But, I didn't have time to look it up. So, I defer to Curtis:
On Chaffetz’s campaign site, one of his big four issues is limited government – stating that “This principal works! I agree with President Regan: “Government which governs least governs best.” He goes on to expand on this point by stating that he is a strong supporter of federalism with the emphasis being placed on the states and that he will “seek to restrict the role of the federal government.”
Ah, but Chaffetz is also the ranking Republican on the Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Post Office, and the District of Columbia and, therefore, is able to rule on all ordinances D.C. comes up with. You see, because Washington D.C. is not technically a state, rather a federal district, the Constitution grants Congress the right to pass all laws regarding the governance of the city. Everything from parking ordinances to the recognition of gay marriage is, technically, left in the hands of Congress.
But I ask Representative Chaffetz, how can you be a supporter of small government and feel that it is ok to intervene in the affairs of Washington D.C.? I understand that D.C. poses unique questions and can be treated differently than Utah – but does that mean that you should? Are the 590,000 of the District less entitled to local government than the 745,000 in yours – if not, do you consider District residents Americans? If so, why do you feel the need to interfere only in their lives but not the lives of residents who live in regular states?
Of course, Jason Chaffetz loves government so much, he is the only Representative to be represented by someone else.