
allthebestusa++++
bestwishusa++++
brightfuturusa++++
welcomehomeusa++++
dear people welcome
Dear people welcome to garate states usa eu asia au nz ++++
www.america.gov
www.usa.gov
www.state.gov
www.states.gov
allthebestusa ++++
allthebestusa ++++
allthebeststates++++
www.Alabama.gov +
www.Alaska.gov +
www.Arizona.gov +
www.Arkansas.gov +
www.California.gov +
www.Colorado.gov +
www.Connecticut.gov +
www.Delaware.gov +
www.Florida.gov +
www.Georgia.gov +
www.Hawaii.gov +
www.Idaho.gov +
www.Illinois.gov +
www.Indiana.gov +
www.Iowa.gov +
www.Kansas.gov +
www.Kentucky.gov +
www.Louisiana.gov +
www.Maine.gov +
www.Maryland.gov +
www.Massachusetts.gov +
www.Michigan.gov +
www.Minnesota.gov +
www.Mississippi.gov +
www.Missouri.gov +
www.Montana.gov +
www.Nebraska.gov +
www.Nevada.gov +
www.NewHampshire.gov +
www.NewJersey.gov +
www.NewMexico.gov +
www.NewYork.gov +
www.NorthCarolina.gov +
www.NorthDakota.gov +
www.Ohio.gov +
www.Oklahoma.gov +
www.Oregon.gov +
www.Pennsylvania.gov +
www.RhodeIsland.gov +
www.SouthCarolina.gov +
www.SouthDakota.gov +
www.Tennessee.gov +
www.Texas.gov +
www.Utah.gov +
www.Vermont.gov +
www.Virginia.gov +
www.Washington.gov +
www.WashingtonDC.gov +
www.WestVirginia.gov +
www.Wisconsin.gov +
www.Wyoming.gov +
prying peace health trust education
allthebestusa++++
allthebestusa ++++
allthebestusa ++++
dear people welcome to bright futur usa us canada mexico brazil arjentina haiti cheli eu uk parish france frankfurt germany italy asia china india japan russia au nz africa southafrica ++++
miami 2plus1 dallas03 nba final year2011 june11 come on miami miami orlendo florida disney world alabama mississippi texas new mexico arizona california i10 ussouth westcost nfl nba mlb nhl chicago springfild gop dnc inp tea salt oil coal sun wind resorce reserve water land farmland business service open honest best right proper just siple basic need nessacity utility regidity reliability efficiency energy hwy auto cars trucks dia120 snp125 qqqq55 ftse5800 bse18000 ford13 hmc35 tm75 ttm20 nissan kia bmw uso40 xom80 cvx99 bp44 cop tso mro vlo teck2100 dsl wifi voip radio tv sports education health service msft23 intc20 csco15 emc25 yahoo google aol apple ebay linked group net web america usa us canada mexico brazil arjentina cheli haiti uk eu france germany italy turky greese irland spance denmark sweezland europe asia aunz africa japan china bejing newdelhi india banglore madrass bombay calcutta taminadu kerala karnatuka maharasra rajashthan gujarat ahmdabad gandhinagar baroda ms surat navsari valsad vapi antheri borivalli central kasmire kanyakumari srilanka pakafg bangladesh indineshia moscow russia melborn sydney austrlia auckland new zeland southafrica northafrica africa mandela mkgandhi mlk rosaparker mteresa dlama thank you america

The Florida education system consists of public and private schools in Florida, including the State University System of Florida (SUSF), the Florida College System (FCS), the Independent Colleges and Universities of Florida (ICUF) and other private institutions, and also secondary and primary schools.
Contents[hide] |
There are ten public universities and a liberal arts college that comprise the State University System of Florida. In addition the Florida College System comprises 28 public community colleges and state colleges.[1] In 2008 the State University System had 302,513 students.[2] Florida also has many private universities, some of which comprise the Independent Colleges and Universities of Florida. In 2010, nineteen of Florida's 28 community colleges were offering four year degree programs.[3]
The state's public primary and secondary schools are administered by the Florida Department of Education (FLDOE). FLDOE also has authority over the Florida College System. The State University System is under the authority of the Florida Board of Governors.
