But it's a very good thing, I'm sure of it.

Quote: "Although volume upon volume is written to prove slavery a very good thing, we never hear of the man who wishes to take the good of it by being a slave himself" -- Abraham Lincoln

Nor do we hear of any offers by Americans outside of DC to permanently relinquish their Congressman and Senators; neither do we hear any offers to "lend" the representation of a Congressman or Senator entirely to the interests of the unrepresented denizens of DC for an extended period.

But it MUST be a good thing for DC to go unrepresented, though, because it says so in the Constitution, right? So why examine the idea critically by weighing the pros and cons, or by examining the motivations of those who created the situation, or by considering the moral consequences of egregiously violating the very "first principles" upon which the nation is founded ?