Puerto Rico’s status lies in the hands of Congress

The Hill ^ | 2/01/2006 | Oxford Analytica

[cll]

The status question, after years on the back burner, will dominate Puerto Rican politics this year. The event that signaled the launch of intense campaigning on the issue by all three of the island’s political parties was the publication in Washington last month of a report commissioned by President Bush.

The report, compiled by an interagency task force, recommended that there should be a federal plebiscite this year on whether Puerto Rico wants to maintain its current status as a territory or commonwealth (estado libre asociado, ELA) of the United States or choose a nonterritorial alternative.

In the latter case, the report suggested that the U.S. Congress, which has responsibility for Puerto Rican affairs through the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, should organize another plebiscite, offering voters a choice between statehood, on the one hand, and independence or free association with the United States, on the other.

These recommendations, predictably, have had a mixed reception. While the opposition Partido Nuevo Progresista (PNP) and Partido Independentista Puertorriqueno (PIP) welcomed the report, the ruling Partido Popular Democratico (PPD) rejected it because the options put forward do not include an enhanced version of the present status.

With both sides lobbying Congress to get across their views, Gov. Anibal Acevedo Vila claims to be confident that the U.S. legislature will not turn the report into law this year.

Acevedo Vila returned to San Juan on Jan. 19 from a meeting with his main ally in Congress, Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), to proclaim that there was widespread opposition, or indifference, in Congress to the report’s recommendations and that the proposal to hold a federal plebiscite was doomed.

Menendez, a Cuban-American, is a member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and thus in a position to know. The minority leader in the House, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), seems to share Menendez’s doubts about the White House report.

However, the governor’s announcement is unlikely to put off the PNP, which also has some useful Washington contacts.

The party is convinced that statehood will become a reality this year and is preparing a campaign based on the argument that Puerto Rico’s “colonial” status is against the spirit of the U.S. constitution. The PNP strategy, devised by the party’s president, former Gov. Pedro Rossello, consists of pushing through the Puerto Rican legislature a resolution urging the U.S. Congress to turn into law the recommendations of the task force’s report, as the Puerto Rico Democracy Act, and then persuading Congress to act on the resolution.

As the PNP has a majority in both houses, and the island’s resident commissioner in Washington, who has a voice but not a vote in the House of Representatives, is also from the PNP, this process is already well under way. The island’s Senate passed the resolution Jan. 18, with the PPD minority voting against, and it now has to be approved by the lower house.

The resolution provides for the creation of an 18-member joint committee of the two houses to handle all aspects of the status issue. Rossello has his eye on the chairmanship of this committee.

The PNP is also planning direct action, in the form of a pro-statehood crusade to Congress early this month, led by the PNP vice president, Miriam Ramirez de Ferrer, bearing a 100,000-signature petition, and a 15-day march around the island in the second half of February.

The PIP, which represents the views of about 5 percent of Puerto Rican voters, is equally enthusiastic about the White House report, calling it a “mortal blow” to the ELA and a first step toward the end of colonialism. Like the PNP, it wants the federal plebiscite suggested in the report to take place this year. However, if the U.S. Congress fails to act, it is calling for a constitutional assembly to be elected in the island.

Acevedo Vila has also called for such an assembly in the past, without success. His argument is that what he calls a “true process of self-determination” should begin on the island, not in Washington, but the White House report “insults” Puerto Ricans by failing to provide for such a process.

The report takes the view that the 1952 ELA accord is a transitory arrangement (which is also the PNP’s position), rather than a pact that can be modified by agreement between the two sides (the PPD view). Acevedo Vila argues that voters should be offered the option of supporting a modified version of commonwealth status, giving the island’s government greater control over such areas as federal appointments, taxation and trade negotiations.

Rejecting calls from some PPD politicians to manufacture a “crisis” over the issue, Acevedo Vila appears reassured that Congress would not support legislation on Puerto Rican status that does not enjoy a consensus in the island itself and is not backed by the governor.

A continuing feud between Rossello and Resident Commissioner Luis Fortuño, and a long-running tussle for control of the Puerto Rican Senate between Rossello and a group of PNP senators led by the current president of the upper house, Kenneth McClintock, complicates the PNP’s campaign.

Fortuño refuses to return to the island to attend PNP executive meetings chaired by Rossello, arguing that his time is better spent cultivating Republican contacts in Washington.

Despite his reservations about Fortuño, Rossello felt obliged Jan. 18 to appoint him as the PNP’s official liaison with the Republican Party. (Former Gov. Carlos Romero Barcelo has been given the same role with the Democrats.)

