Puerto Rico and the Recurring Plebiscite
I believe it was Nietzsche who proposed a theory of eternal recurrence, where you are living and re-living the life you live now to all eternity. Congress, by passing HR 2499, the Puerto Rico Democracy Act, may have accomplished the political equivalent.
In theory, the idea is to authorize a plebiscite on Puerto Rico’s future relationship to the United States. But the official summary of the bill muddles things significantly:
10/8/2009 — Reported to House amended. Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2009 – Authorizes the government of Puerto Rico:
Advertisement(1) to conduct a plebiscite giving voters the option to vote to continue Puerto Rico’s present political status or to have a different political status;
(2) if a majority of ballots favor continuing the present status, to conduct additional such plebiscites every eight years; and
(3) if a majority of ballots favor having a different status, to conduct a plebiscite on the options of becoming fully independent from the United States, forming with the United States a political association between sovereign nations that will not be subject to the Territorial Clause of the Constitution, or being admitted as a state of the Union. Prescribes the eligibility requirements for voting in the plebiscite. Requires the Puerto Rico State Elections Commission to:
(1) certify plebiscite results to the President and Congress; and
(2) ensure that all ballots used for the plebiscite include the full content of the ballot printed in English. Requires the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico to pay all costs associated with such plebiscite (including the costs of printing, distribution, transportation, collection, and counting of all ballots).
Puerto Rico has held several plebiscites, one of which was held during the years I was living at my parents’ home in Santurce. The last plebiscite was held in 1998. Politics is one of Puerto Rico’s favorite sports (along with baseball, basketball, and salsa), and every plebiscite has had a great deal of canvassing, advertising, and publicity; turnout is always high. One should reasonably expect that this will be the case in future referenda.
Every one of the prior plebiscites asked the question of the political status in terms of choosing between remaining a commonwealth, or opting for statehood or independence from the U.S. The 1998 plebiscite also had the option of “none of the above,” which received 50% of the vote.
The Puerto Rico Democracy Act, however, narrows the initial question to: “the option to vote to continue Puerto Rico’s present political status or to have a different political status,” which will probably appeal to that “none of the above” constituency.
Fausta where have you been? Most folks aren’t interested in Puerto Rican Statehood until it looks like it could become a reality.
As a conservative . . . I believe that Puerto Rico . . . should become a sovereign nation. Humbly I submit that the culture in Puerto Rico is best maintained by being independent of the United States. The culture of Puerto Rico is a beautiful thing, to join the Union would destroy the way of life there.
With all due respect, sir, local Puerto Rican elections indicate that less than 5% of the Puerto Rican island population supports independence. The vast majority understand that an independent Puerto Rico -devoid of US economic support and federal judiciary oversight- would become as impoverished, or be run by corrupt governments as are many of the OTHER Caribbean islands.
You say that becoming part of the Union would destroy the way of life there, when in reality, it is leaving the Union that would destroy it, as the current standard of living would be drastically reduced.
Pedrosito,
I was born and raised in Puerto Rico, and attended the University in Rio Piedras for two years, that’s where I’ve been.
What bothers me about the bill, aside from the compulsory “every eight years whether you want it or not” aspect, is that it allows people who are not residents of Puerto Rico to vote while not even defining the criteria – that smells of chanchullo, as we say in PR.
Everything this president does has a secret behind it. Since he has nearly ruined the United States and he knows he will be needing votes come election time. What better way than to bring another State into the Union. He really scares me. You can not believe one word he says.
Puerto Rico will never be admitted to the Union as a state. Hawaii, having certain strategic value to the nation in the Pacific Basin, is probably the last such island territory to be admitted as a full state.
Statehood is not advantageous to Puerto Rico, in any case, as it would then become fully exposed to the US tax codes and all that similar business that the island inhabitants currently avoid.
If those residing there wish to remain a administrative territory of the United States, then those of us living CONUS will probably aquiesce and allow the relationship to persist for 8 more years. The primary benefit of this relationship is to native born Puerto Ricans, who automatically enjoy full US citizenship. I can discern no advantage to the States already admitted to the Union for this relationship.
I very highly recommend independance or, failing that, that you teach your children to speak, read, and write in English. The prospect of maintaining a Balkanized hispanic enclave within the body politic of the US is growing increasingly unpopular with us fly-over people here in the States. That the Democrats think they can count on Puerto Rican votes in perpetuity if they select statehood as their desired relationship only reinforces that unpopularity.
Uh, better see a doctor about that knock on the head you are suffering from. Nothing else can explain you thinking Washington DC works by doing what is sensible. ;D
“all ballots used for the plebiscite include the full content of the ballot printed in English. Considering that at least half the population of Puerto Rico does not read English, does that mean that they would be voting on something they can not understand? Or would the ballots be printed in both English and Spanish?”
