USA States Flag & Organization

[Ashik Uzzaman]

Dear,

As far as my knowledge goes, USA is a combined entity of 52 states and its flag contains 52 stars to represent it. Now if a new state is added or one removes for any reason in future, we dont expect the flag to change, right? States are divided into smaller geographical or administrative unit called jurisdiction. I am not confident about the statements I made and couldn't sort it out quickly from google. :S

Would you help me clear up the states, flag and jurisdiction issue?

Regards,

Ashik
[ November 27, 2004: Message edited by: Jim Yingst ]

[Jim Yingst]

I edited your title to be a closer match to what you were actually asking about.

As far as my knowledge goes, USA is a combined entity of 52 states and its flag contains 52 stars to represent it.

There are 50 states. (Well, Massachusetts calls itself a commonwealth, but the rest of us call it a state.) 48 of the states are connected to each other in one mass, plus Alaska and Hawaii. Washington, D.C. is not a state; it is a district with a unique status. There are also a number of unconnected territories, which are not states. This article seems to cover the subject well.

Now if a new state is added or one removes for any reason in future, we dont expect the flag to change, right?

Yes, we would. It's changed many times in the past.

States are divided into smaller geographical or administrative unit called jurisdiction.

States are divided into smaller geographical or administrative units called counties. The term "jurisdiction" is much more vague and general, and not commonly used where a more specific term is appropriate.
[ November 27, 2004: Message edited by: Jim Yingst ]

[Ashik Uzzaman]

Thank you very much for the comprehensive response. It'll help me a lot.

Ashik

[John Smith]

JY: There are 50 states. (Well, Massachusetts calls itself a commonwealth, but the rest of us call it a state.)

Kentucky, Pennsylvania, and Virginia also like to call themselves a "commonwealth". Probably to sound more stately.

[Ernest Friedman-Hill]

My favorite piece of U.S. flag trivia is that at first there were 13 states, 13 stars, and 13 stripes. When the next few states were added they added a new star and a new stripe for each, up to 15 stripes. Somebody realized that this could get out of hand, and they decided to stick with the original 13 stripes, and just add a star for each new state. The flag that Francis Scott Key wrote about in "The Star-Spangled Banner" (the US national anthem) had 15, not 13 stripes.

[Ashik Uzzaman]

Then how many stars are in teh current flag of USA?

Ashik

[Jim Yingst]

50.

John, thanks for the info about other commonwealths. I didn't know that.

[Tony Alicea]

In order to throw a monkey wrench in an otherwise perfectly functioning machine (AKA this thread), Puerto Rico *is* a COMMONWEALTH (which is as much part of the USA as, say, Mississippi).

Possibly because its American Citizens (that's by birth) cannot vote in Presidential elections some [people] call it a Colony.

Our Congress and presidents through modern ages have correctly stated that it is up to the American citizens residing in Puerto Rico to decide whether to ask to become a full state or a complete independent country (with, of course, the corresponding loss of American Citizenship for new borns).

I voted with my feet 30 years ago: As an American Citizen by birth, I decided to live and work in the Continent AKA mainland.

The last elections held in Puerto Rico were held the same day as ours, a few weeks ago.

They (in Puerto Rico) elected, essentially, to stay as the colony that they are now. Go figure!

[Let's watch the language, eh? - Jim]
[ November 27, 2004: Message edited by: Jim Yingst ]

[Warren Dew]

Tony Alicea:

They (in Puerto Rico) elected, essentially, to stay as the colony that they are now. Go figure!

Maybe they like not paying Federal income tax?

[Jim Yingst]

Interesting - I see that "Commonweath" as applied to Puerto Rico and Northern Mariana Islands (and from 1934-1946, the Phillipines) is different from "Commonwealth" as applied to Kentucky, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. The latter are states; the former are not. Yes as Tony says, they're still part of the US, and people born there are US citizens. Unless Puerto Rico eventually votes to go fully independent, and even then people born there prior to independence would still be fully eligible as US citizens, unless they individually choose to give it up.
[ November 27, 2004: Message edited by: Jim Yingst ]

[Guy Allard]

I have been thinking about this all afternoon.

Ashik - I would like to point out something that my fellow US citizens have failed to mention.

There is

no such thing as

removing a state

.

Once you join, you are in, and you are not allowed to get out.

Proven, on the battlefield.

Freeeeeedom!!!

Regards, Guy

[Joe King]

Originally posted by Guy Allard:
Once you join, you are in, and you are not allowed to get out.

Really? What would happen then if one of the states, Hawaii for example, really wanted to leave? I suppose that one route could be a constitutional change to allow a state to leave.