Underlying the power struggle between Rossello and Fortuño is competition for advantage ahead of the 2008 elections. Rossello sees a successful statehood campaign as the best way of gearing up the party machine to back his candidacy. However, McClintock’s group could yet deny him chairmanship of the status committee.

Meanwhile, Acevedo Vila has been trying to recover the political initiative by submitting a long-awaited tax-reform proposal to the island’s legislature in mid-January. However, the PNP majority is determined to block it — not least because the measures would give the governor additional resources for high-profile public works ahead of the next election campaign.

The formal reason the PNP has given for rejecting the reforms is that they contain no provision for reducing public spending and would only benefit the wealthy at the expense of the middle classes. Acevedo Vila badly needs the tax reforms, as the credit-rating agencies have threatened to downgrade Puerto Rican government bonds if they are not forthcoming.

The focus will be on Washington for most of this year, as Puerto Rico’s fate lies in the hands of Congress. The most likely outcome is that the task-force report will not become law.

Oxford Analytica is an international consulting firm providing strategic analysis on world events for business and government leaders. See www.oxan.com.

[cll]

I am saving this, CG, if you don't mind. The word epiphany does not do your thoughts justice.

I had a similar epiphany. That by being me, an individual, and a hard working an honest one, the American in me would blossom. And it has. I take pride in my brethren who break out of the ghettoes, and pity all who stay behind, no matter what they call themselves.

Dios lo bendiga.

[backtothestreets]

I'm in favor of statehood for Puerto Rico too if that is the choice of a majority of Puerto Rican citizens.

In the meantime, people should appreciate the contributions Puerto Rico makes to our economy. As an example, many of our pharmaceutical giants have manufacturing facilities there. The present Commonwealth status presents a good option to outsourcing manufacturing to other countries.

[quadrant]

Half is a bit of an exaggeration; a third would be a more likely percentage.
However loony these people are, most, with the exception of the Aztlan nuts, accept the legitimacy of the United States and want to be a part of it.
There is a minority in Puerto Rico that doesn't want to be a part of the US and will never be reconciled to it. People of that persuasion will become violent, sooner or later.
It is foolish to inflict that sort of stress onto your political system.

[backtothestreets]

Near as I can tell, no state has ever entered the Union without first being a territory of the United States.

What of Texas which was an independent nation and Maine which was a part of Massachusetts? Neither were ever US Territories.

[backtothestreets]

Including Mexico?

Wouldn't that be keen. We'd finally have the opportunity to crush the corruption in those lands and bring thousands of fugitives from justice to answer for their crimes.

[dvwjr]

Originally posted by: MplsSteve

"Near as I can tell, no state has ever entered the Union without first being a territory of the United States."

Near as I can tell, there were 19. Ah, the benefits of my high school US History class...

I can list a few States that were NEVER Territories of the United States before admission to the Union.

1.) Delaware
2.) Pennsylvania
3.) New Jersey
4.) Georgia
5.) Connecticut
6.) Massachusetts
7.) Maryland
8.) South Carolina
9.) New Hampshire
10.) Virginia
11.) New York
12.) North Carolina
13.) Rhode Island and Providence Plantations
14.) Vermont
15.) Kentucky
16.) Maine
17.) Texas
18.) California
19.) West Virginia

That makes 19 of 50 States which were not admitted to the Union via Territorial Status. There is some debate about Tennesse...

dvwjr

[MplsSteve]

Please read Post #27...

[MplsSteve]

Please read Post #27...

[DakotaGator]

...But I'll still refer you to Justice John Harlan's dissenting opinion in post number 1. How do we fix that?

That's a valid and important question. Before I answer I'll provide a qualifier. I am neither a lawyer nor a constitutional scholar. I am just an American like you who reads and thinks. The "thinking" on my part is also questionable ;-)

Anyhow, the question posed was; "How do we fix that (Justice Harlan's opinion)?" My narrow response is; "We don't because there is nothing to fix." Accepting all you have quoted and represented of Justice Harlan as accurate and complete, his was a minority opinion. It wasn't a judgment. It has no force of law. It is merely the opinion of a learned jurist.

Now I also have an opinion. Though I am not nearly so learned nor respected, my opinion is based on reading, thinking, and experiencing life. My opinion is this; "Sovereign nations by the very nature of their existence will acquire and govern territories and possessions. I further disagree with Justice Harlan that this; "...is wholly inconsistent with the spirit and genius, as well as with the words, of the Constitution." I quote the second paragraph of Section 3 - New States of Article IV - The States of the United States Constitution:

"The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State."

