The story of the American Empire

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The reason for the disparate treatment of American Samoa is because of the insistence of their own leaders who fear losing power and prestige if American Samoa were treated the same as any other insular territory of the US.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The problem with Section 1 of your proposed amendment is that it would force the nearest State to accept those voters regardless of whether it wanted to or not.  Since Hawaii would likely be the recipient and Guam the largest (or even only) donor if Section 1 were in effect, given the recent historical politics of the two, it would make Hawaii more Republican than it has been presidentially.  (The same is true if the Northern Marianas were added to Hawaii, tho the effect would be lesser.)  Margins in Hawaii have generally been high enough that there would have been no change in any recent election, but that need not be the case.  Hawaii is small enough population-wise that Guam could fairly easily shift the margin of victory in Hawaii by a percent or two with its different politics.  Hawaii has had two elections (1960 and 1980) where a 1% shift in the vote from D to R would change who won the State and one election (1976) where a 2% shift would have changed the winner.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Padfoot, interesting suggestions. Why representation in the House but not the Senate, under your scheme?

Perhaps because it is at least theoretically doable.  The Connecticut Compromise is hardwired into the document.  It would be far easier to eliminate the Senate or reduce its power than to tinker with Senate representation. Changing representation in the Senate from anything other than each State gets the same number of Senators would require all fifty States to adopt the amendment.  The D.C. Voting Rights Amendment that failed to pass would have treated the District as a State, tho arguably the provisions that would allow it to have representation in the Senate could have required all fifty States to assent to become valid depending on how the Court ruled on the attempt to finesse the equal representation clause.

Given how little population the territories have, save for Puerto Rico, there is no chance they'd be given two Senators each, and there is no way of giving them Senate representation without treating them as States.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

You all view it very much from a legal/constitutional POV, without including the moral and political aspects of the question.

  I doubt anyone here would argue the moral right of these territories to self-determination.

The US has together with France kept far more of its old colonies than any other nation.

Ahem.  British Overseas Territories

I think at least West Samoa and Samoa should ideally be reunited.

As the 1969 referendum concerning merger of Guam and the Northern Marianas shows, mergers that seem logical to outsiders aren't always approved by those on the ground.  Still, if they want that, I'd be fine with that, but I'm doubtful that American Samoa wants to turn away from the US and towards New Zealand.

Guam and Northern Marianas are also too different from the US to be "American" in any meaningful way.

I fail to see how they are more different than Hawaii was at Statehood and I doubt anyone would argue against Hawaii being American.  Indeed, while it would be smaller than I would like for a State to be, I would not object to a combined Guam and NMI becoming the State of Mariana (or whatever other name they like) and the 51st star on our flag.  While the 1969 referendum indicates there likely would be some opposition to a merger (Guam rejected it for what can be seen as one of the most American of reasons, a fear of higher taxes), I'm reminded that the Oklahoma and Indian Territories were willing to accept a merger when given a choice of remaining two separate territories or becoming one single state.

As for the remaining inhabited US territory, perhaps we should return the Jomfruøerne to Denmark?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The US has together with France kept far more of its old colonies than any other nation.

Ahem.  British Overseas Territories

Excluded the British part of Antarctica that's only 27.500 km2.

That's still 10 separate territories with native inhabitants and doesn't include the Crown Dependencies. It also doesn't count the displaced natives of the BIOT, and counts St. Helena, Ascension, and Tristan da Cunha as 1 territory instead of the 3 they actually are.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The US has together with France kept far more of its old colonies than any other nation.

Ahem.  British Overseas Territories

Excluding the British part of Antarctica that's only 27.500 km2.

If we are counting this by area wouldn't your nation top the list?

If we are ranking by area, Denmark is a dependency of Greenland.