Between Feb 1912 and now Jan 1959 a period of 46 years was the longest we went without admitting a new state. In Aug 1959 Hawaii became a state. We have now gone 41 years.
Will we break the 46 year record?
Yes, because 51 stars would look dippy on the flag. How would you arrange them? Three rings of 17? Like I said, dippy.
Yeah, and 51 concentric stars would make the smallest 45 or so practically invisible.
It doesn’t look like D.C. or Puerto Rico are gonna go for statehood anytime soon.
And international agreements have kind of put a damper on claiming the Moon.
Oh well, time to conquer Canada…
Not Quebec, please.
Maybe we can claim Cuba once The Beard kicks it… I always heard they have nice resorts and beaches. Let’s get it before the Lymies do. They already have the other parts of the Caribbean.
6 rows alternating 8 and 9 stars each wouldn’t look too bad…
So, whose job is it to design a new flag? Does Congress appoint someone to do this or is this subject to competitive bidding?
Re: the stars – Cece has already dealt with it. There have been designs all the way up to the low 60s that don’t look any odder than what there is now.
Re: the States – Essentially the USA has run out of “incorporated territories,” such as were Arizona, NM, the Dakotas, Alaska and Hawaii. i.e. there are no polities currently under the stewardship of Congress pending their becomoning populated and developed enough (developed in the general direction of mainstream America) to qualify for statehood.
Currently the situation seems to be:
DC: Doubtful that Congress would give up being the rulers of the District
PR: Would take at least another whole generation for a pro-statehood majority to develop naturally, absent any threat of being cut off from the USA. Until that happens Congress sits on its hands.
Guam, Samoa, USVI, NMI: tiny populations; none seeks statehood at all due to current favorable free-trade/inmigration/land-title legislation.
Possible Canadian disintegration: a plausibility, if the Provinces don’t decide to just form alterante federations. In any case, low populations would probably require consolidations (Columberta, Saskatoba, Atlantica); they would likely NOT accept spending any time as an unrepresented territory.
Cuba: These days, totally tasteless to annex a sovereign nation. (Anyway if after Fatigue Boy shuffles off, any Miami guy shows up in his power boat with his suitcases full o’ cash and proposes annexing Cuba to the US, I do hope those who had to stick it thru 40+ years in the island will send him back to us on an inner tube) This also makes it implausible to annex Baja California.
Splitting States: Could happen, e.g. SoCal from Northern Cal, the Keys from the rest of FLA. Would probably entail severe difficulties of divvying up long-term obligations.
I’d say the 50-star flag will make it to 2010, but there may be one or two more by 2050.
Wouldn’t it be unconstitutional for DC to become a state, anyway? I’m pretty sure that the relevant passage states that a district will be created, not belonging to any state, for purposes of the seat of government (or words to that effect).
This would only be a problem in the case of Prince Edward Island, which with a 1999 population of 138,000 would be significantly smaller than Wyoming, currently the least populous state at about 480,000; PEI would raise problems of fair representation in the House of Representatives. The chances of persuading them to join up with Nova Scotia or New Brunswick seem slim, given that they haven’t do so already; then again, this whole thing is likely a pretty academic exercise, unless maybe Buchanan gets elected president. The next least populous Canadian province is Newfoundland, which comes in at a solid 541,000, which is not out of line with a number of other U.S. states. New Brunswick - 755,000; Nova Scotia - 940,000; Saskatchewan - 1,028,000; Manitoba - 1,144,000; Alberta - 2,965,000; British Columbia - 4,023,000; Quebec - 7,345,000 (not that I suppose they’d want to join up anyway); Ontario - 11,514,000. Presumably the Yukon (31,000), NWT (42,000) and Nunavut (27,000) would become incorporated territories of the U.S.
A. We could have a Constitutional amendment.
B. A more creative proposal notes that the Constitution sets an upper limit on the size of the seat of the federal government (not more than 10 miles square), but no lower one. In fact, the D.C. used to be a nice even 100 square miles, but before the Civil War the U.S. gave Virginia back the territory it had ceded. (You can still see most of the old boundary if you look at Arlington County.) So, the theory goes, the current District could be partitioned, with almost all of it going to a new state, while the feds keep basically the Capitol, the White House, and the Mall.
Population wouldn’t be a problem.