As mandated by the Florida Constitution, Article IX, section 4, Florida has 67 school districts, one for each county.[4] All are separate from municipal government. School districts tax property within their jurisdictions to support their budgets.[4]
Florida has hundreds of private schools of all types.[5] The FLDOE has no authority over private school operations.[6] private schools may or may not be accredited, and achievement tests are not required for private school graduating seniors. Many private schools obtain accreditation and perform achievement tests to show parents the school's interest in educational performance.
In 2008, about 55,000 students were homeschooled.[7] Neither FLDOE nor the local school district has authority to regulate home school activities. The government supports and assists homeschooling activities. There is no minimum number of days in a year, or hours in a day, that must be met, and achievement tests are not required for home school graduating seniors.
In the state of Florida, public primary and secondary schools are administered by the Florida Department of Education. Each school district has an elected Board of education which sets policy, budget, goals and approves expenditures. Management is the responsibility of a Superintendent of schools. As of 2010, school boards in 25 districts appointed their superintendent. These included the following counties: Alachua, Brevard, Broward, Charlotte, Collier, Duval, Flagler, Hernando, Hillsborough, Indian River, Lake, Lee, Manatee, Miami-Dade, Okeechobee, Orange, Osceola, Palm Beach, Pinellas, Polk, Saint Johns, Saint Lucie, Sarasota, Seminole, and Volusia. The remaining districts continue to elect their superintendent as a constitutional officer.[8]
In 2008, there were 619 secondary schools in the state.[9]
Education Week evaluated Florida's schools for 2010, fifth in the nation overall, with As for student testing, teacher accountability and progress on closing the achievement gap. It gave the state an F for per-pupil spending.[10]
The Center for American Progress, described as a "left-leaning think tank" stated that for half the states studied, it found no correlation between spending and achievement after allowing for cost of living, and students living in poverty.[10] The Center commends Florida as one of two states that provides annual school-level productivity evaluations which report to the public how well school funds are being spent at the local level.[11][12]
Florida's public-school revenue per student and spending per $1000 of personal income usually rank in the bottom 25 percent of U.S. states.[13][14] Average teacher salaries rank near the middle of U.S. states.[15]
Florida public schools have consistently ranked in the bottom 25 percent of many national surveys and average test-score rankings before allowances for race are made.[16] When allowance for race is considered, a 2007 US Government list of test scores shows Florida white fourth graders performed 13th in the nation for reading (232), 12th for math (250); while black fourth graders were 11th for math (225), 12th for reading (208).[17] White eight graders scored 30th for math (289) and 36th for reading (268). Neither score was considered statistically significant from average. Black eighth graders ranked 19th on math (259), 25th on reading (244).
In 2002, voters approved a constitutional amendment to limit class size in public schools starting in the 2010-11 school year from 18 in lower grades to 23 in high school. This was phased in by the legislature from 2003 to 2009, to promote compliance when the amendment took affect.[18] As of March 2011, 28 school districts had failed to comply and owed fines, which were to be redistributed to districts that were in compliance.[19]
Florida educators criticized former Governor Jeb Bush for a program that penalizes underperforming schools (as indicated by standardized tests, most prominently the FCAT) with fewer funding dollars.[citation needed] Supporters say the program's tough measures have resulted in vast improvements to the education system. Major testing organizations frequently discount the use of state's average test-score rankings, or any average of scaled scores, as a valid metric (for details on scaled test scores, see psychometrics).
Florida, like other states, appears to substantially undercount dropouts in reporting.[20]
In 2007, the state's school population grew by 477 students to 2,641,598, which was far below the projected 48,376 increase. School boards blamed rising insurance and property tax costs and the major 2004 and 2005 hurricane season, which have discouraged migration into Florida. Growth in counties such as Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, Hillsborough, Orange, Pinellas, and Duval counties was under state projections. Hillsborough County was the only one of these to have grown; growth in the county was projected to be 4,537, but the actual increase was only 536 students.[21]
Some school districts had backed up the start of the academic year well into August in order to complete the semester and exams before the December holiday break. In 2006, the legislature required districts to start no earlier than two weeks before the end of August.[citation needed] The state requires that each school teach for 180 days. Private schools may be open for more than 170 days.[22]
Florida does not handpick the best students to take the Advanced Placement exams.[23]
In 2010, there were about 60,750 foreign-born children of illegal immigrants attending public schools. The cost per year averaged $9,035 annually. The total cost of educating these children is over $548 million.[24]
Florida had a voucher system for low-income families from failing school districts from 1999 until 2006. In the final year, 750 students out of 190,000 eligible made this choice. The state paid an average of $4,000 per student as opposed to the $7,206 per student attending public schools.
