AMERICAN LEGION MAGAZINE 3.1.22
BY ALAN W. DOWD
It
all started when 13 British colonies in North America declared their
independence and founded the United States of America. The notion of adding
onto that narrow strip of territory hugging the Atlantic seaboard by welcoming
new states into the Union was a given for the Founders. They even wrote it into
the Constitution: “New states
may be admitted by the Congress into this Union.” There’s no limit on the
number of states, no geographic boundary, no timeframe—just a constitutional
invitation to expand. There are efforts underway to accept that invitation yet
again—and add more stars to Old Glory.
Growth
Spurts
Before we discuss
those efforts, it’s important to underscore how common this process has been.
Three states joined the original 13 during George Washington’s presidency. A
land surveyor by training, Washington advocated expansion.[1] Responding to news of Kentucky's statehood
plan, Washington praised “the sentiments of warm attachment to the Union…expressed
by our fellow citizens of Kentucky.”[2]
By 1823, there were
24 states. On the eve of the Civil War, there were 34. By that time, the nation
had expanded north to Maine and Wisconsin, west to Kansas and Texas, south to
Louisiana and Florida. In our nation’s first 183 years (after the original 13
states declared independence), Americans welcomed a new state into the Union,
on average, every five years.
None of these growth
spurts were accidental or unexpected. President Thomas Jefferson acquired the
Louisiana Territory, from which 15 states would be formed. While serving as
secretary of State, John Quincy Adams envisioned a nation “coextensive with the
North American continent.”[3]President
James Polk delivered on that vision, adding the Oregon Territory and vast parts
of the North American west to the Union. The war with Mexico would yield nine
states, including California.[4]With Oregon and California in the fold, the United States stretched from the
Atlantic to the Pacific.
Alaska,
acquired from Russia after the Civil War, pushed U.S. territory even further
west. Hawaii became a U.S. territory in the 1890s, as did Guam, the Philippines and Puerto Rico.[5]
Puerto Rico
That brings us to current statehood efforts. There are undoubtedly
political-electoral calculations in Congress for these efforts—as there have
been every time states have been added to the Union[6]—but
that’s a subject for another essay. The purpose here is simply to explore how
and where the United States might grow.
Puerto Rico is at the top of the list of candidates. A 2020 referendum saw 52 percent of Puerto
Ricans vote for statehood. That’s not exactly overwhelming support from the
Puerto Rican perspective. Moreover, the island is economically bankrupt.[7]And as political analyst Michael Barone points out, “Since 2010, some 550,000
Puerto Ricans, 14 percent of the population, have left for the mainland.”[8]That’s not exactly an ideal statehood candidate from the U.S. perspective.
Regardless of
those impediments, it does seem Puerto Rico’s status in that gray area between
statehood and independence needs to change one way or the other. Toward that
end, a bill was introduced in the House in 2020 empowering the people of Puerto
Rico to organize a convention to “exercise their natural right to
self-determination.” While that measure never gained traction, the statehood
referendum seems to have generated some momentum.[9]There are bills percolating in both the Senate and House that would establish
“a process for the admission of Puerto Rico into the Union as a state…based on
a majority vote of the people of Puerto Rico.”[10]
“We're gonna push for this now,” says Jenniffer González-Colon, who serves as
Puerto Rico’s resident commissioner (or delegate) in Congress. “It's a
bipartisan issue.”[11]
With 3.1 million people, Puerto Rico would be a medium-sized state—sliding in
between Utah and Nevada in population.[12]
Washington, D.C.
Residents of Washington, D.C., too, have voted on statehood, but the
outcome was much clearer: 86 percent of D.C. voters supported a measure calling
on the D.C. council to “petition Congress to enact a statehood admission act to
admit the State of New Columbia to the Union.”[13]
In April 2021, the House passed legislation—aptly numbered HR 51—providing
admission into the United States “of most of the territory of the District of
Columbia….on an equal footing with the other states.”[14]As envisioned by the bill approved by the House, this new state would encompass
“all District territory, with specified exclusions for federal buildings and
monuments, including the principal federal monuments, the White House, the
Capitol Building, the U.S. Supreme Court Building, and the federal executive,
legislative, and judicial office buildings located adjacent to the Mall and the
Capitol Building.” This downsized D.C. “shall be known as the Capital and shall
be the seat of the federal government,” according to the bill, which awaits
Senate action.[15]
Still, major impediments stand in the way of D.C. statehood. The first is
underscored by the contortions and carveouts in the aforementioned legislation.
To ensure that no state has control over the federal government, the
Constitution makes clear that there must be a federal enclave subject to
Congress for the seat of government.[16]Whittling down what is currently known as Washington, D.C., to a few buildings
and monuments, and then declaring D.C.’s remaining serpentine territory a state
would seem to create new problems. Equally troublesome for D.C. statehood
advocates is the reason why all those legal-geographic contortions and
carveouts are included in HR 51: Many constitutional scholars contend that D.C.
statehood—because it would impact the text of the Constitution and could muddle
the intent of the 23rd Amendment to the Constitution—requires a constitutional
amendment.[17]HR 51 tries to sidestep that by preserving some semblance of a federal enclave.
