As a professional geographer I found this a very interesting discussion. You are quite right, though the historical nuances are somewhat more complicated. Nevada in part became a state because it had large silver supplies which the North wanted to have stronger control over during the Civil War. A local pro-Union government was very help…
As a professional geographer I found this a very interesting discussion. You are quite right, though the historical nuances are somewhat more complicated. Nevada in part became a state because it had large silver supplies which the North wanted to have stronger control over during the Civil War. A local pro-Union government was very helpful here. Similarly, in 1863 making pro-Union western Virginia into a state gave Washington better control of the strategic roads in that area. Politics certainly has always been an issue in creating or defining the boundaries of states. A good example was during the first half of the 19th century when slave and free states were equally admitted to the Union, thus keeping a balance in the Senate.
That was sort of the case with our last two admissions. I well remember discussions about Alaska and Hawaii, and it was determined that since one was Republican, the other Democratic, they would balance each other politically. There were other issues too, the main one was having “forward bases” that were firmly part of the U.S. during the Cold War. But citizens were learning more about these areas since the Pacific Northwest was starting to really develop economically and many people had visited Hawaii either in service during the war or for recreation with the improved air travel after it. Thus they were more in the public mind than they had been earlier, and their public acceptance was high.
An issue against Hawaii joining the Union was sheer racism, and unfortunately that would apply to the other islands and D.C. Today nobody in power will say this outright, but still…also, a lot of Americans don’t seem to understand that P.R. and the U.S.V.I. are really parts of the country with their inhabitants being full citizens. The same is true of Guam and the Northern Marianas—which were only separated by a historical accident and should be recombined—but don’t expect one in a hundred Americans to find them on a map even though they have 220,000 citizens. There it makes particular sense if the U.S. wants a Western Pacific state to face a rising China, but that’s a different political matter.
Economically there are some issues. The Northern Marianas has been used for sweatshop labor to produce clothing with “made in U.S.” labels, and there is the 1920 Jones Act, makes shipping to all the islands, including Hawaii, terribly expensive. Such concerns should be addressed at the same time as statehood and that does make things more complicated. (American Samoa is a flat out colony, with its residents having national, but not citizenship, rights.)
So there are good reasons why we could add four states. Call them Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, the Marianas, and Columbia. (The Constitutionally mandated “District” could still exist, but only for major federal buildings, monuments, public spaces like the Ellipse and the like.) But don’t expect any of these places to join the Union until a really open minded Democratic majority is in both houses of Congress, and there is a president willing to convince the country that it is a good idea. May that day come soon.
As a professional geographer I found this a very interesting discussion. You are quite right, though the historical nuances are somewhat more complicated. Nevada in part became a state because it had large silver supplies which the North wanted to have stronger control over during the Civil War. A local pro-Union government was very helpful here. Similarly, in 1863 making pro-Union western Virginia into a state gave Washington better control of the strategic roads in that area. Politics certainly has always been an issue in creating or defining the boundaries of states. A good example was during the first half of the 19th century when slave and free states were equally admitted to the Union, thus keeping a balance in the Senate.
That was sort of the case with our last two admissions. I well remember discussions about Alaska and Hawaii, and it was determined that since one was Republican, the other Democratic, they would balance each other politically. There were other issues too, the main one was having “forward bases” that were firmly part of the U.S. during the Cold War. But citizens were learning more about these areas since the Pacific Northwest was starting to really develop economically and many people had visited Hawaii either in service during the war or for recreation with the improved air travel after it. Thus they were more in the public mind than they had been earlier, and their public acceptance was high.
An issue against Hawaii joining the Union was sheer racism, and unfortunately that would apply to the other islands and D.C. Today nobody in power will say this outright, but still…also, a lot of Americans don’t seem to understand that P.R. and the U.S.V.I. are really parts of the country with their inhabitants being full citizens. The same is true of Guam and the Northern Marianas—which were only separated by a historical accident and should be recombined—but don’t expect one in a hundred Americans to find them on a map even though they have 220,000 citizens. There it makes particular sense if the U.S. wants a Western Pacific state to face a rising China, but that’s a different political matter.
Economically there are some issues. The Northern Marianas has been used for sweatshop labor to produce clothing with “made in U.S.” labels, and there is the 1920 Jones Act, makes shipping to all the islands, including Hawaii, terribly expensive. Such concerns should be addressed at the same time as statehood and that does make things more complicated. (American Samoa is a flat out colony, with its residents having national, but not citizenship, rights.)
So there are good reasons why we could add four states. Call them Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, the Marianas, and Columbia. (The Constitutionally mandated “District” could still exist, but only for major federal buildings, monuments, public spaces like the Ellipse and the like.) But don’t expect any of these places to join the Union until a really open minded Democratic majority is in both houses of Congress, and there is a president willing to convince the country that it is a good idea. May that day come soon.