The system was overturned by the Florida Supreme Court for violating separation of church and state, since some students used these for church schools.[25]
Between 2000 and 2008, school enrollment increased 6%, the number of teachers 20%.[26]
As in most areas, high schools compete in sports in two types of division. One, because of logistical and geographical constraints, is necessarily local. That is, large schools play small ones in the same area. A second division is based on school population and is statewide. Eventually, schools with the best records in this type of division will meet each other for seasonal playoffs to determine the state champion.
Competition is under the auspices of the Florida High School Athletic Association.
In the fiscal year 2007-2008, the Florida Educational Enhancement Trust Fund received $1.28 billion from the Florida Lottery, passing the billion-dollar mark for the 6th time in the lottery's 20-year history. As of 2009, the current lottery's total contribution since start-up is more than $19 billion. [27]
In 2010, the annual tuition. alone, at Florida's 11 public universities was $4,886, third lowest in the country.[28] The average cost total for books, tuition, fees, and living expenses, is $15,500 compared to $16,140 average for the country.[29]
In an attempt to save money, entering students may take nationally standardized Advanced Placement exams. In 2010, 67, 741 Florida seniors took the exam. 33,712 scored 3 or more, sufficient for advanced placement.[30] A total of 307,000 Florida students took AP exams in 2010. 64,000 scored a minimum of three or more; 43,000 scoring a four or higher.[31]
The State University System of Florida manages and funds Florida's ten public universities and a public Liberal Arts college:
In 2009, the system employed 45,000 people statewide. The budget was $4.1 billion for community colleges and universities.[32]
In 2000, the governor and the state legislature abolished the Florida Board of Regents, which long had governed the State University System of Florida, and created boards of trustees to govern each university. As is typical of executive-appointed government boards, the appointees so far have predominantly belonged to the governor's party. This effect has not been without controversy.[33] In 2002, former governor and then-U.S. Senator Bob Graham (Dem.) led a constitutional-amendment ballot referendum designed to restore the board-of-regents system. Voters approved. Therefore the legislature created the Florida Board of Governors; however, each university still maintains a Board of Trustees which work under the Board of Governors. During Florida's 2007 legislative session, Governor Charlie Crist signed into law SB-1710, which allowed the Board of Governors to allow a tuition differential for the University of Florida, Florida State University, and the University of South Florida. This legislation ultimately created a tier system for higher education in Florida's State University System.[34]
The Florida College System manages and funds Florida's 28 public community colleges and state colleges, with over 100 locations throughout the state of Florida.[35]
The Independent Colleges and Universities of Florida is an association of 28 private, educational institutions in the state of Florida.[36] The association reported that their member institutions enrolled over 121,000 students in the fall of 2006.[37]
Additionally, there are 20 colleges and universities that are not affiliated with the ICUF, but are fully accredited universities in the state of Florida.[citation needed]
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Enlargement of the European Union is the process of expanding the European Union (EU) through the accession of new member states. This process began with the Inner Six, who founded the European Coal and Steel Community (the EU's predecessor) in 1952. Since then, the EU's membership has grown to twenty-seven with the most recent expansion to Bulgaria and Romania in 2007.
Currently, accession negotiations are under way with several states. The process of enlargement is sometimes referred to as European integration. However, this term is also used to refer to the intensification of co-operation between EU member states as national governments allow for the gradual harmonisation of national laws.
To join the European Union, a state needs to fulfil economic and political conditions called the Copenhagen criteria (after the Copenhagen summit in June 1993), which require a stable democratic government that respects the rule of law, and its corresponding freedoms and institutions. According to the Maastricht Treaty, each current member state and the European Parliament must agree to any enlargement.
Contents[hide] |
| European Union |
This article is part of the series: |
|
|
Any European country could in theory apply to join the EU, at which point the Council would consult with the Commission and the European Parliament on beginning accession negotiations. The council would either accept or reject the recommendation unanimously. To receive a positive recommendation, the country must meet the following criteria:[1]
To gain membership it must:
In December 1995, the Madrid European Council revised the membership criteria to include conditions for member country integration through the appropriate adjustment of its administrative structures: since it is important that European Community legislation be reflected in national legislation, it is critical that the revised national legislation be implemented effectively through appropriate administrative and judicial structures.
