Jill
pjMom
Pat Austin
Carol
Obi's Sister
fuzislippers
backyardconservative
iainswife
Quite Rightly
nicedeb
Sherry
retrieverheart
zillaoftheresistance
just a conservative girl
Thoughts on Statehood for Puerto Rico
I’ve done a post over at And So it Goes in Shreveport on the issue of statehood for Puerto Rico. There are both pros and cons and there is an important vote on the issue in the House this week on H.R. 2499.
One piece of legislation that is garnering interest is H.R. 2499, The Puerto Rico Democracy Act, introduced in May 2009 by Pedro Pierluisi (D.-Puerto Rico) and coming up for a vote before the House of Representatives next week.
The bill basically gives Puerto Ricans the chance to vote between retaining their current status or choosing a new status, to include Statehood. The text of the bill can be found here.
One issue seems to be the poor economic baggage that the island would bring. Another problem is that the vote in Puerto Rico will be via plebiscite rather than giving a true choice to voters. The wording on the ballot is likely to be in such a way that voters will have no choice but to choose statehood when many Puerto Ricans would prefer “enhanced Commonwealth” status.
Thoughts?
Agnes B. Bullock 7:58 PM on 04/24/2010 Permalink |
It is yet another end run by the Dems to ensure their permanent majority status. First PR, then DC- each with 2 Dem Senators and Dem Reps in the House!!! AND, with 435 seat seseats seats in the
fuzislippers 12:32 AM on 04/25/2010 Permalink |
I’m still not convinced that Puerto Ricans are or would remain a democrat voting block lock. It’s going to be interesting to see how this all pans out, though.
Agnes B. Bullock 1:26 PM on 04/25/2010 Permalink |
Anytime the Democrats sponsor a bill like this one, it’s only purpose is to increase thier power and influence. This is an election year and they are in deep trouble- they tried this wiht Citizenship USA back in 1995 with getting aliens naturalized, etc through an expedited process. Once PR becomes a state (and this bill will pass- the RINOs won’t dare vote against for fear of being labelled racist) Then comes DC, which is directly against the Constitution. Orrin Hacth will sell out the Constitution for another House seat for Utah, never mind that if Dc becomes a state, there are a guarnateed two Democrat Senators to be elected from it.
This bill is meant to blunt the REpublican gains, which will only be temprary if this bill passes and PR becomes a statte
Another point is that the House has 435 members- this number will not change, but states that are due to pick up one or two seats due to the 2010 census will not get them- they will go to PR and DC instead and Americans in these states, most of which lean Republican by the way, will be denied representation.
Jim Mceldowney 3:54 PM on 04/25/2010 Permalink |
what a great site and informative posts, I will bookmark your site. Keep up the good work!
Jeff 4:11 PM on 04/25/2010 Permalink |
One of the “problems” you cite is that some Puerto Ricans support a “Commonwealth” proposal sometimes called ‘enhanced commonwealth.’ The proposal would permanently empower Puerto Rico to nullify federal laws and court jurisdiction and to enter into international organizations and trade and other agreements requiring national sovereignty while Puerto Ricans would also be perpetually guaranteed all current program benefits and U.S. citizenship, a new subsidy for the insular government, new incentives for companies based in the States to locate plants in Puerto Rico, and free entry into the States of goods shipped from (or through) Puerto Rico. This proposal is not possible for constitutional and other reasons, as determined by the Justice and State Departments under Republicand and Democratic administrations, the congressional committees of jurisdiction under Republicans as well as Democrats, and the Congressional Research Service. It would be misleading and unproductive for Puerto Ricans to vote on it. It is the reasons that a plebiscite held under Puerto Rico law only in 1998 was inconclusive. Somewhat similar proposals in Puerto Rico’s two previous status plebiscites, in 1967 and 1993, made those votes inconclusive as well. (The 1967 vote produced a majority for the proposal but it was rejected by the federal government.)
The alternative to a plebiscite that has been promoted by advocates of the ‘enhanced Commonwealth’ proposal is a convention on the theory that a local convention could come up with a governing arrangement that federal officials would not put before voters. Puerto Ricans rejected the idea in the 2008 elections. Candidates who ran on a platform of seeking the current legislation in Congres won the governorship, the non-voting seat in Congress, and two-thirds of the seats of each house of the legislature. opponents won the lowest percentage of the vote of any candidates of their party since 1940.
I am not an advocate of any particular status for Puerto Rico but mitigating the cost that would relate to Puerto Rico’s low per capita income would be additional revenue from equal taxation and, probably, the economic boost of statehood experienced by Hawaii and Alaska.
The bill is not a Democratic proposal, as one of your readers assumed. It is bipartisan; about one third of the 181 sponsors are Republicans, including several Republican leaders. A similar proposal was made by President Bush. Whether Puerto Ricans would primarily vote Democratic if Puerto Rico became a State is speculative. Most Puerto Ricans are not members of the national political parties. Most are socially conservative. The Governor, Senate President, House Speaker, and Mayor of the largest city (San Juan) are national Republicans, as are many other legislators and mayors. When Alaska was made a State, the assumption was that it would be a Democratic State.
Regarding the House representation of the existing States if Puerto Rico became a State, the numbers of members of the House would almost certainly be increased. That is what has been done in the case of most statehood admissions.
