|
On 15 February 1898, the USS
Maine, anchored in Havana Harbor, was blown up under
mysterious circumstances. The incident gave birth to the war
cry, "Remember the Maine, To Hell With Spain." Four months
later, Captain Henry Glass, in command of the USS
Charleston, received orders to sail to Guam, capture it, and
report back when that mission has been
accomplished.
On the morning of June 22,
1898, two days after sailing into Guam's Apra Harbor without
challenge, Captain Glass most likely sent a message to the
Navy Department along this vein: "Mission accomplished. Guam
captured; enemy soldiers under my control. What am I to do
with the thousands of native Chamorros who are inquiring
about their status?" The response from Washington probably
went along these lines: "Civil administration is neither
your concern nor your domain. Proceed to Manila Bay. Report
to Commodore Dewey for duty in connection with the
Philippines campaign."
In the ensuing 50 years, the
Navy not only showed that Guam was under its domain, it
literally dominated the island in every respect. By any
yardstick, Guam had a rocky relationship with U. S. Naval
governance. Then, in 1950, Guam was "transferred" from the
Navy and was placed under the cognizance of the Secretary of
the Interior where it has remained for the second half of
this century. In those 100 years under the Department of the
Navy and the Department of the Interior , Guam has indeed
enjoyed the benevolence of the United States in terms of
financial assistance. At the same time, however, the people
of Guam have been repeatedly frustrated by the failure of
the United States to show a willingness to address seriously
Guam's persistent quest for a well defined, participatory
policy, with respect to its political relationship with the
Mother Country.
The Guam Commonwealth Bill
which has been before the U. S. Congress for the past ten
years has been characterized as something relatively new but
the history books reveal otherwise. They are replete with
references of attempts by the local population in every
decade of this century to improve our relationship with our
own country. Although Guam's designation was modified at
mid-century to "unincorporated territory" to replace
"possession", Guam is still NOT an integral part of the
United States.
While the term
Self-Determination has more or less been taken to mean
political Self-Determination, there are two other areas in
this category that have gone essentially unnoticed. The
first of these has been the conscious effort of our people,
the Chamorros of Guam, to preserve our language and culture.
This insures that we do not end up as a footnote in the
history books as an extinct specie. In this area we have
succeeded in achieving "Cultural Self-
Determination."
Similarly, Guam has attained
a significant measure of economic self-sufficiency while
gingerly picking its was through a plethora of inhibiting U.
S. laws and regulations, many of which were written for
other places at other times. Nevertheless, Guam has managed
to get closer and closer to achieving another milestone --
"Economic Self-Determination."
The enduring quest for the
part that would give us a solid foundation upon which to
build as we prepare to enter the 21st Century, however, is
one that is beyond the capability of the people of Guam to
accomplish by themselves --"Political Self-Determination."
This requires Congressional action and Congress has been
leisurely taking its time and has not shown any inclination
that it considers Guam's political aspirations a top
priority piece of legislation.
Understandably, the U. S.
Constitution was specifically designed to apply to the
States of the Union. Provisions were made to insure uniform
application of laws to all states and to territories that
are embryonic states.
Imbued with the notion of
preserving the Union at all costs, there prevailed a kind of
circle-the-wagons syndrome in the early days of the nation
punctuated by pronouncements that the United States was not
interested in aggrandizing itself with land acquisitions
abroad. That feeling was not shared by many influential
people who wanted to acquire strategically located islands
in the Atlantic and the Pacific for use as forward bases to
protect the homeland in North America. The Spanish-American
War provided America the opportunity to make the
acquisitions it needed and, as a consequence, acquired Cuba
and Puerto Rico in the Atlantic and the Philippines and Guam
in the Pacific.
Cuba and the Philippines
became independent around the turn of the century and about
mid-century, respectively. Significantly, persons of Cuban
and Filipino ancestry continue to comprise a very large
proportion of the immigrants to the United States.
