Statehood debates have consistently depended on the applicant’s anticipated partisanship.

Evidence

When Alaska and Hawaii’s admissions were being debated in 1953, Republican congressional majorities opposed statehood for Alaska because it was a historically Democratic territory; they supported Hawaii’s admission because of that territory’s more conservative political constituency. Likewise, in the ongoing debate over statehood for the District of Columbia, Republicans oppose admission and Democrats support it because of the predictable partisan impact that D.C. statehood would have on the congressional balance of power. — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 307

Categorization

• XREF: Supports the reader’s theory that institutional rules, once created, get exploited predictably by whichever party controls them at a pivotal moment.