Today, the Senate began debate on S. 160, a bill to “provide the District of Columbia a voting seat and the State of Utah an additional seat in the House of Representatives.” DCist reports that the chamber will likely hold the cloture vote tomorrow.

In a new piece in the National Review, former Justice Department official Hans von Spakovsky tries to make the case that D.C. residents don’t deserve full federal voting rights. Spakovsky, of course, has a history of vote suppression allegations while serving in the Bush administration.

In his piece, Spakovsky goes beyond the traditional constitutionality claim made by opponents, such as Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). He claims that D.C. residents don’t need a full voting member in Congress because every federal lawmaker is supposedly looking out for their best interests. Toward the end, he also claims that this bill — supported by Republicans such as Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) — is nothing more than a “raw grab at political power” by Democrats.

ThinkProgress contacted DC Vote Communications Director Jaline Quinto, who offered her response to Spakovsky’s claims:

SPAKOVSKY: And while statehood supporters cite the famous American rallying cry “no taxation without representation,” that is a false analogy. The entire Congress represents the interests of the District, because every single member of Congress works in the District.

QUINTO: Members of Congress are accountable to the people who elect them – their constituents. DC residents have no voting member in Congress and therefore no voting members who are beholden to them. The assumption that all members of Congress act in the best interests of DC residents simply because they work in the District is vastly untrue. In many cases, it’s been quite the opposite. Congress routinely tries to overturn laws that DC residents and the District government have tried to implement. When DC attempted to use its own tax revenue to combat the rising HIV infection rate through a needle-exchange program, Congress stepped in to stop it even though DC residents supported the measure. That’s just one example of many.

SPAKOVSKY: Every year, Congress appropriates millions of dollars for the District. D.C. did so well under the stimulus bill that Eleanor Holmes Norton, D.C.’s nonvoting representative, crowed on her website that “Norton’s stimulus package puts D.C. ahead of seven states.” The District has a smaller population than 49 of the states (Wyoming being the exception). Read more

As Norm Coleman’s legal challenges to Al Franken’s recount victory for Minnesota’s U.S. Senate seat drag on, his friends in Congress have begun helping him foot the bill. Earlier this month, prominent Republicans held a “ritzy fundraiser” for Coleman with many “max[ing] out to Coleman’s effort” (some giving as much as $10,000 in PAC money) while others pleaded with supporters in a YouTube message to contribute to his legal fight.

If Franken ultimately wins, the Senate Democratic caucus will grow to 59 members, close to a filibuster proof majority. But as evidence mounts that Coleman stands little chance of winning, speculation has emerged that Republicans in Congress are simply trying to keep Minnesota’s seat empty as long as possible to avoid making it easier for the Democrats to pass their agenda.

But the longer the seat remains vacant, the longer the citizens of Minnesota remain underrepresented. Indeed, today on C-SPAN, Minnesota’s Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) said that the lone representation in the senate is hurting the state:

HOST: [H]as it hurt the state not having a senator, a second senator available? [...]

PAWLENTY: Yes, it has put Minnesota at a disadvantage when there’s only 100 senators total and you are missing one and it is one of two from your state, that puts you at a disadvantage. When you have big legislation being decided and you are trying to fight for your perspective, or your influence on a piece of legislation it puts our state at a disadvantage.

Watch it:

Pawlenty later added that the Coleman/Franken race “is going to be decided through the courts, unfortunately” and that a decision will be made “in the next month or two.” “If one side or the other then appeals to the federal court it could really drag on well beyond,” he said, adding, “So we’re kind of just stuck pending the court process.”

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) said being Minnesota’s only representative in the senate has been a “challenge.” She added that “her home-state office has been flooded with phone calls and said her staff has seen its casework double in size.”

In the Washington Post last week, columnist George F. Will recycled a column he’s been printing for years which denies that there’s a global warming crisis. The column earned widespread condemnation across the progressive blogosphere because it contained so many egregious scientific errors. The Washington Post has yet to issue a correction and has instead defended Will, claiming the column was “checked to the fullest extent possible.” In a new report, The Wonk Room’s Brad Johnson compiles, explains, and debunks all the false statements from the column that the Washington Post is willing to stake its reputation on. Download the report and take action.

Last night, actor Sean Penn and screenwriter Dustin Lance Black both won Oscars for their work on “Milk,” which told the story of Harvey Milk, the first openly gay elected official. Today, the right wing expressed its disgust that the movie received such acclamation. On his radio show, Mike Gallagher slammed Penn for ignoring “the majority of Americans” by supporting gay marriage rights, saying it went against America’s “fundamental values.”

Gallagher asked guest Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican Party, if he thought the party “ought to consider” something like civil unions. Steele replied immediately, “No, no, no,” adding, “What are you, crazy?” He made it clear that the party would not budge on gay rights:

GALLAGHER: Is this a time when Republicans ought to consider some sort of alternative to redefining marriage and maybe in the road, down the road to civil unions. Do you favor civil unions?

STEELE: No, no no. What would we do that for? What are you, crazy? No. Why would we backslide on a core, founding value of this country? I mean this isn’t something that you just kind of like, “Oh well, today I feel, you know, loosey-goosey on marriage.” [...]

GALLAGHER: So no room even for a conversation about civil unions in your mind?

STEELE: What’s the difference?

Listen here:

Steele’s extremist statements present a sharp contrast from the rhetoric he employed to secure his chairmanship. In November, he told the Washington Times that the party needs to reach out to new communities and that it “has to realize that there are constituencies in the body politic that have no interest in conservative litmus tests based on same-sex marriage and abortion.”

In fact, just days after winning election to head the GOP, he told ABC’s George Stehanopolous that his party would seek to include those who support gay rights:

WALLACE: You are one of the co-founders of something called the Republican Leadership Council which supports candidates who favor abortion and gay rights.

STEELE: Yes.

WALLACE: Does the GOP needs to do a better job of reaching out to people who hold those views?

STEELE: I think — I think that’s an important opportunity for us, absolutely.

Indeed, Steele has talked a big game about reaching new constituencies — saying recently, “We need to uptick our image with everyone, including one-armed midgets” — yet he advocates bigotry that the vast majority of Americans rejects. A poll from December showed that a full 75 percent of Americans support gay marriage or civil unions, with only about 2 in 10 saying gay couples should have no legal rights.

ThinkProgress would like to congratulate our dear friend and former colleague Daniella Gibbs Leger for her recent appointment to a position as the White House Director of Message Events. What does a “director of message events” do? The position entails helping to coordinate presidential events — from a press, message, and logistical point of view. Part of Daniella’s job, for instance, has involved coordinating public White House events that break from the Bush policy of screening the audience members who ask questions. Daniella was previously Vice President for Communications at the Center for American Progress and, before that, Deputy Director of Communications at the Democratic National Committee. We wish her the best of luck and merry event-planning.