@ashiitaka saidIt's true that this is an example of a genuinely apolitical reason for wanting the number of states to stay at 50. But - dare I say? - it's perhaps not the most important possible consideration in deciding the matter?
Because I like numbers, I would say that I like the fact that there are 50 states. I like the perfect lines of stars.
@teinosuke saidBut - dare I say? - it's perhaps not the most important possible consideration in deciding the matter?
It's true that this is an example of a genuinely apolitical reason for wanting the number of states to stay at 50. But - dare I say? - it's perhaps not the most important possible consideration in deciding the matter?
Rather obviously missing the message of that post.
@teinosuke saidI started a thread on the PR and DC statehood issue; we'll see if anybody can come up with a non-partisan reason why these US citizens should be deprived of any say in their federal government.
It's true that this is an example of a genuinely apolitical reason for wanting the number of states to stay at 50. But - dare I say? - it's perhaps not the most important possible consideration in deciding the matter?
@ashiitaka saidRather obviously missing the irony of mine!
Rather obviously missing the message of that post.
@teinosuke saidNo, I did not miss the irony.
Rather obviously missing the irony of mine!
You misinterpreted the original post. It was not intended as a political statement. Rather obviously, favourite numbers do not have any kind of weight.
@ashiitaka saidWell, but that was exactly how I interpreted it...
You misinterpreted the original post. It was not intended as a political statement. Rather obviously, favourite numbers do not have any kind of weight.
@no1marauder saidWhat about Guam? I guess it hasn't voted for statehood in a referendum, but apparently a majority were in favour of statehood in recent polls. How would it likely lean politically?
I started a thread on the PR and DC statehood issue; we'll see if anybody can come up with a non-partisan reason why these US citizens should be deprived of any say in their federal government.
1 edit
@teinosuke saidNot sure, but Guam's population of 160,000 is considerably less than any US State; less than a third of Wyoming's. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_and_territories_of_the_United_States_by_population
What about Guam? I guess it hasn't voted for statehood in a referendum, but apparently a majority were in favour of statehood in recent polls. How would it likely lean politically?
Interestingly, Guam recently joined Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO). https://unpo.org/article/22015
EDIT: It leans Democratic recently; its Governor and Lt. Governor are Democrats, the territorial legislature is 10 to 5 blue and their non-voting elected member of the US House of Representatives is a Democrat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_party_strength_in_Guam
@sh76 saidWhy on earth would you champion the environmental terrorism that is fracking?
I really don't mind reasonable tax hikes (like the one Biden has proposed), but what I really don't want is the Court to be packed, states to be added, fracking banned and wealth taxes.
I may not be as up on parliamentary procedure as you are. Why can't they get rid of the filibuster on a 50-50 tie and a Harris tie-breaking vote?
@teinosuke saidIf PR formally asks to become a state, that's one thing. But the Democrats trying to force it through to try to pick up 2 Senators is another matter.
Why would you be so averse to Puerto Rico becoming a state? Is there any argument against Puerto Rican statehood, except for nakedly political worries about its likely voting orientation? But even the Republican Party had the following in its manifesto in 2008, 2012, and 2016:
"We support the right of the United States citizens of Puerto Rico to be admitted to the Union ...[text shortened]... by means of a general right of referendum or specific referendums sponsored by the U.S. government."
As for DC, the whole point of it is that it's run by the federal government entirely. Why make it a state when it's run by the federal government anyway? If it weren't run by the federal government, it could simply be part of Maryland and/or Virginia as it originally was.
@sh76 saidPR just voted in a referendum for Statehood.
If PR formally asks to become a state, that's one thing. But the Democrats trying to force it through to try to pick up 2 Senators is another matter.
As for DC, the whole point of it is that it's run by the federal government entirely. Why make it a state when it's run by the federal government anyway? If it weren't run by the federal government, it could simply be part of Maryland and/or Virginia as it originally was.
Does that meet your criteria for "asking"?
@no1marauder saidPerhaps it's a formality, but given that it was generally known that the referendum was non-binding, the request should probably come via a legislative act. Giving up sovereignty is a pretty serious step.
PR just voted in a referendum for Statehood.
Does that meet your criteria for "asking"?
@sh76 saidPR has no "sovereignty".
Perhaps it's a formality, but given that it was generally known that the referendum was non-binding, the request should probably come via a legislative act. Giving up sovereignty is a pretty serious step.
1 edit
@sh76 saidIs that invoking the "Simon Sez" rule or the "No Pretty Please with a Cherry On Top" exception?
Perhaps it's a formality, but given that it was generally known that the referendum was non-binding, the request should probably come via a legislative act. Giving up sovereignty is a pretty serious step.
Of course, the referendum is non-binding as would be any request by the PR Legislature be. But the People of Puerto Rico have spoken.
EDIT: Does this count:
"That the Senate of Puerto Rico and the House of Representatives of Puerto Rico approved in final vote Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 67.........................................................and that the same reads as follows:
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
To request the President and the Congress of the United States to respond diligently and effectively, and to act on the demand of the people of Puerto Rico, as freely and democratically expressed in the plebiscite held on November 6,
2012, to end, once and for all, its current form of territorial status and to begin the process to admit Puerto Rico to the Union as a State.
http://www.puertoricoreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/2012-concurrent-resolution.pdf
It was adopted December 11, 2012.