820), the Supreme Court said:The difference between requiring a continent, with an immense population, to submit to be taxed by a government having no common interest with it, separated from it by a vast ocean, restrained by no principle of apportionment, and associated with it by no common feelings; and permitting the representatives of the American people, under the restrictions of our constitution, to tax a part of the society...which has voluntarily relinquished the right of representation and has adopted the whole body of Congress for its legitimate government, as is the case with the district, is too obvious not to present itself to the minds of all.

[23]In 1971, Susan Breakefield sued to recover three years of income taxes she paid to the District of Columbia because she said she was a victim of taxation without representation.

[24] Opponents of D.C. voting rights point out that Congress appropriates money directly to the D.C. government to help offset some of the city's costs.

[25] However, proponents of a tax-centric view against D.C. representation do not apply the same logic to the 32 states that received more money from the federal government in 2005 than they paid in taxes.

[25] Like the 50 states, D.C. receives federal grants for assistance programs such as Medicare, accounting for approximately 26% of the city's total revenue.

[28] Additionally, all federal law enforcement agencies, such as the U.S. Park Police, have jurisdiction in the city and help provide security.

However, sponsors of voting rights legislation point out that both Wyoming and Vermont have a smaller population than the District of Columbia.

The Democrats' support of increased D.C. representation in Congress and the Republicans' opposition to it has been alleged to be purely for self-serving reasons.

These proposals generally involve either treating D.C. more like a state or allowing Maryland to take back the land it ceded to form the District.

The constitutional argument about whether Congress can provide the District of Columbia with a voting member in the House of Representatives, but not in the Senate, is heavily debated by each side.

The Justice Department during the administration of President George W. Bush took the position that “explicit provisions of the Constitution do not permit Congress to grant congressional representation to the District through legislation.”[42] Various such proposals were considered by the Congress during Bush's tenure: On January 6, 2009, senators Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Orrin Hatch of Utah and D.C.

Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton introduced the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009 (H.R.

[61] The Justice Department has split over the constitutionality of legislation to give the District of Columbia voting representation in the House of Representatives.

The Office of Legal Counsel reported to Attorney General Eric Holder that the proposed legislation would be unconstitutional, but Holder overrode that determination and instead obtained an opinion from officials of the United States Solicitor General's office that the legislation could be defended if it were challenged after its enactment.

[68] Those in favor of such a plan argue that the Congress already has the necessary authority to pass such legislation without the constitutional concerns of other proposed remedies.

In the National Congress of Argentina, the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires has 25 seats in the Chamber of Deputies[87] as well as three in the Senate, the same as a province.

In the Dewan Negara (upper house), each of the federal territories is represented by two senators, but these are appointed on the advice of the Prime Minister.

The legislature and executive of the Switzerland are located in Bern, but Swiss law does not designate a capital district of any kind.

[104] Paris, the capital of France, is also one of the special status collectivities but is nevertheless represented on the same basis as the other departments in the National Assembly and the Senate.