Finally, even if statehood were voted for by Puerto Ricans under the bill in the second of two plebiscites — and Congress acted to grant statehood, statehood would probably not take effect for years. Proposals for Puerto Rican statehood have always assumed a substantial transition for the phase-in of equal taxation and equal program funding. A bill that passed the House in 1998 sponsored by Don Young (R-AK) and backed by Speaker Newt Gingrich that would have provided for statehood after a series of plebiscites provided for a transition of 10 years.
rubyslipperblog 1:29 AM on 04/26/2010 Permalink |
Thanks for all that background information Jeff. I agree there is room to argue the voters of a Puerto Rican State wouldn’t necessarily vote Democratic. Some of the talk in the media that Democrats are going to have the bulk of the hispanic voters for years is wishful thinking. They are indeed quite socially conservative and less likely than other voting groups I can think of to forget that when they get beyond the point of latching on to the party who will do something on immigration. I do think they hitched their wagon to the wrong cart in 2008, McCain took a beating for immigration and knowing how stubborn he is wouldn’t have forgotten about hispanic voters once he was elected. He was rightfully angry when they went to him for help after Obama was elected.
Robert Deposada 8:27 PM on 04/25/2010 Permalink |
The reason this is a so-called “Bi-Partisan Bill” is because statehood supporters have successfully fooled supporters into believing this is a simple non-binding self-determination process with no serious implications. But don’t be fooled: this is a statehood trap. You don’t have to believe me, just read the Pro-Statehood Party 2008 platform, and the companion legislature in the local State legislature which clearly spells out their strategy. First get a congressionally sanctioned bill passed by Congress. Then hold an election between statehood and independence. 90 days after statehood wins a simple majority, hold an election to elect a congressional delegation and send them to Washington and demand they be seated. Even the former Governor Carlos Romero Barcelo told a local newspaper that this will work because they (congressional leaders) don’t want to be labeled as racists.
Statehooders are dooing this quietly and under the radar because they know that once legislators know the cost associated with statehood, every conservative and fiscal moderate will staunchly oppose their efforts. the estimated costs are as low as $30 billion a year in additional welfare spending.
Also, how do u justify bringing in a state where according to the US Census, only 20% speak English fluently. BTW, PR is the only jurisdiction in the country excempt from the No Child Left Behind English requirements.
Also, Puerto Rico has one of the strictest and most arcaic gun control laws in the country.
Can you imagine what will happen when the DC statehood supporters realize that Congress will admit PR as a state? This guarantees a democratic majority for many years to come. 4 new liberal senator and 7-8 new liberal members of the House. Trust me, Puerto Rico will be as reliable Blue as DC. I serevd as Director of Hispanic Affairs for Lee Atwater at the Republican National Committee and all polling data showed it very clearly.
Oh but they currently have a Republlican Governor! Yes, but one that ran as a statehooder, not as a Republican, and against one of the most unpopular incumbents in their history. And the new Republican Governor, who by the way supported ObamaCare, and only criticized him when it did not have enough money for Puerto Rico, has an approval rating of low 20s. So there goes the possible Red State argument.
Have no doubt about it, Puerto Ricans will see passage of this bill as a marriage proposal. But before we make this huge mistake, why dont we have a clear and extensive debate on what our conditions are before statehood is allowed to be even considered? Why dont we demand economic parity with our poorest state before statehood is even a possiblility? why not demand that all state government business be conducted in English and that at least half the population be fluent in English before statehood becomes an option?
We cannot afford this bill. Hopefully Republicans and conservative Democrats will wake up this week!
William-José Vélez González 2:49 AM on 04/28/2010 Permalink |
How is a plebiscite not a true choice? We will be able to say if we want to change or not. It is quite disheartening to see so many against us deciding if we want to change the current status. The fact of the matter is that the majority of Puerto Rico want to change the current status, and should be granted the opportunity to say so, and choose from constitutionally viable (this excludes the enhanced commonwealth joke) non-territorial options.
This is a matter of principle, of allowing 4 million American citizens elect their future. This is the US, these principle have precedence over anything else. Its time people like Doc Hastings recognize that.
Naomi 9:23 PM on 04/28/2010 Permalink |
Because the election is rigged. Commonwealth status — which has won the last three times — won’t be offered as a choice to voters. I have an article here: http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NjJkYzU5ZjNiMDU4NjU5YTI3MzE0ZTkxMWRiZWQ5YTc
Puerto Rico Statehood - Ardub 12:29 PM on 04/28/2010 Permalink |
[...] [...]
Quite Rightly 7:26 AM on 04/29/2010 Permalink |
Glenn Beck has been on this. He has shown copies of the PR “Republican” governor’s party platform, which outlines the methodology his party is going to use to force statehood on both PR and the US. It involves using the “Tennessee method” of achieving statehood; that is, to elect a Congressional delegation, send them to Washington, and demand that they be seated. That method worked for Tennessee when it got tired of waiting for Congress to approve statehood, so there is legal precedence for it.
The problem is that the vote is rigged in the same way that polls are often rigged: by careful control of the questions being voted on. If you construct the questions carefully, you can get the answer you want.
nomad3790 5:05 PM on 07/12/2010 Permalink |
Simple method: Instead of using the standard ballot choices (Commonwealth, State, independence) just put “Independence or Statehood”. As a Puerto Rican born and raised in New York City, I have to say that the Commonwealth does more harm than good. I prefer Independence, but statehood will do. As a proud PR I just want to see whats best for the Island my ancestors called home
annexx51 6:32 PM on 08/15/2010 Permalink |
VISIT THE AUTHORITY ON PUERTO RICO’S STATUS … BTW, BRAVO JEFF … LA CHULETA CONGELA’.