Today the accession process follows a series of formal steps, from a pre-accession agreement to the ratification of the final accession treaty. These steps are primarily presided over by the European Commission (Enlargement Commissioner and DG Enlargement), but the actual negotiations are technically conducted between the Union's Member States and the candidate country.
Before a country applies for membership it typically signs an association agreement to help prepare the country for candidacy and eventual membership. Most countries do not meet the criteria to even begin negotiations before they apply, so they need many years to prepare for the process. An association agreement helps prepare for this first step.
In the case of the Western Balkans, a special process, the Stabilisation and Association Process exists to deal with the special circumstances there.
When a country formally applies for membership, the Council asks the Commission to prepare an opinion on the country's readiness to begin negotiations. The Council can then either accept or reject the Commission's opinion (The Council has only once rejected the Commission's opinion when the latter advised against opening negotiations with Greece).[2]
If the Council agrees to open negotiations the screening process then begins. The Commission and candidate country examine its laws and those of the EU and determine what differences exist. The Council then recommends opening negotiations on "chapters" of law that it feels there is sufficient common ground to have constructive negotiations. Negotiations are typically a matter of the candidate country convincing the EU that its laws and administrative capacity are sufficient to execute European law, which can be implemented as seen fit by the member states. Often this will involve time-lines before the Acquis Communautaire (European regulations, directives & standards) has to be fully implemented.
A chapter is said to be closed when both sides have agreed it has been implemented sufficiently, however it can still be re-opened if the Commission feels that the candidate has fallen out of compliance.
To assess progress achieved by countries in preparing for accession to the European Union, the European Commission submits regular reports (yearly) to the European Council. These serve as a basis for the Council to make decisions on negotiations or their extension to other candidates.
Once the negotiations are complete a treaty of accession will be signed, which must then be ratified by all of the member states of the Union, as well as the institutions of the Union, and the candidate country. Once this has been completed it will join the Union on the date specified in the treaty.
The entire process, from application for membership to membership has typically taken about a decade, although some countries, notably Sweden, Finland, and Austria have been faster, taking only a few years. The process from application for association agreement through accession has taken far longer, as much as several decades (Turkey for example first applied for association in the 1950s and has yet to conclude accession negotiations).
The following is an example of an accession process. This follows Estonia's journey to membership, as a recent example from the 2004 enlargement, however the speed of accession depends on each state: how integrated it is with the EU before hand, the state of its economy and public institutions, any outstanding political issues with the EU and (historically) how much law to date the EU has built up that the acceding state must adopt. This outline also includes integration steps taken by the accession country after it attains membership.
| Year | Date | Event | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1991 | 20 August | Independence from USSR | Recognition from EU in same month.[3] |
| 1994 | 18 July | Free trade agreement concluded[3] | |
| 1995 | 1 January | Free trade agreement in force[3] | |
| 12 June | Europe Agreement concluded[3] | ||
| 24 November | Applied for Membership[3] | ||
| 1998 | 1 January | Europe Agreement comes into force[3] | Aiding pre-integration |
| March | Membership negations open[3] | 6 chapters opened[4] | |
| 1999 | 17 chapters opened[4] | ||
| 2000 | 6 chapters opened[4] | ||
| 2002 | December | All chapters closed[4] and negotiations concluded | Final chapter (No. 30) was opened and closed at the same time. |
| 2003 | 8 April | Draft accession treaty approved by Estonian government | |
| 16 April | Treaty of Accession signed | ||
| 14 September | Referendum on membership approved | 66.84% in favour, turnout : 64.02% | |
| 2004 | 1 May | Acceded to EU | |
| 28 June | Joined ERM | Requires 2 years in ERM before euro adoption | |
| 2007 | 21 December | Entered the Schengen area | |
