Guam’s Quixotic Quest for “Commonwealth”

In 1988, the Guam delegate to the U.S. Congress, Ben G. Blaz,  introduced the Guam Commonwealth Act. The bill died but was reintroduced in 1994 by the next delegate from Guam, Robert Underwood.

The proposal’s intent was to establish “the Commonwealth of Guam.” At the time, it was believed that a “commonwealth” could have a different political status than a U.S. territory. Puerto Rico had taken on “commonwealth” in its official name, and some Puerto Rican officials had tried unsuccessfully to convince the federal government to accept a new, more expansive, definition of “commonwealth.” Guam wanted the chance do the same.

Guam “commonwealth” champions would ultimately meet the same fate as “commonwealth” advocates from Puerto Rico. Today, the “commonwealth” concept has been widely disproven for U.S. territories.

“Mutual Consent” Falls Flat

As in Puerto Rico, the Guam Commonwealth Act included a mandate that “the United States agrees to limit the exercise of its authority” so that no Federal laws, rules, and regulations could apply to Guam without the “mutual consent” of the two governments.

As with Puerto Rico, the federal government identified the “mutual consent” requirement as unconstitutional. Each Congress can change the rules of the previous Congresses, and no Congress can make a rule forbidding changes by a later Congress.

Teresa Wynn Roseborough, U.S. Deputy Assistant Attorney General, concluded that the Guam Commonwealth Act’s mutual consent provisions “raise serious constitutional issues and are legally unenforceable.”

Roseborough went on to say that Congress “retains the power to amend the Guam Commonwealth Act unilaterally” and could apply the law to Guam “without the consent of the government of the Commonwealth.” She added that mutual consent provisions “would be misleading,” and that “[h]onest and fair dealing forbid the inclusion of such illusory and deceptive provisions in the Guam Commonwealth Act.”

Relatedly, Rep. Don Young (R-AK), Chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, wrote to President Clinton explaining that “[f]or most of the last decade Congress and the Executive Branch have passed the buck back-and-forth without responding to Guam’s proposal for a ‘Commonwealth of Guam.'” He forcefully added that “[a]t this stage in the process, the only thing worse than further dithering would be to make commitments on behalf of the Federal government that can’t be kept[.]”

Rep. Young cautioned that “the Federal government must never risk making a mockery of the decolonization process.” He stated that “[w]e would do just that by attempting to make less-than-equal citizenship and permanent disenfranchisement seem more tolerable through the legal and political fiction of ‘mutual consent.'”

In his response, President Clinton agreed.  He wrote: “I read your letter regarding Guam’s commonwealth status with great interest, and I share many of the positions you expressed in your well-reasoned analysis. I am aware of Guam’s aspirations for self-government.  At the same time, we must satisfy federal concerns at the policy, legislative and constitutional levels.”

The U.S. Constitution Applies to Guam; U.S. Laws Not So Much

The Guam Commonwealth Act also proposed  that the entire U.S. Constitution should apply to Guam, including the sections addressing states’ rights and U.S. citizenship by birth.

At the same time, “mutual consent” provisions would kick in.  Specifically, the bill sought to prohibit federal laws, rules or regulations from applying to the Commonwealth of Guam “unless mutually consented to” by both the United States and Guam. In other words, Guam would be able to cherry pick which federal laws applied in its borders.

Autonomy over Guam Defense and Foreign Policy

The Guam Commonwealth Act sought to give Guam control over its defense policy and foreign affairs. It would have permitted Guam to enter into bilateral agreements with foreign countries. The proposal gave Guam authority over its tax and trade laws, allowing the island to charge fees and tariffs except on the United States.

The bill also provided Guam with full power to expand and/or limit immigration within its borders.

The legislation further mandated that the U.S. stop using Guam as a “depository for hazardous chemicals” and required compensation for the people of Guam harmed due to “chemical, nuclear, or other hazardous materials” left by the United States in Guam or its surrounding waters.

Impact of U.S. nuclear testing on the people of Guam remains a current issue pending before the U.S. Congress.

Extensive U.S. Financial Support for Guam

The Guam Commonwealth Act provided for generous financial support for Guam, including the return of all taxes collected from Guam.  The bill called for federal benefits in Guam at a level equal to that of the states, as well as an annual federal payment determined by the Governor of Guam.

Guam and Puerto Rico

Consideration of the Guam and Puerto Rican “commonwealths” were apparently intertwined. As the Washington Post reported, “officials from across the administration called the [Guam] plan problematic; criticism came from the Justice, State, Defense and Treasury departments.  Among other things, officials worried that such a change in Guam’s status would set an unwelcome precedent in dealing with Puerto Rico.”

The Post went further behind the scenes and found that after “vigorous internal opposition,” federal officials “deemed unacceptable” the plan “to allow the island more authority over immigration, taxes, trade, labor laws and federal land,” and it was “not endorsed by President Clinton.”

The Guam Commission on Self-Determination, reporting after the Guam Commonwealth Act had died in Washington D.C., expressed hope that they would still be able to get the bill passed. “We believe,” they wrote, “that America is too great a country to keep the people of Guam as possessions forever, or to ignore our rights to consent, self-government, and self-determination.”

The testimony of Guam’s territorial Senator Antonio R. Unpingco at a U.S. House of Representatives Natural Resources Committee hearing on the Guam Commonwealth Act in 1997 was prophetic. “Is Guam’s quest for commonwealth realistic or are we just spinning our wheels as usual before an unsympathetic United States government?” he asked. “I think we all know the answer. No one is taking our quest for commonwealth seriously … and unless there is a major change in attitude, Guam’s political status will remain the same.”

There have been no attempts to change the status of Guam to “commonwealth” in the 21st century.