PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health Care, District of Columbia, Census and the National Archives .
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 12, 2011
New Columbia Admission Act - Sets forth procedures for admission into the United States of the state of New Columbia. Requires the Mayor of the District of Columbia to: (1) submit to the eligible voters propositions for statehood and adoption of a State Constitution, and (2) issue a proclamation for the first elections to Congress of two Senators and one Representative of New Columbia. Requires the President, upon adoption of such propositions and certification of such elections, to issue a proclamation announcing the results and admitting New Columbia into the Union.
Provides for conversion of District government offices to state offices.
Provides that New Columbia shall consist of all territory of the District as of the enactment of this Act, excluding land within specified metes and bounds that shall remain the District of Columbia and that shall include the principal federal monuments, the White House, the Capitol Building, the Supreme Court Building, the federal executive, legislative, and judicial office buildings located adjacent to the Mall and the Capitol Building, and certain military property.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits New Columbia from imposing taxes on federal property except as provided by Congress.
Maintains the applicability to New Columbia of current District laws and continues pending judicial proceedings.
Maintains: (1) the District of Columbia as the seat of the federal government, and (2) the federal government's authority over military lands and specified other property.
Requires each state that is the last place an individual resided before residing in the District of Columbia to permit such individual to vote in federal elections by absentee ballot. Sets forth a rule for expedited consideration of a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution to repeal the 23d amendment (which provides for the appointment of electors for President and Vice President for the District).
People & committees
Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large] · D–DC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health Care, District of Columbia, Census and the National Archives .
Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E56)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Mar 23, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.265 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.265 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.265 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.265 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.