Admission to Union was a long time in the making for Alaska
Published Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!
This is part of a continuing series the News-Miner has produced in celebration of the 50th anniversary of Alaska statehood. From today through Monday, the News-Miner will publish memories of that momentous event, a glance back at where we were, and a look ahead at what the next 50 years might bring.
FAIRBANKS — By the time Alaska formally achieved statehood in January of 1959, the topic of whether or not the United States’ vast northern territory should become a full-fledged state had bounced its way into and back out of national discussion numerous times.
President Harry S. Truman, an advocate of statehood for the territory, famously put the issue in the spotlight with his 1946 State of the Union speech. But it would take more than a decade after that mention before statehood arrived.
Congress first gave the OK for Alaska to have its own elected legislature 50 years before statehood, but Truman’s 1946 discussion set a tone that lasted through the decade-long debate, as continued advocacy from proponents in Alaska helped it crawl through Congress.
It helped convince figures like then-House Speaker Sam Rayburn to help push open the door to Alaska as the country’s 49th member.
Various theories on the momentum behind statehood suggest it might have gained its last needed push in the 1950s partly from expectations that a Democratic delegation from Alaska would help other Democrats’ effort to advance controversial civil rights bills, and partly from an interest by oil companies to improve oil leasing processes through a state-led effort, said Steve Haycox, a history professor at the University of Alaska Anchorage.
“Those changes made the difference. That’s what brought statehood to Alaska was those guys changing their minds,” Haycox said of congressional leaders like Rayburn and Johnson.
In the end, it was Bob Bartlett whom many credited with shepherding the plan past the finish line, Fairbanks historian Claus Naske said. The man who would become the state’s first U.S. senator forged a series of friendships with other federal lawmakers that Naske said proved essential.
Years of debate
The statehood topic had hung around since at least the years immediately following the Civil War, according to an account in “Alaska: A History of the 49th State,” by Herman Slotnick and Naske.
In 1912, Congress approved an elected Legislature for Alaska, one of the first measures of self-government for the vast and resource-rich federal territory, according to the book. James Wickersham, the state’s delegate to Congress, continued to stab at self-governance measures in Washington, and President Warren G. Harding visited Alaska in 1923 at a time when the federal bureaus that shared responsibility for the territory had clashed on different views about how it should develop.
Harding later declared, in speech given a week before his death, that Alaska was “destined for statehood.”
Later figures, such as Anthony Dimond, elected as delegate to Congress in 1932, and territorial governor Ernest Gruening sparked many points in the modern drive for statehood. Dimond pushed the proposal as a chance to solidify local management of natural resources like fisheries.
Bartlett, who became the state’s delegate in 1944, picked up the torch, and the following summer the nation’s Interior Secretary, said statehood for Alaska became his department’s official policy.
Alaska voters then delivered a key signal of their collective desire to achieve statehood in a 1946 referendum that passed by a solid 3-2 margin.
The rest of the country supported the idea, according to a public opinion poll taken about a year after the end of World War II, largely out of national defense interests, Naske’s book reads — this at a time when the populations of Anchorage and Fairbanks were growing exponentially due to federal spending on military bases there.
Slow march forward
In the years that followed, concerns about statehood continued to pop up from inside and outside the state and members of Congress.
The body resumed debate about the idea in 1948. Congress’ two-year session ended without a statehood bill making its way to the House floor, but Democrats — who generally were more supportive of statehood — solidified power in Congress that winter. Meanwhile, voters statewide replaced Alaska legislators who they felt had opposed efforts to create a state-administered tax system here.
A statehood bill made it to the House floor and passed in 1950. Debates continued in the Senate and in committee for several years. Detractors, including then-President Dwight Eisenhower, who was elected in 1952, felt Alaska was too thinly populated to support itself financially. Some suggested that if statehood was the answer, it should include only a portion of Alaska, focused on the population centers of the Southcentral section of the territory.
Key Senate hearings failed to produce an acceptable plan.
In the mid-1950s, statehood advocates discussed, and then organized, a constitutional convention to write a model guiding document for the territory.
In 1958, the Senate debated the statehood issue through the early summer before the chamber approved a bill on June 30, leading Bartlett to characterize the previous 15 years of struggle a “pretty successful campaign,” given that no state had been admitted to the union in more than four decades.