But that may not be enough to satisfy legal challenges. Moreover, given that
only 29 percent of the American people support D.C. statehood, passage of the
enabling legislation through an evenly-divided Senate—let alone passage of a
constitutional amendment requiring ratification by three-fourths of states and
two-thirds of Congress—seems unlikely.[18]
Another solution for D.C. residents—who are
currently represented by a non-voting delegate in the House and participate in
presidential elections via the 23rd Amendment—is something known as
“semi-retrocession.” Under semi-retrocession, U.S. citizens living in D.C.
would vote in Maryland’s Senate elections and for one of Maryland’s federal
House seats, thus giving them political representation on par with other U.S.
citizens.[19]
With 700,000 residents, D.C. would be a small
state, just slightly larger than Vermont and Wyoming.
Beyond P.R. and
D.C.
Candidates for 21st-century statehood
are not limited to P.R. and D.C. The United States could lean into this and explore adding
several stars to the flag. The
candidates are sprinkled across the Pacific, Caribbean and even North America.
As with P.R. and D.C., each faces impediments to statehood, each has its share
of drawbacks and downsides, and each has to address the issue of political
support for statehood within Congress and among its population.
USVI
With a population of 104,000, the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI) are located 1,200
miles southeast of Florida and 112 miles east of P.R. Like other U.S.
territories, USVI is represented in Congress by a non-voting delegate. Virgin
Islanders are considered deeply patriotic and supportive of America.[20]Yet statehood seems a distant aspiration for USVI, owing to problems it has had
developing a constitution that meets Washington’s approval. The most recent
draft constitution was returned to the island during the Obama administration.[21]USVI held a referendum on its political status in the 1990s, with the majority
voting to remain a territory.[22]
Guam and NMI
With its strategic location, a major U.S. military presence and population of
military dependents, Guam may have the strongest case for statehood among
America’s Pacific territories. The island, which sits about 4,000 miles
southwest of Hawaii and 1,500 miles south of Tokyo, has 169,000 residents and
is represented by a delegate in Congress. Polls reveal that 56 percent of
Guamanians support statehood, with only 10 percent supporting independence.[23]As with Hawaii and Alaska in the 1950s, there’s a solid national-security
rationale for Guam joining the Union: Guam as a state could serve as a potent
political deterrent to Chinese aggression. As Eyck Freymann, director of Indo-Pacific programs at
Greenmantle, argues, “The notion that Guam is ‘just a
military base’ makes it a more attractive target for U.S. adversaries that
would not dare target an American state like Hawaii.”[24]
About
100 miles north of Guam sits the Northern Mariana Islands (NMI), a collection
of 22 islands populated by just 54,000 people.[25]
Like Guam, NMI has
a delegate in Congress. Freymann
notes that “Mariana
Islanders have repeatedly voted to merge with Guam as a step toward statehood.”
Although those votes have yet to generate much forward momentum,[26]Freymann contends that
“statehood for Guam and the Northern Marianas would send a powerful message to
Beijing,” namely, that the U.S. is not
only committed to defending
the Indo-Pacific, but that the U.S. is part of the
Indo-Pacific and will not be driven out.[27]
American
Samoa
American Samoa, a cluster of seven islands and atolls in the South Pacific with
a population of 55,000, sits 2,500 miles southwest of Hawaii. It’s the only
U.S. territory whose residents are not considered U.S. citizens.[28]Samoan officials have mulled independence, statehood and continued territorial
status, though there seems to be little momentum for statehood currently.[29]In fact, Howard Hills, a former State
Department official who handled issues related to Pacific territories, notes
that “fiercely patriotic”
Samoan “nationals” committed to “preservation
of local culture and customary communal land ownership traditions” comprise a substantial segment of the territory. “Unlike the other
four territories,” Hill concludes, “American Samoa retains
strong social cohesion and political as well as economic
self-determination.”[30]
Canadian Provinces
When it appeared that Quebec might declare independence in the 1990s and thus
disconnect the eastern provinces from the rest of Canada, some provincial
premiers in the east discussed U.S. statehood.[31] More recently, Canadians in the western part
of the country have grown disenchanted with the government in Ottawa. Many in
these western provinces have an individualist, independent ethos similar to
that of the American southwest, and they’ve launched the “Wexit”
movement—mirroring Britain’s effort to withdraw from the EU, which was dubbed
“Brexit.” There’s even a political movement pushing for secession known as
Wexit Canada, with a core of support in Alberta.[32]If Alberta were to cut itself away from Canada, U.S. statehood would be a more
likely—and more viable—option than independent nationhood.
The Californias
We tend to think of the boundary lines and names of existing states as settled.
