Bush Weighs In On DC Voting

In case you didn’t see this, the Decider-in-Chief has ruled out voting rights for the District: (Washington Post)

The White House declared its opposition yesterday to a bill that would give the District its first full seat in the House of Representatives, saying it is unconstitutional, and a key Senate supporter said such concerns could kill the measure.

“The Constitution specifies that only ‘the people of the several states’ elect representatives to the House,” said White House spokesman Alex Conant. “And D.C. is not a state.”

Then, Conant added: “Let them eat cake.” Not really, but it’s very easy to imagine him dressed up like Louis XIV.

My question is: when did Bush become pro-Constitution? My whole memory of the legal proceedings at Guantanamo was Bush trying to find the best way to avoid having the Constitution apply to him.

And, if I’m not mistaken, doesn’t the Supreme Court exist to decide what is and what’s not Constitutional? True, some of them are more duck-hunting partners for the VP than legal authorities, but still, wouldn’t it be polite to at least ask them what they think?

On the other hand, as Scalia once put it: “Quack, quack.”