[CQ-Contest] Counting DC as a Multiplier and Not as PartofMaryland.

Richard DiDonna NN3W nn3w at cox.net
Mon May 21 16:17:10 EDT 2007

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv at subich.com>
To: "'Eric Rosenberg'" <wd3q at starpower.net>; <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Counting DC as a Multiplier and Not as PartofMaryland.

> The NAQP rules are what they are and there is no need to change 
> them or to make DC a multiplier.  If DC were made a multiplier, 
> the same logic would need to be extended to every other self-
> governing entity including Indian Reservations, etc.  
The issue of D.C. versus indian reservations is old.  While there are similarities, there are several differences that lessen the independence of th reservations.  When you go to your polling station on the Navajo indian reservation in Window Rock to vote, you're voting in a State of Arizona election.  You're voting for John S. McCain III or Jon Kyl.  Your vote for president contributes to the Arizona tally for the electoral college.  There is no federal representation by any person in the House of Representatives or the Senate.

In D.C., your vote is for Eleanor Holmes Norton (who DOES have a seat in the House of Representatives.  You do not vote for Barbara McCulsky who is one of Maryland's senator and your presidential vote does not constitute a vote for the Maryland electoral votes.  To the contary, your presidential vote represents a vote for the D.C. electoral college votes.

When you step off an indian reservation in Arizona, into the rest of Arizona to drive, you need an Arizona driver's license - and you may indeed need one while on the reservation.  In D.C. you need a D.C. driver;s license and you certainly are not issued a Maryland driver's license.

To my knowledge, the Indian reservations do not have independent United States federal district courts.  But, D.C. does.  It has the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.  The Congress has clearly seen it fit that the District have its own federal courts - similar to that of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.

The differences are pretty definitive, and D.C. holds a unique position worthy of multiplier recognition.

> DC is recognized for Maryland credit in the WAS program (it's not 
> WAS + DC). 
For purposes of WAS, I have no objections.  Or better yet, make it not acceptable for Maryland.

> DC is not a "country" for DXCC purposes - therefore the comparison 
> to Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands is not appropriate.  
Actually the terns us "entity" as the DXCC refers to them.  I think a stronger allusion to both Puerto Rico and the Virgins is their inclusion in the Federal Court system as separate districts, their voting positions in elections, and their quasi independent status - separate from ANY state control.

>> Now is the time for justice to be served by NCJ contest managers 
>> moving in a positive direction to right this wrong!
> This is no more a "wrong" than the arbitrary multipliers in many 
> other contests.  It is a historical fact of life that should be 
> maintained for tradition and not changed on a whim.
I'm not sure how its being changed on a whim.  Its as much of a political entity as any state (albeit without a governor).  Indeed most major contests recognize it as a multiplier - ARRL DX, ARRL 10, CQWW 160, RTTY Roundup  and several QSO parties including Florida (recently announced).

73 Rich NN3W 

> 73, 
>   ... Joe, W4TV 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com 
>> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Eric Rosenberg
>> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 2:11 AM
>> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
>> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Counting DC as a Multiplier and Not as 
>> Part ofMaryland.
>> Dear Fellow Contesters,
>> As I'm sure you well know, the North American QSO Party considers the
>> District of Columbia as part of Maryland, not as an 
>> independent entity,
>> and therefore not as a unique multiplier.  This despite the fact that
>> the District, while not a State, is self governed, its residents pay
>> federal and local taxes, vote in federal (presidential) elections, and
>> send a Delegate to the House of Representatives.
>> In past years, we residents of the District of Columbia have 
>> argued that
>> DC should qualify as a separate multiplier, equivalent to a state. The
>> NCJ contest managers have consistently rebuffed that argument.
>> A closer reading of the NAQP rule describing multipliers (item #11)
>> leads us to believe that our justification for a separate multiplier
>> based on statehood may have been misguided. So what if we're not a
>> state!  We do appear to qualify under the clause "and other North
>> American countries," as per the rule:
>>    "Multipliers: Are U.S. states (including KH6 and KL7), 13 Canadian
>> provinces/territories (British Columbia, Alberta,
>>    Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, 
>> Nova Scotia,
>> PEI, Newfoundland/Labrador, Yukon, NWT and Nunavut) and
>>    other North American countries. District of Columbia counts as
>> Maryland. Non-North American countries, maritime mobiles and
>>    aeronautical mobiles do not count as multipliers, but may be worked
>> for QSO credit."
>> Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands are both unincorporated
>> territories of the United States, whose tax-paying residents are not
>> permitted to vote in federal (i.e., presidential) elections, 
>> yet send an
>> elected representative (a Resident Commissioner and Delegate,
>> respectively) to the US House of Representatives.  Guam and American
>> Samoa are also US territories whose tax-paying residents send 
>> Delegates
>> to the Congress.
>> What we are *not* is part of Maryland! We do not live in, pay taxes in
>> or vote in Maryland.  If the contesting community wants more greater
>> participation, the NAQPs are especially well suited for the role -
>> short, sweet and simple to do.
>> Make DC a multiplier and sure, more will jump in and give it a go!
>> Thoughts? Comments?
>> Now is the time for justice to be served by NCJ contest managers moving
>> in a positive direction to right this wrong!
>> 73,
>> Eric W3DQ
>> Washington, DC
>> "taxation, but no multiplier representation"
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list