[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 145 (Tuesday, December 2, 2014)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1698-E1699]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
HISTORICAL RECORD OF POLITICAL STATUS ISSUE IN AMERICAN SAMOA
______
HON. ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA
of american samoa
in the house of representatives
Tuesday, December 2, 2014
Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to include, for
historical purposes, the following information on the political status
of American Samoa.
[Press Release, Oct. 2, 2006]
Faleomavaega Testifies Before Political Status Commission
Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that he testified
before the American Samoa Political Status Commission in a
hearing held on Saturday, September 29, 2006 at BYU-Hawaii in
Laie, Hawaii.
I believe the work of this commission is critical for
American Samoas political future, Faleomavaega said. I am
honored to provide input as the commissioners deliberate our
political status options.
In my opinion, before we get too far ahead of ourselves in
examining our political options we need to look inward to
resolve some lingering ambiguities regarding our current
territorial status. Currently, American Samoas political
relationship with the United States is governed by the two
Treaties or Deeds of Cession signed in 1900 (Tutuila) and
1904 (Manua). These documents provide no clear protections
for our culture, no clear guidance for our relationship with
the United States, and no expression of political unity
between our own islands.
To me, it makes sense that we should address these issues
first before we can develop a roadmap for our future.
Otherwise, unresolved questions will always remain regarding
our internal (Tutuila and Manua) and external (with the
United States) political relationships.
One source of ambiguity in these documents is that, in a
Samoan context, this was understood to be a treaty of
cession, rather than a deed of cession. In the Samoan version
of these documents, our chiefs used the term feagaiga, which
means treaty, but in the English version, the word treaty is
never mentioned. To our Samoan chiefs this treaty
relationship meant that Samoans would maintain a measure of
autonomy the terms of the agreement allowed the U.S. the
right to use the land and the harbor, in exchange for
providing protection against hostile nations. Viewed as a
deed, however, this agreement would have meant that the
chiefs were giving over the land as well as their sovereignty
over the land. The problem inherent in this ambiguity is that
a deed of cession offers our people something less than the
sovereign status that a treaty would provide, and in fact the
term deed implies ownership of property rather than a sense
of the rights and privileges of a sovereign people.
Another source of ambiguity related to these two treaties/
deeds is that they were negotiated separately between the
United States and each of the island groups. Because these
two instruments were two separate acts, by themselves they
did not unite American Samoa into one political entity.
Therefore, the fact remains that to this day, there is no
officially declared political union between the island groups
of Tutuila and Manua, only separate understandings with the
United States.
Furthermore, despite what others may have said was the
understanding in the past, these treaties do not provide for
the protection of the basic rights of American Samoas people.
While these two treaties have proven instrumental in
providing stability to the people of American Samoa for the
past 106 years, the deeds do not cover many of the most basic
issues of concern for our people, such as citizenship,
immigration, international trade and commerce, national
security, marine and communal property rights, or membership
in international organizations, to name a few. Rather than
being instruments that express some vague obligation on the
part of the United States to protect our culture, I see these
two treaties as asserting United States sovereignty over our
lands and our lives.
While the Deeds of Cession still stand as the basis upon
which American Samoa can claim a political relationship with
the United States, there is still some confusion even within
the United States government as to the effect of these two
treaties. A review of the U.S. Department of State listing of
U.S. treaties in force makes no mention of any treaty
existing between the United States and the island groups of
Tutuila and Manua.
Also, as a current conflict in federal law illustrates, the
U.S. Congress has its own problems in defining the U.S.
relationship with American Samoa. The U.S. Congress approved
these documents under the 1929 Ratification Act (48 U.S.C.
1661). Section 1661 states as follows:
Until Congress shall provide for the government of such
islands, all civil, judicial, and military powers shall be
vested in such person or persons and shall be exercised in
such manner as the President of the United States shall
direct; and the President shall have power to remove said
officers and fill the vacancies so occasioned. (emphasis
added)
Congress did not ratify the 1900 and 1904 Deeds until 1929,
and then delegated its constitutional authority to administer
the territory to the President, who transferred the
administration of American Samoa to the Secretary of the
Navy, primarily because the U.S. wished to establish a naval
station in Pago Pago Bay.
In 1951, President Truman transferred the administration of
American Samoa to the Secretary of the Interior. The transfer
of all administrative, judicial, and military authority from
the Congress to the President has not been amended since
1929. Notwithstanding this 1929 law delegating authority over
the territory to the President, in 1984 Congress passed a
bill, signed into law by the President (Pub. L. 98-213,
codified at 48 U.S.C. 1662a), that now requires congressional
approval of any amendment to the territory's constitution. In
view of this new law, several questions and problems are now
being raised. First, why does American Samoa now require
Congressional approval of any amendments to its territorial
constitution when Congress never expressly approved the
territorial constitution to begin with? Second, there are
several provisions in our territorial constitution that would
raise serious constitutional issues that Congress has not yet
addressed. In fact, it is questionable if Congress would
approve such provisions in light of the U.S. Constitution.
Unfortunately, Congress has never fully examined the
contradictions between these two statutes.
The question here is whether the territorial constitution
should be subject to congressional or presidential authority.
If the authority is congressional, the 1929 law should be
amended to rescind the authority delegated to the President;
if the authority is presidential, the 1984 law should be
rescinded and the approval of changes to our constitution
should be returned to the complete authority of the President
via the Secretary of the Interior. In either case, we have to
face the fact that our present constitution and our current
measure of sovereignty are nothing more than an extension of
the presidential power of the Secretary of the Interior.