Ontario 11,407,700
Quebec 7,419,900
British Columbia 3,933,300
Puerto Rico 3,857,000
Alberta 2,847,000
Manitoba 1,145,200
Saskatchewan 1,023,500
Nova Scotia 947,900
New Brunswick 762,000
Newfoundland 563,600
District of Columbia 543,200
Prince Edward Island 137,200
Compare this with these states:
Idaho 1,210,200
Hawaii 1,186,600
Rhode Island 987,400
Montana 878,800
Delaware 739,300
South Dakota 738,000
North Dakota 640,900
Alaska 609,300
Vermont 589,900
Wyoming 479,700
I haven’t heard anyone suggest we switch to Hawlaska or Montaho, so I think we can rule out Columberta and Saskatoba. As for PEI, I think historical sovereignty would take precedence. After all, some state has to have the lowest population.
Why do Americans always think that Canada will eventually join the states? … are you freaking serious? … I would rather eat my own spleen.
Personally I think the best bet right now is for BC, Alberta, Washington State, Colorado, and Oregon to form a new country. We would be a powerful nation of software development, natural resources, power generation, and deep sea port access.
Other questions which come to mind…
Which state will be the first (next) to try and leave the USA?
What are the possibilites of the USA buying more land. We bought Alaska from the Russians, could we buy Siberia?
Actually, Lazurus, I agree with you. I’m sure that most Canadians don’t want to join the United States. And even if Quebec did become an independent nation, I see no reason why the remainder of Canada would not continue to thrive. But stranger things have happened in geography, many of them within the last few years. Who would have predicted fifteen years ago that the Ukraine would become an independent nation before Quebec?
Little Nemo: Actually, Lazurus, I agree with you. I’m sure that most Canadians don’t want to join the United States.
Then why are 95% of them within 100 miles (160 [sup]o[/sup]C) of the US border. Unless they’re planning… AN INVASION!! :D:D
And even if Quebec did become an independent nation, I see no reason why the remainder of Canada would not continue to thrive.
Except that the Maritime Provinces would be cut off. Well, I guess Alaska’s been separate for all these years; I guess the MPs could survive.
Everybody take a really close look at Little Nemo’s list of populations…
Why are Puerto Rico and D.C. listed among the Canadian provinces? :wally (Sorry, I couldn’t pass up an excuse to use the Wally smile.)
Does D.C. really only have about 500k people? I thought that the 1990 census listed its population at about a million. Sigh I guess it really is one of the worst cities in America.
D.C. seems to have peaked in the 1950 census at 802,178–at that time, more populous than 13 of the 48 states. In 1960, it still had 763,956; DC still edged newly-admitted Hawaii (632,772) and swamped Alaska, which had a mere 226,167 people. Clearly, 1960 or so was when D.C. should have made the big bid for statehood–and, in fact, the XXIII Amendment, giving D.C. residents the vote in Presidential elections, was proposed in 1960 and ratified in '61. (Incidentally, that would be another route around the Constitution’s “seat of government” clause–another Amendment giving D.C. a Representative and Senators without technically admitting it as a state–I don’t know if they’d get a star for that or not.) It’s been downhill ever since; by the 1990 census, D.C. had shrunk to 606,900, ahead of only three states. By the 1998 estimated figures, D.C. was down to 523,124, edging out only Wyoming (480,907).
Probably the most expedient thing to do with the problem of adding a new state would be to simply merge North and South Dakota at the same time into a single state. Or we could give North Dakota to Canada.
That way we wouldn’t have to all buy new flags (unless the powerful flag producing lobby had their way).
Two other possibilities for state-splitting: the breakup of Texas, which has been discussed before; and the upper peninsula of Michigan becoming the state of Superior.
As for the city of Washington D.C., since the crime and poverty of the capitol has become a national embarrassment, rather than grant it statehood, I propose the following alternative:
Have the Federal government exercise the power of eminent domain and make all the land in the District Federal property. Disincorporate the city of Washington and expel the undesirables to Maryland and Virginia. Only people with permission could live there permanently, like the inhabitants of military bases.
Fool. Our devious plans remain unnoticed. Soon all of your country will be under our control. Next, we will open up Tom Hortons’ donut shops in California and crush Krispy Kreme and Dunkin Donuts under the weight of Canadian tyranny.
See http://www.standonguard.com for a full summary of our impending treachery.