Make DC A Federal District Again

Washington, D.C., can never become a state. And it is long past the time to end D.C.’s failed experiment in self-government begun in 1973. While a necessary first step, it’s not enough to just temporarily federalize the D.C. police.

It is time to return D.C. to its original constitutional purpose, being a federal district under mostly federal control.

I always loved D.C. I graduated from Georgetown University and was based out of the D.C. area off and on for decades. I finally lived there again recently from 2020 through the end of 2024. We moved out because the city I loved was no longer livable.

The crime, even in the “good part of town,” Northwest (NW), became oppressive, spiking greatly in 2023, with shootings, murders, carjackings, muggings, and robberies becoming commonplace, as did the drugs and homeless encampments that sprung up everywhere.

Serious crime was no longer limited to the Southeast (SE) or Anacostia.

I was always embarrassed as fresh-faced tourists had to see the trash on the streets, and graffiti everywhere, as well as the ubiquitous homeless camps and tents in our nation’s capital. I was also worried at their naivety walking around the city thinking they were safe.

Things got so bad that in March 2023 Congress reversed a revision to Washington’s criminal code passed by the District council which, among many other crazy changes, reduced penalties for various crimes, including carjackings, robberies, and even homicides.

It was the first time Congress had overruled a local law in three decades, and just the fourth time in history.

Mitch McConnell, the then-Senate minority leader, warned that the district’s “soft-on-crime” leaders needed “adult supervision.” By summer’s end, three Republican congressmen had filed a bill to dissolve the council and mayor’s office and put federal lawmakers in charge.

And then as a candidate in 2024, President Trump began again to talk of federalizing the city, making many hopeful that our nation’s capital could be cleaned up at last.

Thankfully, he has begun the process by having the federal government temporarily take over the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), with plans to extend that control indefinitely.

Reorienting the MPD to effectively fight and reduce crime with federal help is key turning D.C. around. Changing D.C.’s liberal laws and soft-on-crime policies is, as he is intent on doing, and the GOP-led Congress has been pushing, is also key.

In 2024, Republicans again offered a bill that would undo the capital city’s law allowing judges to hand down lighter sentences for criminal defendants under 25 years old. The measure would have moved that threshold down to people under the age of 18.

All of D.C.’s pro-criminal laws must be reviewed or repealed.

Replacing soft-on-crime judges is also coming under U.S. attorney for D.C., Jeanette Pirro.

Unlike any other American city, the U.S. attorney is responsible for prosecuting both local and federal crimes.

In 2022, the office declined to prosecute 67% of local arrests, up from 31% in 2016. That is much higher than in other cities: that same year Philadelphia prosecutors dropped just 4% of cases, Cook County, which includes Chicago, 14%. D.C.’s horrible dismissal rate discourages MPD officers from making arrests.

As The Economist notes, it also “sends a message: in America’s capital, committing a crime may not have consequences.”

But all of this should only lead to the real goal, returning D.C. to its original status as a federal district; a neutral location for our federal government, not state or normal city, or a battleground for partisan politics and local radical agendas.

Even with limited self-government awarded in 1973, D.C. has unique powers over how the city is run. Before the 1973 Home Rule Act, the president appointed commissioners who ran the District.

In 1967, Lyndon Johnson replaced that commissioner government with a mayor and 13-member council. But the council members were presidential appointees, not elected officials.

The 1973 Act went further; it gave the city some power to govern itself. It’s what allows D.C. residents to elect the D.C. Council and the mayor. But the federal government has stepped in since to help run the city when it was seen to be failing, most recently under Bill Clinton from 1995-2001.

Referring to getting Congress to overturn the Home Rule Act, Trump has said: “We’re gonna look at that,” he said. “In fact, the lawyers are already studying it. We have to run D.C.”

The lawyers are likely reviewing the recent GOP bill dubbed the “Bringing Oversight to Washington and Safety to Every Resident,” or BOWSER, Act (named after D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowswer).

The February 2025 bill offered by Utah Senator Mike Lee and Tennessee Representative Andy Ogles would simply repeal the 1973 District of Columbia Home Rule Act — a move that would bring D.C. back under complete federal control.

Lee wrote in his own post on X that D.C. should be governed through Congress “as the Constitution originally provided.”

“Our nation’s capital deserves to be a shining example to the world, not a national embarrassment,” said the Utah senator.

However, it would require both the House and Senate to pass it.

But even without repealing Home Rule, the president can significantly tighten federal control over the district by simply reinstating the Control Board, a five-member federal authority that would run the city.

The Control Board was put in place by Clinton during his administration, because thanks in part to corruption and incompetence, the District’s finances were a mess. The board essentially ran the city for six years.

Since then, the Control Board never went away but just went dormant. If Trump declared a fiscal or crime emergency, he could appoint five members to that board, which could then overturn any law that the D.C. Council passed.

That would include the day-to-day operations of D.C. government, giving D.C.’s mayor and Council very little power. This could give Trump the result he wants — returning federal control to the district — without the trouble and risks involved in fully repealing the Home Rule Act.

READ NEXT: Republicans Claim Crucial Redistricting Victory