| 2011 | 1 January | Adoption of the euro | |
| 1 May | Right to limit migration from 2004 countries expires | Only Austria and Germany applied this, the rest of EU countries abolished restrictions before 2011 |
Enlargement has been one of the EU's most successful foreign policies,[5] yet has equally suffered from considerable opposition from the start. French President Charles de Gaulle opposed British membership fearing US influence. A later French President François Mitterrand opposed Greek, Spanish and Portuguese membership fearing they were not ready and it would water the community down to a free trade area.[6]
The reasons for the first member states to apply, and for them to be accepted, were primarily economic while the second enlargement was more political. The southern Mediterranean countries had just emerged from dictatorships and wanted to secure their democratic systems through the EEC, while the EEC wanted to ensure the same thing and that their southern neighbours were stable and aligned to NATO.[7] These two principle forces, economic gain and political security, have been behind enlargements since. However, with the recent large enlargements in 2004, public opinion in Europe has turned against further expansion.[6]
It has also been acknowledged that enlargement has its limits, the EU cannot expand endlessly.[5] Former Commission President Romano Prodi favoured granting "everything but institutions" to the EU's neighbour states; allowing them to co-operate deeply while not adding strain on the EU's institutonal framework.[5] This has in particular been pushed by France and Germany as a privileged partnership for Turkey, membership for which has faced considerably opposition on cultural and logistical grounds.[8][9]
| Applicant | Issued | Accession/ failure rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Albania | 28 April 2009 | (not yet official candidate) |
| Austria | 17 July 1989 | 1 January 1995 |
| Belgium | N/A | 23 July 1952 |
| Bulgaria | 14 December 1995 | 1 January 2007 |
| Croatia | 21 February 2003 | negotiating |
| Cyprus | 3 July 1990 | 1 May 2004 |
| Czech Republic | 17 January 1996 | 1 May 2004 |
| Denmark | 10 August 1961 | |
| 11 May 1967 | 1 January 1973 | |
| Estonia | 24 November 1995 | 1 May 2004 |
| Finland | 18 March 1992 | 1 January 1995 |
| France | N/A | 23 July 1952 |
| Germany, W.[10] | N/A | 23 July 1952 |
| Greece | 12 June 1975 | 1 January 1981 |
| Hungary | 31 March 1994 | 1 May 2004 |
| Iceland | 17 July 2009 | negotiating |
| Ireland | 31 July 1961 | |
| 11 May 1967 | 1 January 1973 | |
| Italy | N/A | 23 July 1952 |
| Latvia | 13 September 1995 | 1 May 2004 |
| Lithuania | 8 December 1995 | 1 May 2004 |
| Luxembourg | N/A | 23 July 1952 |
| Macedonia[11] | 22 March 2004 | official candidate |
| Malta | 3 July 1990 | 1 May 2004 |
| Montenegro | 15 December 2008 | official candidate |
| Morocco | 20 July 1987 | |
| Netherlands | N/A | 23 July 1952 |
| Norway | 30 April 1962 | |
| 21 July 1967 | ||
| 25 November 1992 | ||
| Poland | 5 April 1994 | 1 May 2004 |
| Portugal | 28 March 1977 | 1 January 1986 |
| Romania | 22 June 1995 | 1 January 2007 |
| Slovakia | 27 June 1995 | 1 May 2004 |
| Slovenia | 10 June 1996 | 1 May 2004 |
| Spain | 28 June 1977 | 1 January 1986 |
| Serbia | 22 December 2009 | (not yet official candidate) |
| Sweden | 1 July 1991 | 1 January 1995 |
| Switzerland | 25 May 1992 | |
| Turkey | 14 April 1987 | negotiating |
| United Kingdom | 10 August 1961 | |
| 10 May 1967 | 1 January 1973 | |
| * Applications to the European Coal and Steel Community, European Communities and European Union depending on date. |
||
The European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) was proposed by Robert Schuman in his declaration on 9 May 1950 and involved the pooling of the coal and steel industries of France and West Germany. Half of the project states, Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands, had already achieved a great degree of integration between themselves with the organs of Benelux and earlier bilateral agreements. These five countries were joined by Italy and they all signed the Treaty of Paris on 23 July 1952. These six members, dubbed the 'inner six' (as opposed to the 'outer seven' who formed the European Free Trade Association who were suspicious of such plans for integration) went on to sign the Treaties of Rome establishing two further communities, together known as the European Communities when they merged their executives in 1967.
The Community did see some loss of territory due to the decolonialisation occurring in their era. Algeria, which was an integral part of France, had a special relationship with the Community.[16] Algeria gained independence on 5 July 1962 and hence left the Community. There was no enlargement until the 1970s.
