Dear Editor,
I have been monitoring, with keen interest, the discussion on the Swains delegate pursuit of the right to vote in the House of Representatives. The recent Constitutional Convention in 2022, and the endorsement by the Secretary of Interior, now provides a pathway for the Swains delegate to vote in the House proceedings.
Nonetheless, there is an underlying issue that needs further discussion: Is the Swains Island Seat in the House of Representatives Unconstitutional?
The American Samoa House of Representatives has long included a seat for Swains Island, a small privately-owned atoll with a unique history. However, the legitimacy of this seat has come under increasing scrutiny, particularly in light of recent constitutional changes and the fact that Swains Island has had no residents for the past 20 years. The question before us now is whether maintaining this seat violates constitutional principles of representation and democratic governance. The issue is worthy of a debate.
A Seat Without a Constituency
Swains Island has been uninhabited for almost two decades, yet a representative continues to be appointed to the House of Representatives. This raises fundamental concerns about representation and the very nature of democratic legitimacy. Every other representative in the House is elected by popular vote from a defined district with an active constituency. In contrast, the Swains Island representative is selected by adult “residents” of an island that, for all practical purposes, has no permanent residents.
The Cambridge Dictionary defines ‘resident’ as “a person who lives or has their home in a place.” How can an elected official truly represent a people who do not exist in any meaningful, residential sense?
A Questionable Election Process
The method of selecting the Swains Island representative differs significantly from the process applied to other legislative seats. Unlike representatives who must win a competitive election through the general vote, the Swains seat is chosen through a process involving a small, exclusive group of individuals, who claim ties to the island. This selective process appears to contradict the fundamental democratic principle of broad-based electoral participation.
Moreover, during the 2022 Constitutional Convention, the delegates approved granting the Swains Island delegate the right to vote within the House legislative proceedings. That amendment was endorsed by the Secretary of Interior in 2024. Prior to that, the Swains delegate could only Chair and vote in committees. The fact that this representative holds voting authority, while lacking a true electoral constituency raises questions about fairness, equal representation, and constitutional validity.
Private Ownership and Legislative Authority
Adding another layer of complexity is the fact that Swains Island is privately owned by the Jennings family. Unlike other districts in American Samoa, which are defined by village and district public governance structures, Swains Island is essentially an extension of a privately held estate. This raises an alarming precedent—does private ownership of land justify exclusive legislative representation? If so, what prevents other private landowners from seeking a similar status? The notion that a private family could effectively control a seat in the House undermines the integrity of representative government.
Constitutional and Legal Implications
Under American Samoa’s Constitution, representation in the legislature is meant to reflect the will of the people. If a district no longer has a population, can it still justifiably hold a legislative seat? Given that representation should be tied to the existence of an electorate, the Swains Island seat may now be unconstitutional.
Additionally, American Samoa’s political structure operates within the broader framework of U.S. constitutional principles, including equal representation and democratic legitimacy. While American Samoa has its own governing system, it remains subject to federal oversight, and maintaining an unelected legislative seat may ultimately invite legal challenges on constitutional grounds.
Time for Reform?
The Swains Island seat may have historical significance, but history alone cannot justify its continued existence in an evolving democratic system. The people of American Samoa must consider whether maintaining this seat aligns with democratic values and constitutional principles. Possible reforms include:
1. Abolishing the Swains Island seat – If there are no residents, there is no constituency to represent. Eliminating the seat would correct this imbalance.
2. Merging the Swains seat with another district – This would allow those with ties to Swains Island to still have a voice without an exclusive, unjustified seat.
3. Requiring general election voting – If the Swains Island seat is to remain, its representative should be elected through a fair and open electoral process, rather than a limited selection method.
Conclusion
At its core, democracy is about representation and legitimacy. The continued existence of a Swains Island representative, despite the lack of residents and the island’s private ownership, violates both. In light of the 2022 constitutional change granting voting rights to the Swains representative, the issue has become even more pressing. Now is the time for American Samoa to address this constitutional inconsistency and ensure that all seats in its legislature are democratically justified.
Ignoring this issue risks undermining the very principles upon which representative government stands.
Signed,
Fia Iloa