But that may not be true. In 2014, there was a
statewide initiative to split California into six states.[33]A similar effort dubbed the “New California” movement proposes dividing
California into a coastal-urban state stretching from Los Angeles to San
Francisco (which would retain the name California) and a
rural-suburban-agricultural state (which would be known as “New California”).[34]
Dating to the Gold Rush days of the 1840s, California residents and even some
members of Congress advocated forming the State of Jefferson in northern California.[35]Not unlike Albertans disgruntled with and disconnected from Ottawa,
Californians agitating for Jefferson today view the government in Sacramento as
out of touch with their interests and values. Jefferson’s prospects for
statehood may be slim. But the Los Angeles Times reports that some counties
have entertained proposals from Jefferson supporters. The Sacramento Bee notes that
“sweeping pandemic edicts out of Sacramento” have added new fuel to the
Jefferson statehood movement.[36]And it pays to recall that this has happened before: A
large swath of northwestern Virginia broke away to form West Virginia in 1863.[37]
If it happened in the past, it can happen in the future.
[1]https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/presidents/george-washington/
[2]https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/presidential-speeches/december-8-1790-second-annual-message-congress
[3]https://history.state.gov/milestones/1801-1829/florida; John Lewis Gaddis,
Surprise, Security and the American Experience, 2004, p.26.
[4]https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-mexican-american-war-in-a-nutshellhttps://www.britannica.com/event/Mexican-American-War
[5]https://history.state.gov/departmenthistory/people/seward-william-henryhttps://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/gp/17661.htmhttps://history.state.gov/milestones/1866-1898/spanish-american-war
[6]https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-last-time-congress-created-a-new-state-hawaii https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/gop-dc-statehood/2021/03/28/3d1b1b64-8e43-11eb-9423-04079921c915_story.html?outputType=amp https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/statehood-for-territories-may-boomerang-on-democrats
[7]https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/puerto-rico-files-debt-restructuring-plan-criticism-rcna375
[8]https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/statehood-for-territories-may-boomerang-on-democrats
[9] https://www.pr51st.com/puerto-rico-statehood-pros-and-cons/
[10]https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/780?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22%5C%22puerto+rico%5C%22%22%5D%7D&s=1&r=2
[11]https://abcnews.go.com/US/puerto-rico-votes-favor-statehood-island/story?id=74055630
[12]https://worldpopulationreview.com/states
[13]https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/dc-election-statehood-council-seats/96080/
[14]https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/51/actions?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22%5C%22statehood%5C%22%22%5D%7D&r=4&s=4
[15]https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/51?r=4&s=4
[16] Article I, Section 8
[17]https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/24/dc-statehood-constitutional-letter/https://www.heritage.org/political-process/report/dc-statehood-not-without-constitutional-amendment
[18]https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/february_2021/55_oppose_d_c_statehood
[19]https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11443
[20]https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-how-about-justice-for-the-virgin-islands-too-20210510-4eussleomngj3oc5p7ct4zjgdu-story.html
[21] https://www.britannica.com/place/United-States-Virgin-Islands/Government-and-society
[22]https://weather.com/storms/hurricane/news/puerto-ricans-usvi-american-citizens https://web.archive.org/web/20201128225332/https://www.pacificislandtimes.com/post/2017/01/06/Choose-or-Lose-US-Virgin-Islands-in-2017
[23]https://www.kuam.com/story/31747261/2016/04/Sunday/uog-poll-guamanians-prefer-statehood
[24]https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/10/14/counter-china-by-making-guam-a-state/
[25]https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_congressional_non-voting_members
[26]https://www.kuam.com/story/33785373/2016/11/Wednesday/could-the-community-decide-reunifying-the-marianas
[27]https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/10/14/counter-china-by-making-guam-a-state/
[28]https://www.doi.gov/oia/islands/american-samoa
[29]https://www.samoanews.com/local-news/future-prospects-american-samoa%e2%80%99s-political-status
[30]https://www.samoanews.com/local-news/do-americas-territories-want-equality-or-autonomy-so-far-american-samoas-priorityhttps://www.pr51st.com/citizens-without-state/
[31]https://buffalonews.com/news/frustrated-provinces-ponder-statehood/article_170ed1d2-d2c0-5c28-a3f1-023425b40c3e.html http://archive.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/gallery/RedrawingNewEngland?pg=5 http://faculty.marianopolis.edu/c.belanger/nfldhistory/NewfoundlandandConfederation-USA.htm
[32]https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49899113https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/wexit-canada-separation-conservatives-1.5638244
[33]https://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-six-californias-initiative-20140912-story.html
[34]https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-state-of-jefferson-activists-20180317-htmlstory.htmlhttps://www.newcaliforniastate.com/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/01/16/new-california-declares-independence-california-bid-become-51st-state/1036681001/
[35]https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/article246652603.html
[36]https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/article246652603.htmlhttps://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-state-of-jefferson-activists-20180317-htmlstory.html
[37]https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/01/16/new-california-declares-independence-california-bid-become-51st-state/1036681001/https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/on-this-day-west-virginia-starts-controversial-statehood-process