What about if two states merged together? Its not likely, but also not impossible. In that case would the flag be changed?

[Frank Silbermann]

Originally posted by Guy Allard:
There is no such thing as "removing a state." Once you join, you are in, and you are not allowed to get out. Proven, on the battlefield.

Nonsense -- violence doesn't solve anything (or so I was told).

All the Civil War proved was that the North was able to conquer the South. A division would have been disastrous for the North, as they would have had no way of enforcing their protectionist foreign trade duties against southern-based smugglers, and they would have been inundated by freedom-seeking runaway slaves.

[Joel McNary]

Originally posted by Jim Yingst:

States are divided into smaller geographical or administrative units called counties. The term "jurisdiction" is much more vague and general, and not commonly used where a more specific term is appropriate.

...and just to confuse matters, they're called "parishes" in Louisiana, not "counties." The terminology is different, but the function is the same.

[Jeroen Wenting]

There's another state that's not calling itself a state and that's California. They are a proud republic.

People outside California often call it the Peoples' Republic of California because of their left-leaning attitude

As to leaving the union, I do believe it's possible though it's to the best of my knowledge never been done.
Alaska may well decide to at some point, there's a rather large movement for independence over there (according to some Alaskans I know).

It's not like the EU where a country (and we are on paper fully independent) is not allowed to leave unless all the other members approve and even then massive reparations may be required by the EU...
That is, when that illconceived "constitution" is put into effect soon that will be the case.

[Marcus Green]

Could you supply more information on the inability of a country to leave the EU. My understanding that there was a specific clause (clause 46) in the constitution that addressed this issue. I was not aware that this required the consent of all other members.

[Joe King]

I was under the impression that even with the new constitution, there is no direct financial penalty for pulling out of the EU. There would be other financial difficulties, as a country that leaves the EU would no longer have the trade advantages of being a member, but there's no requirement to ask other countries about pulling out first.

[Jeroen Wenting]

the constitution would require countries wishing to leave to file a request to that extent with the European comission who would then decide on the terms under which that country may leave. There is specifically no mention AFAIK of the EC being required to ever grant that request not limits on the conditions that can be set.

[Thomas Paul]

Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:
the constitution would require countries wishing to leave to file a request to that extent with the European comission who would then decide on the terms under which that country may leave. There is specifically no mention AFAIK of the EC being required to ever grant that request not limits on the conditions that can be set.

And what if they refuse to file a request and simply leave? Do the other countries invade them?

[Jeroen Wenting]

Once everyone has the Euro that's hardly an option...
I wouldn't be surprised if diplomatic sanctions, trade restrictions, etc. would be imposed.
The largest few members need the small ones as a source of income for their industry, they won't sit idly by while their client states try to regain independence.

The 2 major political powers in the EU now pay less than 15% of all money flowing into the coffers in Brussels and Strassburg, yet they draw over 60% of that money in the form of subsidies...

[Marcus Green]

"Once everyone has the Euro that's hardly an option.."

I don't understand what you mean by that, why is it not an option, are you saying that any two countries that use the same currency cannot be politically independent?

"I wouldn't be surprised if diplomatic sanctions, trade restrictions, etc. would be imposed."

I would be, how do you arrive at that supposition?

"The largest few members need the small ones as a source of income for their industry, they won't sit idly by while their client states try to regain independence."

Are you suggesting that the smaller states buy things from the larger states, and that the larger states have more industry?

"The 2 major political powers in the EU now pay less than 15% of all money flowing into the coffers in Brussels and Strassburg, yet they draw over 60% of that money in the form of subsidies."

Which powers are you referring to? Where does the rest of the budget come from. Why do the smaller nations join, is it because the want to subsidise the larger nations?

The proposed EU constitution has a clause addressing the issue of a nation leaving. If a nation did leave it would involve an agreement and financial arrangement. Any talk of "massive financial reparations" is pure speculation.
[ December 01, 2004: Message edited by: Marcus Green ]

[Joe King]

Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:

I wouldn't be surprised if diplomatic sanctions, trade restrictions, etc. would be imposed.
The largest few members need the small ones as a source of income for their industry, they won't sit idly by while their client states try to regain independence.

The relevant bit of the constitution is this:

Article I-59: 2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and
conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking
account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be
negotiated in accordance with Article III-227(3); it shall be concluded by the Council, acting by a
qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

This does seem to be about as clear as mud. While its all well and good to say that the leaving country and the EU will "conclude an agreement" it doesn't say what will happen if they don't. At the end of the day there's very little that the EU could do if one country left.

There's no mention of diplomatic or trade sanctions.