The deal gave the state the right to more than 100 million acres of land. Haycox, however, is one who believes the importance placed on statehood has been overstated.
Haycox said he thinks the successful drive to statehood extended an inaccurate self-image of Alaska as independent, a perspective contradicted by an obvious dependence on industrial and political forces outside the state, one evident by population out-migrations seen in the tough times such as the 1980s economic bust.
“It didn’t do anything to change the frontier rhetoric,” he said of statehood. “And, if anything, it strengthened it.”
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
Wait till you read the folowing!
"Professor Igor Panarin said in an interview with the respected daily IZVESTIA published on Monday: "The dollar is not secured by anything. The country's foreign debt has grown like an avalanche, even though in the early 1980s there was no debt. By 1998, when I first made my prediction, it had exceeded $2 trillion. Now it is more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid that can only collapse."
He even suggested that "we could claim Alaska - it was only granted on lease, after all." Panarin, 60, is a professor at the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and has authored several books on information warfare".
http://www.drudgereport.com/flashrur.htm...
If you are so unhappy with the people of the interior, and think that we are all ignorant, I hope that you are either including yourself, or packing to leave. And as for Russia taking back Alaska, Never happen, They couldn't take it then and they won't be able to now.
lol,..I provided the above information from one source. The article was in other "Russia" magazines. I think it's a classic Russia mentality, considering there are so many Russians residing, here, in the Interior.
I love Alaska. I made the trek here 25 years ago. In fact, my tourism marketing put Fairbanks on TV 20 years ago.
Before you dole out an ignorant accusation to someone, I suggest you do some research.
Back to the story of Alaska history, statehood....
I think one of the more interesting relics in Alaska history is the exploration for and development of Kennicott mine. If people don't know the history it is great reading. Biefly, in 1898 a group of explorers seeking mineral wealth, and funded (in part)by the Googenheimers of NY. ventured a dangerous exploration by horse and mule. They discovered the largest copper deposit ever at Kennicott.
Kennicott mine was a remarkable development. If you haven't made the trip, it's well worth it. McCarthy housed over 800 families of men, who worked the mine. Kennicott provided hot/cold water piped right to upper mangement residencies. They has a school, small medical clinic, and their very own train to Cordova.
Even E.T. Barnett, Judge Wickersham were part of the eventual success of developing Kennicott.
Another small part of the history of this great state, Alaska.
PS. I may assume too much but to me it sounded like you were making a generalization about all folks in the interior. And there are alot of Russians living here, some good, some bad, just like any other group of people. And they are here because they no longer want to live in Russia, If Russia tried to take Alaska back they would be the first ones to put up a fight. And what of talk of seccesion, it was an unfair vote then and has never been openly discussed since. It is a major issue to a lot of folks, let's put it to a vote. And then see where we stand.
One other thing PS I am wondering why you have to try to insult folks by calling them Kooks, I understand people Mock what they do not understand, but wouldn't that make you the ignorant one. Maybe before you try insult people you should go and take a look in the mirror. Or maybe you should at least try to understand where people are coming from instead of belittling them.
Look, I simply showed a story. Pachalsta! Pivia. Geeesh. I'm not against anyone. I like and enjoy people from all over the world.
I just thought it amazing that some professor from Russia believed that Alaska was on a lease option.
A little more on topic, the article has a small problem. Eisenhower wasn't president in 1950. He took office in 1953.
robb, I think that sentence is talking about the debates in the Senate, which didn't pass the bill as the House did. I'd agree that was a little unclear, and I've fixed it.
These statehood stories are wonderful. Thanks to the FDNM for celebrating our 50th anniversary this way. Keep it up! Can't wait for the next installment. N-M staff, do you have any historical pictures you could include?
The Alaska natives were here before 1959, therefore made Russia a crooked country who stole this land and made the United States a fool. They did not want to deal with large tribes in Alaska so they made a deal under the table with the United States because they needed money for the their post war economy. As far as Alaska natives are concern the land claims settlements still need another look. PEACE!
You may well get your wish Wisechief. Just ask Sarah Palin about the Natie Claims settlement act. oops,...shhh,...it's a Palin secret.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.