Reasserting the National Character of the District of Columbia
The Founders created a Federal City to stand as a beacon to the world.
Since its founding, the District of Columbia has occupied a unique, and intentionally constrained, place in our constitutional architecture. From the moment James Madison penned in Federalist No. 43 that the national capital must lie outside any single state’s sway, the Framers treated Washington not as an ordinary city but as a federal enclave governed by the collective will of the American people through their elected representatives in the three branches of government (Madison, 1788). Yet, today’s “home rule” experiment has obscured that original purpose. Ceding too much authority to a municipal government beholden to local interests has produced chronic fiscal instability, overcrowding of high-density housing, and fragmented land use that undermines the District’s symbolic and practical role as the nation’s capital.
Under Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution, Congress wields “exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever” over the seat of government (U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 17), a power reaffirmed first by the Organic Act of 1801 (2 Stat. 103) and again in the Consolidation Act of 1871 (16 Stat. 419). The 1973 Home Rule Act granted an elected mayor and council, but it did so only at Congress’s pleasure: every piece of local legislation remains subject to federal review, and the District cannot alter its debt limits, tax non-resident exemptions, or zoning controls without congressional approval (Home Rule Act, 1973). In effect, D.C.’s municipal government has become a hybrid creature, neither fully autonomous nor fully integrated into a state, left perpetually vulnerable to budgetary raids, federal riders, and the ebb and flow of political whims in Washington.
This constitutional tug-of-war has had tangible consequences. Today, nearly half of the District’s land is devoted to residential development, a startling departure from Pierre L’Enfant’s grand design of monumental avenues flanked by open vistas, ample parkland, and civic edifices intended to inspire and instruct visitors from every corner of the republic (L’Enfant, 1791). High-rise apartments and condominiums now crowd former government tracts and green corridors, eroding vital security buffers around federal buildings, straining public infrastructure, and diluting the city’s identity as a living campus of democracy, learning, and public worship.
Financially, the home rule arrangement has left Washington in a precarious position. Reliant on volatile bond markets and occasional federal bailouts, the District carries over $6 billion in general-obligation debt while facing recurring multi-hundred-million-dollar cuts whenever Congress enacts budget riders or caps local tax rates (Office of the Chief Financial Officer, 2024). Unfunded mandates—particularly for transit (WMATA) and public education—compound the problem, forcing hard choices between essential services and fiscal solvency.
Throughout its history, the District of Columbia has struggled with crime rates that consistently exceed national averages, undermining residents’ sense of security and tarnishing the capital’s image. In 2023, D.C.’s violent crime rate stood at 1,150.86 incidents per 100,000 residents—207.4% higher than the 50-state average of 374.37—and its property crime rate reached 4,307.39 per 100,000, outpacing the national average of 1,916.65 by 124.7% (USAFacts, 2024). These figures reflect a long-standing pattern: even as crime rates fell nationally from their peaks in the early 1990s, Washington’s rates remained stubbornly elevated, with decades of homicide, robbery, and theft statistics far above those of peer cities and the nation as a whole (The Disaster Center, 2023).
Compounding these challenges, juvenile crime in the District has spiraled beyond manageable levels. Between 2016 and 2022, the Metropolitan Police Department averaged 2,235 arrests of youth (ages 10–17) per year—roughly 52 arrests per 1,000 children—nearly double the national arrest rate for juveniles (D.C. Policy Center, 2023). Moreover, recent data show that the share of homicides and non-fatal shootings perpetrated by 15- to 20-year-olds nearly doubled between 2021 and mid-2024, underscoring an alarming surge in youth-involved violence (D.C. Witness, 2024). Systemic failures—such as tripling truancy rates in some wards, delays of over 60 days for youth to access treatment programs, and device malfunctions in electronic monitoring—have further eroded rehabilitation efforts and allowed repeat offenders to remain at large (Washington Post, 2025; OJJDP, 2024).
The uneven distribution of crime across neighborhoods, federal-local jurisdictional frictions, and budgetary unpredictability continue to hamper coherent law-and-order strategies. Until D.C.’s governance structure and land-use priorities are realigned with its national mission, public-safety struggles, especially out-of-control juvenile crime, will persist as distractions from the capital’s broader purpose as the shining seat of American governance.
If Washington is to reclaim its founding purpose, we must realign land use, governance, and funding with its status as the “City of the Nation.” First, Congress should reaffirm its exclusive jurisdiction by ending the Home Rule Act. This path would restore clear lines of authority and end the perennial tug between local and national priorities.
Second, zoning and development policies must shift away from perpetual residential build-outs and toward civic and cultural institutions. No new high-density housing permits should be granted within the historic ten-mile square, and incentives should instead reward the expansion of museums, research institutes, universities, think tanks, faith-based centers, nonprofit headquarters, and additional parkland. By redirecting development capital toward these national assets, we honor L’Enfant’s vision and ensure the District remains a prestigious showcase for America’s ideals.
Third, the federal government should invest in a “National Capital Trust,” funded through appropriations, to acquire and manage critical civic lands. This trust would preserve security buffers, enhance pedestrian promenades, and create continuous ribbons of green space between monumental sites. It would also underwrite the relocation of residents from high-security zones, offering tax credits and moving stipends to encourage voluntary transition to neighboring Maryland and Virginia communities—where new mixed-use developments can accommodate growth without compromising the capital’s grandeur.
Finally, the District’s programming mission must be reinforced. Expanded federal grants and partnerships should draw leading think tanks, academic centers, and faith-based nonprofits to establish headquarters within the District’s civic core. By nurturing a vibrant community of scholars, policymakers, and faith leaders, we cement Washington’s identity as a dynamic forum for public discourse, innovation, and moral reflection.
In the end, restoring the District to its intended role is not merely a matter of local politics; it is an act of constitutional fidelity. The Founders created a Federal City to stand as a beacon to the world, governed not by parochial interests, but by the nation as a whole, through the three branches that protect our liberties. To honor that original covenant, we must recenter Washington’s land use, governance, and financial structure on its national mission. Only then can the District of Columbia truly reflect the shining hill upon which our Republic stands.
References
Home Rule Act, Pub. L. No. 93-198, 87 Stat. 774 (1973).
L’Enfant, P.-C. (1791). Plan of the city intended for the permanent seat of the government of the United States. National Archives.
Madison, J. (1788). Federalist No. 43. In A. Hamilton, J. Madison, & J. Jay, The Federalist Papers.
Office of the Chief Financial Officer, District of Columbia. (2024). Comprehensive annual financial report for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2024. https://cfo.dc.gov/page/financial-reports
Organic Act of 1801, ch. 15, 2 Stat. 103.
OJJDP. (2024). Youth arrest rates by state. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/statistical-briefing-book/crime/faqs/qa05103
The Disaster Center. (2023). District of Columbia crime rates 1960–2019. https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm
U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 17.
USAFacts. (2024). What is the crime rate in Washington, D.C.? https://usafacts.org/answers/what-is-the-crime-rate-in-the-us/state/washington-dc/
Washington Post. (2025, April 3). D.C. police form new unit of detectives to focus on youth crime. The Washington Post.
D.C. Policy Center. (2023). DC voices: Juvenile justice. https://www.dcpolicycenter.org/publications/dc-juvenile-justice/
D.C. Witness. (2024). Everyone thinks youth crime is increasing—D.C. Witness data shows why. https://dcwitness.org/everyone-thinks-youth-crime-is-increasing-d-c-witness-data-shows-why/