The United Kingdom, which had refused to join as a founding member, changed its policy following the Suez crisis and applied to be a member of the Communities. This was also due to economic reasons; Britain was surprised at the success of the EEC and failed to secure a free trade deal with it. British growth was sluggish as most of its trade was with its former empire when the greatest increases in world trade was between industrialised countries (such as within the EEC).[7] The UK and US were also concerned about France attempting to usurp US leadership in Europe and the US encouraged the UK to join in order to counterbalance French influence. Other EEC members were also inclined to British membership on those grounds, and why France was against it. French President Charles de Gaulle also feared Britain's US influence and vetoed British membership.[7]
Once de Gaulle had left office, the door to enlargement was once again opened. The EEC economy had also slowed down and British membership was seen as a way to revitalise the community.[7] Only after a 12-hour talk between British Prime Minister Edward Heath and French President Georges Pompidou took place did Britain's third application succeed.[17] After Britain was accepted Prime Minister Edward Heath said:
"For my part, I have no doubt at all that the discussions which we have had will prove of real and lasting benefit, not only to Britain and France, but to Europe as a whole."[17]
As part of the deal for British entry, France agreed to allow the EEC its own monetary resources. However France made that concession only as Britain's small agriculture sector would ensure that Britain would be a net contributor to the CAP dominated EEC budget.[7] Applying together with the UK, as on the previous occasions, were Denmark, Ireland, and Norway.[18] These countries were so economically linked to the UK that they considered they could not stay out of the EEC if the UK went in.[7] However the Norwegian government lost a national referendum on membership and hence did not accede with the others on 1 January 1973. Gibraltar, a British overseas territory, did not join the Community with the United Kingdom at this point, which led to further discussion with Spain about the international status of Gibraltar.
The next enlargement would occur for different reasons. The 1970s also saw Greece, Spain, and Portugal emerge from dictatorship. These countries desired to consolidate their new democratic systems by binding themselves into the EEC. Equally, the EEC was unsure about which way these countries were heading and wanted to ensure stability along its southern borders.[7] However François Mitterrand initially opposed their membership fearing they were not ready and it would water the community down to a free trade area.[6] Greece joined the EU in 1981 and the two Iberian countries in 1986.
The year 1985, however, saw the only time a territory had voted to leave the Community, when Greenland was granted home rule by Denmark and the territory used its new powers and voted to withdraw from the Community (See member state territories).
Morocco and Turkey applied for membership in 1987. Morocco's application was turned down as it was not considered European, while Turkey's application was considered eligible on the basis of the 1963 Ankara Association Agreement, but the opinion of the Commission on the possible candidate status was by then negative. Turkey received candidate status only in 1999 and began official membership negotiations in 2004. Currently, 11 of the 35 chapters have been opened with Turkey (with 1 already closed)[19]
After the 1970s Europe experienced a downturn which led to leaders launching of the Single European Act which set to create a single market by 1992. The effect of this was that EFTA states found it harder to export to the EEC and businesses (including large EFTA corporations such as Volvo) wished to relocate within the new single market making the downturn worse for EFTA. EFTA states began to discuss closer links with the EEC despite its domestic unpopularity.[20] Combined with this 1989 removed another major obstacle to the membership of EFTA countries in the EEC. Austria, Finland and Sweden were neutral in the Cold War so membership of an organisation developing a common foreign and security policy would be incompatible with that. As that obstacle was removed, the desire to pursue membership grew stronger.[20] The end of the Cold War also saw, on 3 October 1990, the reunification of East and West Germany. Hence East Germany became part of the Community in the new reunified Germany (not increasing the number of states).
The Community later became the European Union in 1993 by virtue of the Maastricht Treaty and established standards for new entrants so their suitability could be judged. These Copenhagen criteria stated in 1993 that a country must be a democracy, operate a free market, and be willing to adopt the entire body of EU law already agreed upon. Also in 1993 the European Economic Area was established with the EFTA states except Switzerland. Most of the new EEA states pursued full EU membership as the EEA did not sufficiently satisfy the needs of their export based corporations. The EU has also preferred these states to integrate via the EEA rather than full membership as the EEC wished to pursue monetary integration and did not wish for another round of enlargement to occupy their attention. However with the EEA's credibility dented following rejection by businesses and Switzerland, the EU agreed with full membership. This was more readily accepted with the prospect of poorer eastern European countries wishing to join; contributions from richer countries would help balance the EU budget.[20] On 1 January 1995 Austria, Finland, and Sweden acceded to the EU marking its fourth enlargement. The Norwegian government lost a second national referendum on membership.
