Documentaries/Long Videos about D.C. Autonomy

By: Miriam Edelman

Just as there are songs regarding D.C. autonomy, there are also documentaries/long videos about this topic. This piece follows up on DCNOW’s blog’s post, entitled “Songs Relating to D.C. Autonomy.”

NEWorks Productions created the award-winning documentary, “Becoming Douglass Commonwealth: From D.C. Disenfranchisement to Full Democracy,” about the history of Washington, D.C., from the earliest days of the country to recent years and D.C. statehood. Released on April 16, 2021, to commemorate D.C. Emancipation Day 2021, the Executive Office of the Mayor of D.C. presented this film, which is nearly an hour long. This documentary features D.C. Mayors Muriel Bowser, Vincent Gray, Sharon Pratt, Anthony A. Williams, and Adrian Fenty; D.C. Council Chairs Linda Cropp and Phil Mendelson; U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder; Representatives James Clyburn (D-SC), Steny Hoyer (D-MD), and Jamie Raskin (D-MD); Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC); U.S. Shadow Senator Paul Strauss (D-DC); chef José Andrés; and more.

During this film, Norton made the especially powerful point:

“The Framers never quite figured out where the capital should be, but believe me and mark me, there is nothing in the record that showed that the Framers meant that the people who live in their own nation’s capital wouldn’t have the same rights as everyone else, not after fighting the Revolutionary War.”

Another key point was that by the early 1960’s, the Democratic and Republication platforms supported Congressional representation for D.C residents. DCNOW’s blog post, entitled “Blast from the Past: Republicans Supported Washington, D.C., Autonomy,” made the same point. In the documentary, Bowser explained the ramifications of D.C.’s status: “What not being a state means is that the Congress can always interfere with our laws.” D.C. ally Representative Jamie Raskin (D-MD) elaborated:

“It’s not just a question of representation in Congress. It’s also the fact that Congress ultimately can control local legislation for people in Washington and can micromanage the affairs of people in D.C., and that’s been a nightmare for people in D.C. on everything from criminal justice issues to publicly funded reproductive health care for women and abortion rights. It’s been a nightmare from the standpoint of adoption of children by gay couples and on and on. D.C., is often treated as a kind of play thing by right-wing forces in Congress that [sic] could never get their legislation passed for everybody in America and oppress people’s rights across the country, but they can do it for Washington, D.C, which does not have voting representation.”

The documentary discussed how D.C. statehood would improve the lives of D.C. residents in the following eight ways: “Court System, “Health & Wellness,” “Transportation & Infrastructure;” “Education;” “Housing & Development;” “Business & Enterprise;” “Human Rights & Equality;” and “Public Safety.” Then, it stated and refuted the following arguments against statehood: “Statehood for D.C. is unconstitutional;” “Statehood requires a constitutional amendment;” “New states have usually been added in pairs;” “D.C. statehood will weight Congress in favor of the Democratic Party;” “What do we do with the 23^rd Amendment?;” “D.C. should be retroceded back to Maryland;” “D.C. is not ready for statehood;” “D.C. does not have much of a working class:” and “D.C. does not have agriculture, mining and manufacturing.”

Former Attorney General Eric Holder stated, “In order to make the promise of democracy real for us all, Washington, D.C., must become the 51^st state.” Bowser stated regarding D.C. statehood:

“We will be fully part of the union. We will have two Senators. We will have representation. We will never be able to have a President try to take over our police department. We will never be silent in discussions about the confirmations of Supreme Court justices.”

Filmmaker Anna Reid Jhirad created “The Last Battlefront,” documentary. This film, which is one hour long, discusses the history of D.C.’s disenfranchisement: “SEAT OF GOVERNMENT, 1783-1801;” “AN EXAMPLE FOR ALL THE LAND;” “CIVIL RIGHTS IN WASHINGTON, D.C.;” and “THE FIGHT FOR STATEHOOD, 1998 – PRESENT.”

In 2024, the D.C. Council created and issued a video, entitled “DC Home Rule at 50: Extended Interview Version.” This eight-minute long video includes very poignant comments about home rule and the need for D.C. statehood and features former and current local D.C. elected officials, including Mayors Sharon Pratt and Anthony Williams. In this video, former D.C. Council Chair Linda Cropp, Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.), columnist Colby King, Pratt discussed D.C before home rule. According to Pratt, “home rule meant we had some measure of dignity and participation in the American experience.” Cropp said that home rule “gives us the same rights and privileges that other citizens have. Unfortunately, ours is limited.” Current Chair Phil Mendelson said, “[t]he status quo is not acceptable we need to have control over all aspects of our government to improve our society, the community that's Washington, D.C., and we do not have that now.” Pratt said, “[a]t the end of the day, Congress still can checkmate what we do.” She said, “being in office made me realize nothing shy of statehood could possibly serve our interest.” Norton stated, “until we become the 51^st state, we will not have the same equal rights that other residents of the United States of America have.”

D.C. needs to become a state. Its residents should be full citizens. The nation’s capital must not lose its limited home rule. Does D.C. again want to “basically be treated as a colony,” a phrase used by Cropp in the “DC Home Rule at 50: Extended Interview Version” video to describe D.C. before D.C. received home rule? Certainly not.