Not only does this paragraph vest Congress with sole power to dispose of and make rules and regulations over Territory and Property belonging to the United States, but it is placed in the section of the Constitution dealing with New States (which is also the sole power of Congress). Therefore, Justice Harlan's dissenting opinion was wrong on point of fact; the Constitution does specifically state with words the power of Congress to govern territory and property.

Further, I disagree with and challenge Justice Harlan's point of opinion that; "The idea that this country may acquire territories anywhere upon the earth, by conquest or treaty, and hold them as mere colonies or provinces...is wholly inconsistent with the spirit and genius...of the Constitution." On the contrary, it was provided for in the Constitution by the very article I cited above. The founding fathers well understood that territory is only gained through treaty (by deed, i.e. District of Columbia, Louisiana Purchase) or conquest. That is so basic that they felt no need to spell it out. But they did spell out that territory/property was to be exclusively governed by Congress.

So, I disagree with Justice Harlan's opinion. My disagreement is based on Constitutional fact. Justice Harlan's opinion is based on a false premise. That's how I see it.

But it is also how I narrowly see it. I agree with Justice Harlan's underlying sentiment of freedom and self-determination. These are basic to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Both are available to the United States Citizens of Puerto Rico.

By virtue of being a Commonwealth, Puerto Rico is a part of the United States. By not being a State, Puerto Rico residents are citizens of the United States but not of one of the Several States of the United States e.g. I am a citizen of both South Dakota and the United States. This status provides Puerto Rico residents an opportunity I do not have, the ability to become a sovereign state not part of the United States. It also gives them the opportunity to become one of the Several States that are part of the United States.

I say to the United States citizens of Puerto Rico; "Seize the opportunity. Petition Congress to become either a State or a Sovereign Nation!" It is time.

Good luck with wading through my response. Hope it didn't put you to sleep!

[dvwjr]

Please see post #146 for a complete list, not just Texas.


dvwjr

[backtothestreets]

Make English the official language of the U.S., via a constitutional amendment.

English is already the language of commerce. As such people seeking to improve their lives have always sought to learn the language, or insist their offspring learn it to have the best opportunity within our nation.

That formula has worked well in our nation for over two centuries. The proof is found simply by looking at a map to find cities with non-English names like Baton Rouge, St. Louis, Sacramento, and St. Augustine, it's clear that no Constitutional Amendment was necessary to bring the original inhabitants to speak English.

The absolute best laws are those which are self imposed, not government imposed. The economy of our nation has always brought people to learn the language of the land.

[backtothestreets]

You get a BIG STAR for drawing out the history buffs. From that sense your post was great for stimulating more involvement from people that might otherwise just read without ever posting a comment.

[JRios1968]

I'm just saying that PRs DO NOT generally intermarry with gringos. They remain separate, unlike most groups in this country that intermarry within two or three generations.

I'll make sure I let my wife know she has, according to you, stopped being a "gringo" woman, even if she's blonde, born and raised in California and her maiden name started with "Mc"

[JRios1968]

Nevertheless, Puerto Ricans (those born and raised on the island) are not CULTURALLY American. They speak Spanish as a first language, watch Univision or Telemundo, play dominoes instead of poker, and actually enjoy dancing. I could go on and on.

Funny...I was always considered by many of my family and friends to be a "gringo" because I spoke English better than 99% of the population, can't understand how to play dominoes, certainly can't dance very well, and I can't stand watching Telemundo or Univision...in fact, I was the main reason my folks got cable TV as soon as it became available in my neighborhood in Puerto Rico, and I lived there my first 24 years. In fact, I even went to college in Puerto Rico. Remember the old proverb: all generalizations are false, including this one.

[CGVet58]

thanks for providing some light on a little known fact; that local government in PR taxes at a horrendous rate. This is a cold hard reality that everyone can understand.

[CGVet58]

No hay de que, compadre.

Viva Puerto Rico, USA!

[bert]

dittos

[bert]

......Mexico is not (presently)a territory of the United States....

[California Patriot]

Republicans would be insane to let PR become a state.

If PR wants to be cut loose in the event statehood is blocked, then by all means, cut it loose.

[cll]

"Good luck with wading through my response. Hope it didn't put you to sleep!"

Not at all. Very well thought out. I'll ponder it further.