Do you understand what “include” means? That has to be one of the stupidest questions I’ve ever read, and this is Pajamas Media, mind you, where stupid questions are the only questions allowed, given the intellectual limitations of the readers.
What I find humorous is that your perfectly content to have the US in charge of Puerto Rico’s affairs for eternity. But don’t force a plebiscite on us! Hilarious stupidity.
What is it about liberals that they have to assume that everyone who isn’t a liberal is evil?
Who said anything about maintaining the current status for perpetuity? As the article mentioned a plebiscite was held on the issue just a few years ago, and by a wide margin the people themselves choose to maintain the current relationship.
The article also mentions that Puerto Ricans can hold another plebiscite anytime they want. They don’t need the US congress to order them to do it.
As to being stupid, you hold the record there.
As to your claim to being Puerto Rican, I give that as much credence as I give your claims to having a functioning brain stem.
Grouch, I have seen “include” misused to mean what was specifically “included” were the only things there. On official US fedgov documents (USFS contracts), no less. Go snarl at the judges who support such misuse by upholding the contracts.
To oscar le grouche: You may wish to consider your grammar if you attempt to belittle the “intellectual limitations of the readers” of Pajamas Media. I believe you meant “you’re” not “your” and “most stupid” instead of “stupidest”. Altough I expect we should not expect someone of your mindset and obvious political stance to abide by given rules.
All the tax incentives that have attracted the pharmaceutical industry and others to set up shop in “Rich Port” for decades will vanish, and the jobs will leave to other tax havens. Be careful what you wish for, PR.
Newsflash for ya: many of those incentives have already been done away with. True, island Puerto Ricans pay no federal income tax, but many pay more in local taxes than they would in federal taxes anyway. And becoming a state would have the benefit of much better funding for Medicare/Medicaid or SSI programs, which currently are underfunded (or nonexistant in the case of SSI) on the island.
“Unlike other U.S. territories, which receive full food-stamp funding, Puerto Rico’s Nutritional Assistance Program (known as PAN for its Spanish acronym) is funded at about 67% of that level. Also, while the other territories receive full Medicare funding, Puerto Rico’s is based on a special limited formula. Likewise, unlike other territories, Puerto Rico does not receive full federal funding for needy children in elementary and secondary schools. All territories are capped on Medicaid money and only Northern Marianas residents receive Supplemental Security Income, according to federal officials…. As it is, Puerto Rico’s slice of the U.S.-wide budget pie has remained unchanged at 0.7%, placing it at par with West Virginia and higher than states such as Utah and Hawaii. But while West Virginia (0.7%), Utah (0.8%) and Hawaii (0.4%) each represents less than 1% of the U.S. total population, Puerto Rico holds 1.4%. A comparable state, Kentucky, with 1.5% of the U.S. population, receives more than double, or 1.6%, of the federal expenditures tart, according to Census data.” http://www.puertorico-herald.org/issues/vol4n11/CBFedFunds2PR-en.html
Oscar,
What prevents Puerto Ricans from determining when to schedule plebiscites?
Fortuño is a Republican who didn’t seem too enthusiastic in his support for McCain, even saying during the presidential elections that he preferred “change” always. Also, after the forced pass of Obamacare, he was all happy telling reporters how much more money puertorricans would receive.
New Progressive Party follows indeed a progressive ideology, demonstrated after so many years of all of their administration’s increased welfare programs intended to buy them votes and power. In fact, they “sell” statehood to puertorricans by telling them how much more welfare they could collect if Puerto Rico were a state. Their main opposition, the Populares, have also become a welfare party for the same reason except that they don’t want statehood.
The remaining political group wants independence, but they are openly socialists and sympathizers of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez and most puertorricans have a problem with that; that’s why they can only get a negligible share of the popular vote.
All in all, there is no true right wing, conservative party in Puerto Rico. One that believes in true open markets, minimum government power and intervention, very limited welfare and friendly to private enterprise. There’s no party that makes economic independence a priority. Everything is between left and far left.
It is a chacullo, i lived in Orocovis for 22 years , and in that time i think there was at least 4 plebicist and all with the same results, because they are not explained what will happen after voting for any of the choices on the ballot. They rather stay the way they right now.
Oscar, I wouldn’t go pointing fingers and calling others dumb. The statement “all ballots used for the plebiscite include the full content of the ballot printed in English” BY ITSELF contains absolutely nothing indicating that the ballot must or may be printed in any other language. One might infer that a Spanish version would be included, from the context, but it’s not stated. And it’s too late for you to mention the context, anyway – you hinged your insult on the definition of “include”, on which you pin only one definition. Another interpretation might be that a summary or excerpt is not acceptable, that only the full text is permitted.