As we discuss our possible options in our quest for a
greater measure of self-government, where are we now in our
relationship with the United States? American Samoa is
described as an unorganized and unincorporated territory of
the United States. American Samoa is considered unorganized
because since 1929 Congress has not officially organized a
government for the separate island kingdoms of Tutuila and
Manua under one organic act. Our territory is unincorporated
because, according to Supreme Court decisions regarding the
constitutional rights of insular territories, Congress has
never intended to incorporate American Samoa into the Union.
[[Page E1699]]
From 1900 to 1951, the U.S., through the Department of the
Navy, appointed military officers to govern the affairs of
the islands. According to the 1921 Codification of the
Regulations and Orders of the Government of American Samoa,
on May 1, 1900 Commander Benjamin Tilley, the first naval
commandant of Tutuila and Manua, declared that the
Governor, for the time being, of American Samoa is the
head of the Government. For fifty-one years, this self-
made regulation governed American Samoas course with one
appointed Naval Governor after another acting as the maker
of all laws and appointments with little regard for the
will of the people. During this period of martial law
there were no elected leaders.
With the transfer of power in 1951 to the Department of the
Interior, American Samoa experienced little more than a
transition from military to civilian rule. Civilian-appointed
governors still had full authority over island affairs. In
the 1960s a territorial constitution was drafted and there
began to be some involvement from the Samoan Legislature. One
unintended consequence of the law passed in 1984 requiring
Congressional approval of amendments to the American Samoa
constitution is that, whereas between 1960 and 1984 our local
leaders had extensive practice at constitution-writing, after
the law was passed this practice ceased. To date, the final
steps toward some measure of self-government were taken when
in 1977 the first Governor was elected by popular vote and in
1980 when American Samoa elected its first Delegate to the
U.S. Congress.
Given this background and history of our political
relationship with the United States, Faleomavaega offered the
following recommendations. First, Tutuila and Manua must
officially declare a union as one political entity or
governing body, thereby sanctioning its authority to deal
with the United States as we negotiate our future status.
This would address one of the major shortcomings of the
separately negotiated Deeds of Cession.
Second, I would recommend that a national convention be
called to deliberate the specific provisions of the 1900 and
1904 Deeds of Cession. As I mentioned, these Deeds do not
provide any real protection for our communal lands and
culture as our forefathers intended. I believe we need to
formulate a statement of principles underlining our desire to
either amend certain provisions of the two deeds or establish
an entirely new agreement with the United States. The
provisions of any such agreement should define our political
relationship with the United States, whether it is a covenant
status like the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands,
free association status like the Federated States of
Micronesia, Palau, and the Marshall Islands, commonwealth
status like Puerto Rico, or even an Organic Act such as the
one governing Guams relationship with the United States.
Third, once we have defined what American Samoas
relationship should be with the United States under the terms
of an agreement that is agreeable to both sides, the
leadership of Samoa should then call a constitutional
convention and organize a government based upon the terms and
conditions outlined in the agreement, not the U.S.
Constitution. Moreover, I believe this must be done as soon
as possible the longer this uncertainty surrounding these two
Deeds remains, the further we drift from our forefathers
treaty intentions and risk the erosion of our culture, of
becoming less Samoan and more American or, in other words,
Americans of Samoan ancestry. As it stands, we cannot claim
loyalty to the United States and at the same time refuse to
apply federal standards that are incompatible with our local
traditions and land-tenure system.
To summarize, Faleomavaega said, what I asked of the
esteemed members of the Political Status Study Commission is
that, before they become too deeply involved in examining all
possible future options, they focus first on clarifying the
original sources of authority underpinning our current
political relationship with the United States, the two Deeds
of Cession, as a foundation for a unified approach to
determining our political future.
The full text of the Treaties/Deeds of Cession, in English
and Samoan, as well as the 1929 and 1983 laws discussed in
the Congressmans statement are available on Congressman
Faleomavaega's website at www.house.gov/faleomavaega/
historical.shtml
____
[Press Release, May 24, 2007]
Future Political Status Study Commission Report Now Available Online
Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that a copy of the
Future Political Status Study Commission Report is now
available online for the public and particularly members of
the Samoan community all around the world to read.
``Many people in our Samoan community, especially those
residing outside of American Samoa, have contacted my office
to request copies of or to find out how to obtain a copy of
the Future Political Status Study Commission Report,''
Faleomavaega said. ``So, I am pleased to inform everyone that
a copy of the report is now available online on my website
and on the American Samoa Governor's website for anyone to
read.''
``I want to congratulate and thank The Honorable Tufele
Li'amatua--Chairman, The Honorable Tuaolo Fruean--Vice
Chairman, High Talking Chief Fofo Sunia--Executive Director,
and all the Commissioners and staff of the Future Political
Status Study Commission for the tremendous work they did in
completing this report.''
``Now that we have the report, everyone concerned should
take time to thoroughly review the Commission's
recommendations, especially our Fono and the Administration.
As I have stated before, I believe the next logical step in
this important process is for the Fono to conduct hearings to
discuss the different recommendations made by the Commission.
Only after such a careful review and discussion I feel we
should proceed to the next steps or implementation,''
Faleomavaega concluded.
____________________