As with the Mediterranean countries in the 1980s, the former communist countries in Central and Eastern Europe had just emerged from dictatorship and wanted to consolidate their new democracies. They also wanted to join the project of European integration and ensure they did not fall back into the Russian sphere of influence. The EU, and NATO, offered a guarantee of this and the EU was also seen as vital to ensuring the economic success of those countries. The EU's desire to accept these countries' membership applications was however less than rapid. The collapse of communism came quickly and was not anticipated. The EU struggled to deal with the sudden reunification of Germany with the addition of its poorer 17 million people and, while keeping its monetary union project on track, it was still at that early stage pointing the EFTA countries in the direction of the EEA rather than full membership.[21]
The former communist states persisted and eventually the above mentioned issues were cleared. The US also pressured the EU to offer membership as a temporary guarantee; it feared expanding NATO too rapidly for fear of frightening Russia. Although eventually trying to limit the number of members, and after encouragement from the US, the EU pursued talks with ten countries and a change of mind from Cyprus and Malta helped to offset slightly the influx of large poor member states from the east.[21]
In the end, eight Central and Eastern European countries (Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia), plus two Mediterranean countries (Malta and Cyprus) were able to join on 1 May 2004. This was the largest single enlargement in terms of people, landmass and number of countries, though not in terms of GDP.[22] The less developed nature of these countries was of concern to some of the older member states, who placed temporary restrictions on the rights of work of the citizens of these new eastern states to their countries. The movement westward of some of the labour force of the newly acceded countries that occurred in the aftermath of the enlargement initially spawned clichés among the public opinion and media of some western countries (such as the "Polish plumber"), despite the generally conceded benefit to the economies concerned.[23]
Following this Romania and Bulgaria, though were deemed initially as not fully ready by the Commission to join in 2004, acceded nevertheless on 1 January 2007. These, like the countries joining in 2004, faced a series of restrictions as to their citizens not fully enjoying working rights on the territory of some of the older EU members for a period up to seven years of their membership.
| # | Official Name | Date | Community Countries and OMR | Associated territories | Excluded territories |
| 1 | ECSC Foundation | 23.7.1952 | Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, France, Saarland, Italy, West Germany, West Berlin [24] | Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Tunis, Morocco, Guinea, French Cameroon, Togo, Mali, Senegal, Madagascar, DR Congo, Italian Somaliland, Benin, Niger, Upper Volta, Ivory Coast, Chad, Central African Republic, Congo, Gabon, Mauritania, Burundi, Rwanda, Netherlands New Guinea, Algeria, Comoros, Suriname, French Somaliland, French-administration of Vanuatu,[25] West Berlin,[24] Réunion, French Guiana, Martinique, Guadeloupe, Mayotte, St.Pierre and Miquelon, Wallis and Futuna, French Polynesia, New Caledonia, French Southern and Antarctic Lands, Scattered islands in the Indian Ocean, Netherlands Antilles | |
| 1953–1957 | the above, Saarland joined West Germany | the above without the newly independent: Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Tunis, Morocco | |||
| 2 | EEC and EURATOM Foundation | 1.1.1958 | the above, Algeria, Réunion, French Guiana, Martinique, Guadeloupe | Guinea, French Cameroon, Togo, Mali, Senegal, Madagascar, DR Congo, Italian Somaliland, Benin, Niger, Upper Volta, Ivory Coast, Chad, Central African Republic, Congo, Gabon, Mauritania, Burundi, Rwanda, Netherlands New Guinea, Comoros, French Somaliland, Mayotte, St. Pierre and Miquelon, Wallis and Futuna, French Polynesia, New Caledonia, French Southern and Antarctic Lands, Scattered islands in the Indian Ocean | Suriname, Netherlands Antilles, West Berlin[24] |
| 1958–1962 | the above | the above, without the newly independent: Guinea, French Cameroon, Togo, Mali, Senegal, Madagascar, DR Congo, Italian Somaliland, Benin, Niger, Upper Volta, Ivory Coast, Chad, Central African Republic, Congo, Gabon, Mauritania, Burundi, Rwanda, Netherlands New Guinea | the above | ||
