Ever since the United States purchased the Virgin Islands from the Danish crown for military reasons in 1917, the relationship between Virgin Islanders and the federal government, and the territory’s status vis-a-vis the rest of the nation, has been complicated.
That fundamental question of political status, often enshrouded in esoteric theory or imprisoned in the language of ideology, will be dissected and examined during a forum co-hosted by the United Nations Association of the Virgin Islands and the Virgin Islands Cultural Heritage Institute from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m. Saturday at the Virgin Islands Cultural Heritage Institute, located in the J. Antonio Jarvis House on St. Thomas.
he panel will investigate status in light of legislative efforts recently introduced in the US House of Representatives to foster political development in US territories.
One bill, co-sponsored by Delegate Madeleine Bordallo of Guam, Delegate Eni Faleomavaega of American Samoa and the U.S. Virgin Islands’ own Representative Donna Christensen, would fund educational programs in the three territories on political status options, according to statement issued by Christiansen Friday.
Another bill, introduced by Resident Commissioner Pedro Pierluisi of Puerto Rico, and recently reported to the House Committee of the Whole, would provide for a “federally sanctioned self-determination process for the people of Puerto Rico.”
Other Congressional proposals include a proposed constitutional amendment extending the presidential vote to the territories, and legislation for greater territorial representation in the U.S. House of Representatives, according to the statement.
Panelists discussing these proposals and other related issues Saturday will include Christensen; Dr. Carlyle Corbin, International Advisor on Governance; Tregenza Roach, former director of public education, USVI Constitution; and Dr. Malik Sekou, Professor of Political Science, University of the Virgin Islands.
Judith Bourne, President, United Nations Association of the Virgin Islands, will moderate.
While this writer expects to be in attendance at the forum, he is fast becoming tired of the kind of discussion he expects will take place. This point of view is based upon a series of past discussions that he has witnessed over an extended period of years on the same topic.
After a number of years studying, reviewing and researching the internationally recognized political status options so recognized, this writer has determined that free association is the most practical and viable option for the Virgin Islands.
Free Association creates separate sovereignty for the Virgin Islands while allowing for a negotiated political and economic relationship with the United States. Separate sovereignty allows for the creation of laws, rules and regulations that are of our own making, unlike the current requirement that mandates adherence to cherry-picked provisions of the United Constitution that are only applicable to us because the U.S. Congress through legislation that it adopted made those provisions applicable to us, and not because the U.S. Constitution on its own is applicable to us. Many of these cherry-picked U.S. Constitutional provisions made applicable to us have served us poorly and they have disallowed the enactment of local legislation that promotes interests that are uniquely important to the small territory that we are.
While we mull the future political status of our homeland, we are loosing traction in it daily, and being superimposed upon by anyone else entering into the boundary of the property of the United States known as the U.S. Virgin Islands. One would think that the same provisions of Federal law that allows the superimposition referred to previously would be available to those among us who seek the presidential vote at this late stage in our history, but it is important to remember that while the territory is owned by America, neither it nor the other unincorporated territories are considered to be a part of America. This is clearly an instance in which the equal protection laws are one-sided and they apply in one direction only, to the ever-lasting detriment to those among us who seek, but have not been granted, presidential voting authorization. The presidential vote is off the agenda of this writer. Instead, his interest lies primarily in self-determination as a Caribbean state in free association with the United States along with the concomitant issues of self-governance and a home-grown constitution.
Gaylord A. Sprauve