“What I find humorous is that your perfectly content to have the US in charge of Puerto Rico’s affairs for eternity. But don’t force a plebiscite on us! Hilarious stupidity.”
Was that supposed to make sense? It doesn’t. By the way, genius, you misspelled “you’re”.
You want stupid questions, go visit Think Progress (Two lies for the price of one!) or the Kos Kidz.
Mark:
What is it about idiots who assume that anyone pointing out an obvious flaw in their logic is from the opposite political stripe? We may never know. There is nothing even remotely sensible in this article. Indeed, I put to you again: why should a Puerto Rican worry about the way congress–which can, has and does pass all manner of law and policy regardy PR with no input from its residents–has constructed a plebiscite? Its simply asinine thinking. You fools will do anything to go on ignoring the real issues facing our country.
If you were capable of finding a flaw in anyone’s logic, it would be a discovery of Einsteining proportions.
There are three choices: (l) Independence (2) Estado Libre Asociado (3) statehood. The first choice always looses because if it were ever to be successful Puerto Rico would become another Cuba. There was an effort to get choice two off the ballot. That would have left the voters with two choices: Independence or Statehood. Statehood would obviously win hands down. In other words it was an effort to produce statehood. I think Jose Serrano celebrated some kind of victory because Puerto Ricans living on the mainland will be able to vote on the fate of Puerto Rico. I do believe that the Estado Libre Asociado, the current status, is most advantageous for the island. Should Puerto Rico become a state there would be no reason for American corporations to remain on the island since they would lose their tax breaks. The island would become a vacation resort. The population would follow the migration of the jobs to the U.S.
Oscar – Einstein said, ‘Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again’. I know I know. Advice from a white guy. Though I’ve read he was quite intelligent.
How you find the will to peruse this site everyday, read and provide ‘in-depth’ commentary amongst us neanderthals is quite a feat.
Due to your possessing but a public school education and not attending college (surely it’s someone else’s doing/ fault), I believe you were looking for the word ‘you’re’ in your assessment, Sire.
Fausta, you’ll get nothing out of ‘My liege’ regarding the matter. I do hope he’s scouring the internet to give you but another roundabout, half-assed response to back his unfounded, err, unmatched prowess..
How you find the will to peruse this site everyday, read and provide ‘in-depth’ commentary amongst us neanderthals is quite a feat.
Paul-Un
Finally, something intelligent from you. There’s some hope after all.
Puerto Rico should be an independent nation. Four million remain on the island and 2 million all over the U.S. El Salvador has 6 million people and $42B in GDP, while PR has $77B GDP. They can make it as a country. They should keep their culture by remaining independent. Do they have any pride?
Vivo, they do have pride in being Puerto Ricans (that’s why so many have yet to embrace statehood) -but they’re also proud to be Americans. And, they also need to feed their families. Sure, they could “make it” as a country, like El Salvador does now. I have great respect for Salvadoreans, but the truth is most there live in abject poverty. Most in Puerto Rico don’t, and don’t WANT to, either.
Why is Puerto Rico far more economically advanced than any other Caribbean island, with a GDP per capita higher than ANY Latin Ameican nation? The reason is its special relation with the US -which provides substantial financial aid, open markets for Puerto Rican products, as well as federal oversight in terms of rule of law- that no other Latin nation enjoys. Many understand this would be lost if PR were to become independent. Consider this: the local government has a huge deficit -despite the fact that it pays nothing for defense or foreign relations, and receives large US grants for welfare programs! How could Puerto Ricans maintain the same level of social services/quality of life if left on their own?
Besides the economic argument, Most understand that, while they consider their Puerto Rican culture to be unique, there is a special bond with the US (which explains why statehood, while never winning a majority in local plebiscites, does garner about 45% of the vote). Most locals have relatives in the US, and many have relatives who fought bravely in America’s wars. And while many understand the US has exploited Puerto Rico for its own purposes (e.g. citizenship was only granted in 1917, so that Puerto Ricans could be drafted to fight in WWI), they also understand Puerto Rico has reaped many benefits as well.
This is why, if left to choose, most vote for continuation of the current status: they get to keep their identity, yet reap the benefits of living under the auspices of the US -even if it entails sacrificing certain national rights. But if pushed to decide between independence and statehood, they will choose statehood.
Thank you for your well elaborated explanation and opinion. It looks like the current status quo is working for them.
El Salvadore is not an island. That creates unique issues.
Fausta, you forgot to note that Rep Virginia Foxx added as a 4th option on the proposed second round of plebiscite voting to “continue the present status.” http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2499/show
This, of course, completely undermines the whole point of the proposed second vote. The whole idea of having a two-step vote was to establish that a majority wanted change in the first vote, and what that would change be in the second vote. But now, we can vote for change in the first, and then vote for “more of the same” in the second! So long as island Puerto Ricans are given the chance to vote for more of the same, they will -as they’ve shown in all the previous plebiscites. Most island Puerto Ricans are unwilling to voluntarily give up their “Puerto Rican” identity, so nothing new will happen here.
