When asked his position on D.C. voting rights, Republican presidential contender John Kasich didn’t pretend to draw on any constitutional clause or existing law to explain his stance against it. Instead, the Ohio governor stated the political reason that many already perceive as the biggest obstacle standing between D.C. and congressional voting representation: Giving D.C. voting representatives in Congress would mean more Democrats in Congress. “What it really gets down to if you want to be honest is because they know that’s just more votes in the Democratic Party,” Kasich said Wednesday during an interview with The Washington Post editorial board.
The District is overwhelmingly Democratic, and its current non-voting representative, Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, is an outspoken liberal. Still, Kasich’s blunt answer — rather than the position itself — is a bit surprising for a candidate who has bashed his party for not being open to ideas and being “knee-jerk” against most things.
… When pressed further, Kasich did eventually concede that he didn’t have a strong argument against D.C. voting representation and would ultimately be open to the idea as president. (He flatly stated he was against D.C. statehood.)
“Maybe I’ll have to flip flop my position, okay? I don’t know. Let me look at it. Let me think about it,” he said. “I mean that’s a good point. It’s kind of hard for me to argue against it. I’d have to hear what the argument is.”