Similarly, Puerto Ricans and Guamanians also migrate to the
U. S. mainland but they arrive as American citizens, having
acquired them through collective naturalization decades
earlier as residents of U. S. flag territories. These
resettlements from Guam and Puerto Rico come about primarily
in pursuit of opportunities and services not available to
U.S. citizens in their home islands.
It comes as a big surprise to
many that the provisions of the U. S. Constitution are
selectively extended to the U. S. territories (that is, not
all of the provisions of the U. S. Constitution apply to U.
S. citizens who are residents of the territories and not of
the States of the Union). This stems from the fact that
Congress has plenary powers which it applies to non-states
as it wishes, even whimsically, if it so chooses. These
powers are derived from the Territorial Clause of the
Constitution which was inserted to address the problem of
the Northwest Territories, those areas which the United
States controlled in North America but which were not
themselves states.
With the acquisition of such
small overseas territories as Guam, however, a change came
about when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the newly
acquired overseas possessions were indeed territories, but
different. Territories which were destined for statehood, it
called incorporated. Those that were not, it declared to be
unincorporated and, as such, were not an integral part of
the United States.
The plenary powers of the
Congress have been upheld over the years in the way that it
administers the off-shore territories. Unfortunately,
because the Uniformity Clause of the Constitution does not
apply to unincorporated territories, it has resulted in an
aggravating lack of uniformity in the application of U.S.
laws and regulations resulting in some territories being
covered by a Federal law, while others are not. In other
words, since the Uniformity Clause has been ruled as
inapplicable to the current territories, Congress has not
shown any misgivings about the lack of uniformity in the
application of U.S. laws to the territories, which laws
often defy reason and logic. The U. S. Supreme Court has
consistently upheld Congressional actions in exercising its
plenary powers in the past and can expected to continue to
do so in the future.
What Guam has been seeking is
an arrangement whereby its relationship with the United
States is based on a mutually agreed document that takes
into account the political realities of today and one that
is fair to both entities and without prejudice to either.
For those who are riveted to making no changes, the words of
one of the greatest of America's early leaders seem
particularly appropo:
"I am not an advocate for
frequent changes in laws and constitutions but laws and
institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the
human mind. As that becomes more developed, more
enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths
discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change
of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep
pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear
still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized
society to remain under the regimen of their barbarous
ancestors."
The author of these words
once prompted President Kennedy to tell a group of American
Nobel Prize winners who were being honored at a White House
dinner that there had not been such a collection of genius
gathered under its roof since Thomas Jefferson dined there
alone. We take great pains today to insure accuracy of
entries in the record of colloquies and verbatim accounts of
debates to establish clearly legislative intent behind
various pieces of legislation. The most accurate indications
of the thoughts of the Founding Fathers as they pondered
nation-building are found in their writings which have been
diligently preserved in our archives. Even in the days of
the American Revolution, Jefferson clearly foresaw the need
for changes in laws and institutions to go hand in hand with
the human mind as new discoveries are made and we become
more enlightened.
For a nation that has won the
respect and envy of peoples everywhere for its willingness
to commit its resources, human and material, to fight in
foreign lands in the name of freedom and democracy, on short
notice, it is woefully negligent in dealing promptly with
the affairs of its own citizens. For a nation that is widely
acclaimed internationally for welcoming immigrants to its
shores, it struggles trying to accommodate those under the
American flag who live in the land of their own nativity:
Indians, Eskimos, Hawaiians, Samoans, Chamorros. For a
nation that devotes so much money and energy in the well
being of nations and peoples around the world, it spends
more time and resources on fishes, lakes, insects, wild life
and rare animals, than it does on "endangered" Native
Americans on the mainland and in overseas
territories.
It is against this background
that one can begin to appreciate the tone and tenor in which
Guamanians present their case for a different relationship
with the United States.
A hundred years is a long
time in a queue, especially when you have to get off the
line from time to time to fight a war in defense of the
nation.
|