Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The thing is that most people in the USVI including the governor and the US Congressional delegate are content with the status quo ... I am not even sure if the USVI has an organized statehood movement.
The USVI Democratic Party (the biggest party in the territory) is pro-territory
The USVI Independent Citizens Movement is in favor of a sort of "commonwealth" status similar to Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands ... an like Puerto Rico and the NMI the USVI would remain a US territory under this arrangement.
The USVI Republican Party is more or less extinct.
Ah, but you see the majority isn't in the least bit interested in statehood.
Pretty much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WIHS2006
The thing is that most people in the USVI including the governor and the US Congressional delegate are content with the status quo ... I am not even sure if the USVI has an organized statehood movement.
The USVI Democratic Party (the biggest party in the territory) is pro-territory
The USVI Independent Citizens Movement is in favor of a sort of "commonwealth" status similar to Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands ... an like Puerto Rico and the NMI the USVI would remain a US territory under this arrangement.
The USVI Republican Party is more or less extinct.
Not a Virgin Islander but have lived there...and I can't say that I would want the VI to become a state either.
The thing is that most people in the USVI including the governor and the US Congressional delegate are content with the status quo ... I am not even sure if the USVI has an organized statehood movement.
The USVI Democratic Party (the biggest party in the territory) is pro-territory
The USVI Independent Citizens Movement is in favor of a sort of "commonwealth" status similar to Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands ... an like Puerto Rico and the NMI the USVI would remain a US territory under this arrangement.
The USVI Republican Party is more or less extinct.
You're correct. As I mentioned earlier, the "independence/statehood" proponents are very few, pop up every couple of years and make a lot of noise for a very brief period but they don't have anywhere remotely close to a majority supporting them. They spend their quiet times joining with other groups from the other US territories and PR to push their agenda but it really means squat. This has been going on for the almost 30 years I've lived here and it'll no doubt be going on for many years after I'm fish food!
The issue with the USVI is a question of sustainable sovereignty. Puerto Rico appears moving in the direction of statehood as opposed to independence or maintaining the status quo. There are challenges for Puerto Rico to become a state, but those challenges apply to a far greater magnitude for the USVI. With a population under 120,000 and less than 150 square miles, the US Virgin Islands equates roughly to the city of Billings, Montana, but with only a third of the population density. As such, the USVI are, unfortunately, easily disregarded by the Federal government. The low population, and a falling GDP (under $4 billion in 2013) would imply that the Islands would likely not be sustainable as a sovereign nation, and thus true independence would be nearly impossible. Furthermore, these same factors mean that the USVI would almost never be able to exert any significant political pressure to initiate their own statehood movement. So realistically, whether the residents like it or not, the USVI have but two options: either become part of the state of Puerto Rico or forever be a territory. For my part, I'd rather see the USVI become part of Puerto Rico (or Puerto Virgo).
Also, the US territories operate at the discretion of the US Federal government, which means the admission of Puerto Rico as a state may bring the USVI anyway. When Nevada became a state (in 1864), the Federal government took land away from what was then the Arizona territory. Similarly, the same could be done with the USVI as an extension of eminent domain.
there not going to give 2 U.S. Senators and representation in congress to a territory of less than 120,000 people.....You have to have at least 2 million or more.
there not going to give 2 U.S. Senators and representation in congress to a territory of less than 120,000 people.....You have to have at least 2 million or more.
This was exactly my point. The US Virgin Islands have almost no shot at becoming their own state, and almost no prospect of autonomous independence. So as I said, the USVI either becomes part of Puerto Rico or will always be a territory.
Just fyi: The minimum population for statehood, so far as I know, is only 60,000 people, but that minimum was set to allow Michigan statehood back when slave states were admitted only when paired with non-slave states.
This was exactly my point. The US Virgin Islands have almost no shot at becoming their own state, and almost no prospect of autonomous independence. So as I said, the USVI either becomes part of Puerto Rico or will always be a territory.
Just fyi: The minimum population for statehood, so far as I know, is only 60,000 people, but that minimum was set to allow Michigan statehood back when slave states were admitted only when paired with non-slave states.
They are fine being a territory just like Bermuda is fine being a British territory under the protection of Britain.
U.S Virgin island becoming part of P.R. is like asking North Carolina to be part of New Jersey.....not going to happen because of language, culture and traditions. It makes sense if the VI had a large population of Puerto Rican immigration and P.R. control the local politics in the island but that's not the case.
I don't see it......I don't think the VI politicians would want to give political power to the more populated Puerto Rico.
fyi: Michigan became a state in 1837, that's 178 years ago! I'm sure 60,000 people was the standard to become a state back then.....Michigan today has a little less than 10 million. They would have more but the bad economy from Detroit have made many move out of state but that's another topic.
there not going to give 2 U.S. Senators and representation in congress to a territory of less than 120,000 people.....You have to have at least 2 million or more.
I guess they changed the rules. There are currently 14 states with less than 2 million people, 6 of which have less than a million.
Puerto Rico, and to a lesser extent Guam are the only US territories where status is a major issue and even in Guam the major goal is to attain a "commonwealth" arrangement within the Territorial Clause similar what Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands currently have. The Northern Mariana Islands did not become a US territory until the 1970s and the arrangement is thus much more 'modern' than say Guam or the US Virgin Islands.
The optimal solutions are statehood for Puerto Rico and incorporated territory with "commonwealth" arrangement for other US territories. Perhaps at some point the Territorial Clause could be revisited and modernized into a special kind of statehood-lite.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
