This manifesto lays out an approach for the inhabitants of Columbia to exercise their constitutional rights to voting representatives in both the U.S. House and U.S. Senate.

Congress has and had no power under Article IV of the Constitution to make Columbia, originally part of the State of Maryland, not part of a State.

In 2000 (Adams v. Clinton), the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed it is an impossibility for Columbia's inhabitants rights to representation to run through the District of Columbia because the Congress would then be able to elect its own representatives.  

This being the case, and that Columbia is no longer part of the State of Maryland, the rights to representation through a state were not lost but reverted to Columbia's people under Amendment X.

Some background:

Columbia is the land ceded by the State of Maryland in 1791 and accepted by Congress in 1801 to use as the Seat of the United States Government. 
At that time Columbia had only 11,000 inhabitants and those who tried to vote in Maryland were denied. 

The District of Columbia.   The District was not ceded by Maryland, only the land called Columbia in Maryland's 1791 Act was ceded.  The District of Columbia was created in February 1801 by Congress' Organic Act.

Congress' rights in Columbia are limited.  The Constitution grants Congress extensive powers in the District, bit Congress may not act unconstitutionally.  Rights to state representatives in Congress were not delegated to Congress and are reserved by Amendment X: 
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Summary: Congress has not yet explicitly made Columbia a state or part of a state so all rights not delegated to Congress are reserved to the people of Columbia. The District of Columbia can never be a state, so is irrelevant to the manifesto objective.

Columbia has not been admitted as a new state of the Union.  At the time of writing, Columbia has not been formally admitted as a state under Art. IV of the Constitution.  In 1801, that wouldn't have made sense because Columbia would have two U.S. senators and one House member for only 11,000 people.  However, by 1860 Columbia's population was larger thn the smallest state.

Current State Constitutional Harm.  Columbia's inhabitant's rights to representation in Congress through a state is guaranteed by the Constitution, inhabitants of Columbia had them before the cession and by law they have not been terminated.  Here are those rights, which are independent of the District Clause art. I § 2 cl. 18: 
 
art. I § 2: "The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature."
art. I § 3: "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote."
​
This harm has been recognized by the courts but they are unable to do anything about it.  The Federal District Court has stated and affirmed that only Congress can admit a new state so it cannot give any relief against the harm that has been caused.

No overlap in powers or governance.  Objectors to state rights for Columbia inhabitants claim that this is contrary to the purpose of the District Clause which was intended to provide the Congress with the means of its own security and not be subject to events like the 1783 Philadelphia Mutiny perpetrated by the Pennsylvania state militia.   
There is no issue here, per Amendment X the only rights reserved to the people in the District are those "not given to the federal government'.  They do not include raising a militia etc.
​
Multi-pronged Action Plan
​
1. Manifesto Communication Campaign  
Unfortunately the DC Statehood movement has confused a lot of people.  Although launched with the best of intent, it is an impossibility for DC to be a state of the Union.
What is needed is a campaign to educate folks that the DC Government (which is subject to Congress and can be abolished) is not the right vehicle.  Neither is this a voting issue - voting is an atttribute of state suffrage.  Rather, it is the people to whom the rights to representation in Congress are reserved by the Constitution.  

2. Statement of Rights
In its 1801 Act accepting the cession of Columbia, Congress agreed that the law in Columbia and the District would be identical to the laws of Maryland as they were then.  This is helpful to our cause because:
a) It cannot reasonably be disputed that the Maryland Constittuion at 1801 forms the basis of Columbia's state constitution and
b) the state constitutional law of Maryland at that time included a specific provision "“XXVII. That the Delegates to Congress, from this State, shall be chosen annually, or superseded in the mean time by the joint ballot of both Houses of Assembly;…”

3. Institute the State of Columbia as 'inchoate'
Inchoate means "something that is not, or not yet, completely formed or developed."  
This process has already begun.  This should be promoted as a viable way to recognition of our rights to representation independent of the federal govenrment.  
With elected state-level representatives operating under the laws recognized by Congress we have a platform that can press for our state rights both politically and legally.

4.  The State of Columbia political campaign should have a sole aim - explicit acceptance as a state under Art IV and the seating of our Congressional representatives. 
The lobbying could look similar to the DC Statehood program but with more aggresive assertion of our rights and that the alternative is have Congress 1801 Organic Act  declared unconstitutional because of the undisputed harm which continues.  We should press for a monetary settlement.

5. The State of Columbia legal campaign should consider a range of actions from i) approaching Maryland because the terms of cession should not have disenfranchised us, ii) suing Congress for non-admission and causing harm.  Disputes between states and the U.S. Government are original cases that go before the U.S. Supreme Court so this is a heavy lift so maybe a class action against would be appropriate iii) creating the court of equity of the State of Columbia to issue its own legal opinions iv) a class action suit against the Secretary of State for publishing decennial census returns (which are used for appportionment of representation in the House) that did not mention our extant rights to a representative and v) a suit to declare the 1801 Act of cession unlawful because nobody has the power to make part of a state (Columbia) not part of a state.