Why can't DC join Maryland?

DC joining Maryland, a process called retrocession, is technically possible but faces a wall of political opposition from both sides of the Potomac. Maryland doesn't want DC, DC doesn't want Maryland, and Congress hasn't moved a serious bill in either chamber. A constitutional wrinkle tied to the 23rd Amendment makes any deal messier still.

What retrocession actually means

Retrocession means that DC, or most of it, would rejoin Maryland. The standard proposal works like this: the vast majority of the city would become a new Maryland county, and Congress would oversee a shrunken federal district covering the area around the US Capitol, the National Mall, and the White House. DC has been separate from Maryland for a very long time. Created as the federal district in 1801, DC has been separate from Maryland for longer than 34 of the 50 states have even existed.

It has been done before, just not with Maryland

There is a working precedent. The House passed the Alexandria retrocession act 96 to 65, the Senate concurred 32 to 14, and President James Polk signed the legislation returning Alexandria to Virginia on July 9, 1846. In September of 1846, residents of Alexandria and present-day Arlington County voted in favor of retrocession from Washington DC, and in March of 1847, Virginia accepted jurisdiction over the area. That included the City of Alexandria and the areas that now include the Pentagon and Arlington National Cemetery.

The Maryland side never followed. Marylanders did not agree with their Virginian counterparts. They liked living in the federal enclave and decided to remain without direct representation.

Maryland's answer is almost certainly no

This is the most concrete obstacle. A survey of Maryland state legislators from the 1990s found that over 90 percent of the state's governing body rejected the notion of retrocession, even if Congress mandated it as a condition of DC statehood.

Public opinion tracks with that. About a third of Marylanders said they supported welcoming DC as a new county, compared with 57% who were opposed, per a 2019 Washington Post-UMD poll. The political math inside Annapolis is equally unfavorable. The idea isn't very popular with Maryland Democrats either. Baltimore-area politicians, already concerned about the balance between their region and the Washington suburbs, worry that adding DC would further erode their power base.

Maryland Democrats are not keen on having their center of power shift from Baltimore to Washington. Baltimore has a population of 575,000, so it is smaller than Washington, with a population of around 710,000, and would have to contend with political rivals in the blue state.

DC doesn't want it either

DC's own leaders have been blunt. Former Mayor Muriel Bowser said flatly: "I don't support retrocession. And I don't think the people of Maryland would either." DC Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton has said: "Unlike retrocession, DC statehood has strong support. Retrocession has no constituency in Maryland or in DC."

In a 2016 referendum, 79% of DC voters cast ballots in favor of statehood. Retrocession would give DC residents voting representation but would cost them their shot at a Senate seat of their own. DC becoming the 51st state would mean the District would have two more senators in the upper chamber; under retrocession, the number would stay as is.

Congress would have to act, and it won't

Retrocession requires the approval of both chambers of US Congress and the Maryland state government. Bills have been floated, mostly as counter-moves to DC statehood pushes, but none have gone anywhere. In April 2021, Senator Roger Marshall introduced S. 1361, the District of Columbia-Maryland Reunion Act. The bill had zero cosponsors.

Republicans have used retrocession proposals as a talking point against statehood, but their enthusiasm doesn't last. Republican enthusiasm for getting DC off the federal books tends to wane as the danger of statehood recedes. George Derek Musgrove, a professor at UMBC and author of Chocolate City, told Axios the proposal "should be taken seriously," but added: "I don't think it can pass" in both chambers of Congress, for the same reasons Republicans oppose statehood.

The 23rd Amendment problem

Even if everyone agreed tomorrow, a constitutional puzzle would remain. The 23rd Amendment creates unusual issues with Electoral College votes for any shrunken federal district. The amendment, ratified in 1961, grants the district no more electoral votes than that of the smallest state, which is currently three. The votes do not depend on the size of the district. So a retrocession plan that reduces DC to a small federal enclave around the Mall would leave those three electoral votes attached to a near-empty patch of federal buildings. Under such a plan, the residents of the new, smaller district would likely only be the president and the president's family living in the White House. The first family would effectively get three electoral votes.

Repeal of the 23rd Amendment would require ratification by three-quarters of the states, meaning both red and blue states would have to ratify, and one of the political parties would be sacrificing a guaranteed three electoral votes in the next presidential election. That alone is enough to kill momentum on Capitol Hill.

The practical friction on the ground

Beyond politics and constitutional law, there are real administrative headaches. Maryland municipalities get most of their revenue from property taxes, while DC's budget is dependent on sales and income taxes that would conflict with Maryland state taxes, a difference that would mean either a huge tax hike or a major service cut for DC residents.

DC residents are also wary of giving up a distinct civic identity. As Professor Musgrove put it: "We have a different history, a different identity, and we don't necessarily want to give that up."

Sources

• DC NOW: Retrocession overview
• Axios: One way DC can protect itself from Trump
• 51 for 51: Retrocession is not the answer
• GGWash: DC contributors weigh retrocession
• Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy: 23rd Amendment problems (Muller)
• WETA Boundary Stones: The Alexandria retrocession of 1846
• Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton press release on retrocession bills