| 3.7.1962 | the above, without the newly independent: Algeria | the above | the above | ||
| 1.9.1962 | the above | the above, with Suriname[26] | the above, without Suriname | ||
| Netherlands Antilles Association Convention[27] | 1.10.1964 | the above | the above, with the Netherlands Antilles | the above, without the Netherlands Antilles | |
| 3 | First Enlargement | 1.1.1973 | the above, Ireland, United Kingdom, Gibraltar, Denmark, Greenland | the above, Bahamas, Grenada, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Dominica, St. Lucia, Kiribati, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Vanuatu,[25] Belize, Antigua and Barbuda, St.Kitts and Nevis, Brunei, St. Helena, Pitcairn Islands, Falkland Islands, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands, British Antarctic Territory, British Indian Ocean Territory, Anguilla, Montserrat, British Virgin Islands, Turks and Caicos Islands, Cayman Islands, Bermuda | the above, Faroe Islands, Akrotiri and Dhekelia, Isle of Man, Jersey, Guernsey, Zimbabwe, Hong Kong |
| 1973–1980 | the above | the above without the newly independent: Bahamas, Grenada, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Suriname, Tuvalu, Dominica, St. Lucia, Kiribati, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Vanuatu, Comoros, French Somaliland | the above without the newly independent: Zimbabwe | ||
| 4 | Second Enlargement | 1.1.1981 | the above, Greece | the above | the above |
| 1981–1984 | the above | the above without the newly independent: Belize, Antigua and Barbuda, St. Kitts and Nevis, Brunei | the above | ||
| 1.1.1985 | the above without Greenland | the above, Greenland | the above | ||
| 5 | Third Enlargement | 1.1.1986 | the above, Spain, Portugal, Azores, Madeira, Plazas de soberanía | the above, with Aruba, formerly part of the Netherlands Antilles[28][29] | the above, Macau, East Timor |
| 3.10.1990 | the above, East Germany and West Berlin join into Germany | the above | the above without West Berlin | ||
| 6 | Fourth Enlargement | 1.1.1995 | the above, Austria, Sweden, Finland | the above | the above |
| 1.7.1997 | the above | the above | the above, without Hong Kong, transferred to China | ||
| 7 | 1.5.1999 | the above, Scattered islands in the Indian Ocean[30] | the above, without Scattered islands in the Indian Ocean | the above | |
| 20.12.1999 | the above | the above | the above, without Macau, transferred to China | ||
| 20.5.2002 | the above | the above | the above, without the newly independent East Timor | ||
| 8 | Fifth Enlargement | 1.5.2004 | the above, Malta, Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Hungary, Akrotiri and Dhekelia[31] | the above | the above without Akrotiri and Dhekelia[31] |
| 9 | 1.1.2007 | the above, Bulgaria, Romania | the above | the above | |
| 10 | 22.2.2007[32] | the above, Clipperton, without Scattered islands in the Indian Ocean | the above, Scattered islands in the Indian Ocean, without Clipperton | the above | |
| 10.10.10 | the above | the above, without the now-dissolved Netherlands Antilles, with Curaçao, Sint Maarten, Bonaire, Sint Eustatius, Saba[29] | the above | ||
| 31.3.11 | the above, Mayotte joined to France | the above, without Mayotte | the above |

Article 49 of the Maastricht Treaty (as amended) says that any European state that respects the "principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law", may apply to join the Union. The Copenhagen European Council set out the conditions for EU membership in June 1993 in the so-called Copenhagen criteria (see Criteria and process above for details). The Western Balkan states had to sign Stabilisation and Association Agreements before either applying for membership and all except Kosovo[33] have done so.
Croatia, Iceland, Macedonia,[11] Montenegro and Turkey are all official candidates states while Albania and Serbia have applied for membership. Bosnia and Herzegovina has concluded an association agreement and is preparing an application while Kosovo is beginning negotiations for an agreement.[citation needed] The Western Balkans have been prioritised for membership since emerging from civil war during the breakup of Yugoslavia; Turkey has been seeking membership since the 1980s and Iceland has lodged its application since suffering economic collapse in 2008.
The EU may also acquire new outermost regions in 2015 due to the integration of three Caribbean islands into the Netherlands following the dissolution of the Netherlands Antilles in 2010.