Only if forced to choose solely between independence and statehood will things change, and in that case, statehood will win hands down. Less than 5% of the population there want independence. Only romantic idealists or loonies favor it, as everyone else knows that would mean crushing poverty or corruption, like in many of the OTHER Caribbean islands.
The question is: does the US Congress really want to force Puerto Rico to choose between independence and statehood? What would the US Congress do then with an inevitable “statehood” win? Would it admit an entirely Spanish-speaking state into the Union? Or would it then ignore the vote of 4 million US citizens -many who have given their blood fighting in all US wars since WW I?? It’s a hard question to answer, that’s why for decades there’s been a “don’t ask, don’t tell”-like policy. And that may be the reason “more of the same” was tacked onto the second-round vote of the plebiscite….
Democrats are interested in a Puerto Rico state, as they know full well that would mean 2 brand-new Democrat Senators, and 6 brand new Democrat Representatives, as most Puerto Ricans have traditionally always been of Democrat tendencies. But so long as “Commonwealth status” remains on the ballot, it’s likely that will continue to win.
“…who would qualify as a “Puerto Rican living in the 50 states”?
The bill proposes voting for “Puerto Ricans living on the island and U.S. citizens born in Puerto Rico.” That is, for mainlanders to vote, they must show proof of being born there. How they’d go about doing that is unclear to me, but I’m assuming it would entail producing a local birth certificate -no big mystery there.
“’forming with the United States a political association between sovereign nations that will not be subject to the Territorial Clause of the Constitution.’ I have no idea what this would look like…”
Try “Free Association”: “Three former territories — the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau — are currently engaged in free association with the United States. (Following World War II, the U.S. administered all three of those territories on behalf of the United Nations, although they were never U.S. territories per se but United Nations Trust Territories.) Based on current compact agreements with the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau, the U.S. provides those countries with defense protection and various forms of economic aid. If the “sovereign association” language proposed in H.R. 2499 is viewed as something akin to free association, the future relationship between the U.S. and an independent Puerto Rico could resemble the current relationships between the United States and the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Palau.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puerto_Rico_Democracy_Act
Granted, it’s easier and perhaps strategiaclly more significant to offer defense/aid to sparesly populated Pacific islands. How that would work when dealing with 4 million Puerto Ricans is unclear. But it’s doubtful many in PR would vote for that, as it’s clearly a step away from independence. A few years back “free association” was floated as an “enhanced” version of the current Commonwealth status, and many locals panicked. They realized that “free association” implies a bond which BOTH states freely enter into, and could freely withdraw from. Many saw this as a move through which the US could legally -without consuling the local population- “freely” jettison Puerto Rico and all its current economic obligations…
Chileno,
Lots of interesting points in your comments, but
I’m assuming it would entail producing a local birth certificate -no big mystery there Considering that even the idea of showing photo ID for voting at a US election raises loud cries of protest, having to show a birth certificate to get a ballot will be struck down in no time. After which, the opportunities for voter fraud are endless.
The Bill may imply some kind of Free Association status, but it sure doesn’t spell it out.
Fausta, you may be right on the mainland vote issue. But the PR island government (which will ultimately run/count the votes) may opt to treat mainlanders like “absentee voters,” requiring them to register with the PR Election Committee prior to receiving a ballot. And to register, they may first require proof of birth, just like any voter registration committee requires proof of citizenship. We’ll see how things pan out.
I sometimes wonder whether any of the island’s political parties actually WANT to define the island’s status. If the status issue was ever resolved, the parties would actually have to DO something about the island’s real problems, like crime, education, and poverty. It’s far easier to distract people with lofty speeches about the status, than to actually solve these other pressing problems.
But then again, perhaps I’m being a little too cynical….
The status issue also serves as a convenient shield for criticism. For example, anyone criticizing the current “Statehood” governor can simply be discounted as a disgruntled “Commonwealth” supporter, just like the corruption charges against the last “Commonwealth” governor were denounced by his supporters as part of a grand anti-Commonwealth conspiracy, concocted by “los Federales” with the help of the “Statehood” party.
Chileno,
You’re exactly right on the “status” issue serving as a distraction from the real problems, and its usefulness when dismissing criticism.
I am all for recurring plebicites to determine the status of Puerto Rico. Now lets advocate that they do that for each of the 50 states.
So for the state of Puerto Rico… state emblem- the Chupacabra or that freaky little goblin thingy that teenager encountered in the haunted caves and beat to death? Rich tapestry for the “X-Files State” as I will call it.
Oh also that haunted pirate island with all the bermuda triangle type shennanigans. Cool.