Most of the current states were once territories of the United States, and — as we’ve seen in previous posts — most of them had to fight hard for statehood. First, the territories had to decide they wanted to become states. They then had to reach a large enough population, traditionally 60,000 permanent residents. They needed to write a constitution and get voters or representatives to agree to it, as well as having Congress approve it. The most essential step, of course, was for Congress to choose to admit the territory as a state.
Florida and Anti-statehood Movements
Choosing statehood was usually the easiest part. While every territory had anti-statehood factions, often focusing on the cost of supporting a government or on taxes, most residents of territories chose statehood.
Reaching the required level of population sometimes took time, and more than one territory finessed the question and snuck in with fewer residents than the traditional 60,000. Many current states required multiple constitutional conventions and several tries before they could get the approval of Congress for their constitutions. But the biggest hurdle to statehood was invariably Congress.
Anti-statehood Arguments against Arkansas
What makes Congress admit states?
A few states were admitted quickly. Alabama never held a referendum among the people, California never even got around to becoming a territory before being admitted, and Nevada was rushed into statehood so the Republicans would have another red state before the upcoming presidential election. But other states, including Hawaii, Utah, New Mexico and Oklahoma, had to fight for years or decades to gain statehood.
Anti-statehood Arguments against Utah
Often Congress argued over whether to admit a territory as a state based on their guesses about which way the residents would vote. These guesses were actually wrong most of the time. Hawaii and Alaska are famous examples, but Nevada, brought in specifically because it was a Republican state, has actually turned out to be a swing state.
Sometimes Congress focuses on the natural resources of a territory. This was the case of California during the Gold Rush, and it was also a major delaying factor for Arizona, which was unpleasantly arid for the tastes of the presidents at the beginning of the 20th century.
The reputations of the territories have sometimes been important parts of the debates in Congress. Texas and Colorado both were delayed because Washington thought they were uncivilized. Arizona and Arkansas were considered too wild and violent. Louisiana and New Mexico were thought to be too foreign.
Anti-statehood Arguments against Louisiana
But all the territories that became the lower 48 states had the advantage of Manifest Destiny. There was a widespread belief in the 18th and 19th centuries that the United States was intended by God to stretch from sea to shining sea — all the way across the continent from the Atlantic to the Pacific. This idea did not apply to Hawaii or Alaska, nor to the current territories, which are all islands.
Arguments against Statehood…for Alaska
Lessons for Puerto Rico
Puerto Rico has voted for statehood four times, with statehood winning every referendum during this century. Congress has not yet voted on any admission bill for Puerto Rico, but various members of Congress have supported statehood for Puerto Rico or spoken against it over the years. Since the U.S. Constitution does not specify the exact criteria or procedure for admitting states, there is no specific action Puerto Rico can take to ensure admittance. However, former territories which are now states have dealt with many of the same delays Puerto Rico has encountered in its fight for statehood — along with others, like famine (Kansas) and war (Florida, Ohio, Texas), that Puerto Rico has not faced.
The post Why Are Territories Admitted as States? appeared first on PUERTO RICO REPORT.
