Subscribe to RSSManipulating Self-Determination
Puerto Rico might become a state without wanting to
Puerto Rico has been a self-governing commonwealth of the United States since 1952, a status that has survived many reform efforts. But there is a bill in Congress that presents a novel issue. The Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2009 would initiate a series of convoluted plebiscites with the ultimate goal of Puerto Rico’s addition to the Union as the 51st state—despite the fact that a plurality of the island opposes such an outcome. Indeed, the act is designed to fabricate a false, inflated majority for statehood by making the people choose between their least-preferred options rather than their most-preferred.
A HISTORY OF VOTING
Since 1952 Puerto Ricans have rejected statehood three times. In a 1993 plebiscite, 48.6 percent voted to remain a commonwealth, with statehood and independence receiving, respectively, 46.3 percent and 4.4 percent. In 1998, the New Progressive Party (NPP)—longtime supporters of Puerto Rican statehood—excluded the commonwealth option from a plebiscite by arguing that the Popular Democratic Party’s (PDP) inability to enhance the island’s commonwealth status after 1993 was proof that it was impossible to do so. In a contest designed to favor statehood, an unexpected victor emerged: it was the “none of the above” option defended by the PDP, which won the plebiscite with 50.1 percent against statehood’s 46.5 percent.
Now, back in power, the NPP is sponsoring a bill in Congress that calls for a two-round plebiscite that circumvents the previous results through a manipulation of the democratic process. In the first round, the people would be asked to vote “yes” or “no” on the question of whether to remain a commonwealth. Based on the 1993 results, 48.6 percent would vote yes and 50.7 percent (the sum of those voting for statehood and independence) would vote no. With a “no” victory, a second election would be called in which Puerto Ricans would choose between statehood and independence, without a “none of the above” option. Given a choice between statehood and independence, approximately 90 percent of the Puerto Rican population would favor the former, and thus, through clever manipulations, statehood supporters will have finally pulled off a victory.
THE MEANING OF DEMOCRACY
The PDP opposition, of course, calls the bill a “scheme.” Puerto Rico’s Democratic Party Chairman Roberto Prats told the HPR that the bill “makes a mockery of the most basic elements of the people’s inalienable right to political self determination” because it effectively excludes half of the electorate: those who want to remain a commonwealth. Prats lambasted the bill’s congressional co-sponsors for “refusing to observe the democratic values [that America] holds the rest of the world accountable for.” Puerto Rico’s pro-statehood Secretary of State Kenneth McClintock, however, supports the bill and strongly disagrees with the PDP’s claims. In an interview with the HPR, he defended the bill’s structure, deeming it “appropriate to pose a neutral question as to whether a voter supports the present relationship” or prefers to “change to a permanent, non-territorial status.”
LETTING WINNERS WIN
Prats noted, however, that President Obama has expressed his commitment to Puerto Ricans’ right to choose between three options: commonwealth, statehood, and independence. Prats argued that enhancing the commonwealth is a matter of “diplomatic craftsmanship, not fanciful legal constitutional construction [because] when it comes to developing political relationships, the U.S. Constitution left the field wide open.” For Prats, the issue is not the commonwealth’s capacity to enhance itself, but statehood supporters’ desire to exclude that possibility. And Kenneth Shepsle, a Harvard government professor, said that the bill “is absolutely loaded to produce statehood.” Shepsle maintained that “the appropriate [second] referendum is between statehood and commonwealth status,” and if commonwealth should win, enhancements to that arrangement should be made by its supporters.
Self-determination relies on choosing between the most-favored alternatives, not the least. Unless the people of Puerto Rico agree on a fair and democratic procedure for reforming their government’s status, instead of trying to preordain the results, efforts to enhance the commonwealth will prove, yet again, to have been in vain.
Professor Shepsle’s quotes have been corrected. Their original versions were not word-for-word accurate, although their meanings were identical.
Pablo Hernandez ‘13 is a Contributing Writer.
Photo Credit: Jami Dwyer (Flickr)
To get the HPR each quarter, Subscribe Now
Current Issue: Spring 2010
Religion in America
- Is Godless Great? A New Heyday for American Secularism
The American Way of Faith Compromise, innovation, and tradition
Read more
112 Comments
2010-03-09
12:51:23
There is some info missing here. Right now there is a 'fight' in the PDP because some of their member want to change the current status by voting for a more freedom status with dual citizenship. So right now we are talking about, people who want the independence, another who wants more freedom inside the current status, people who wants the current status and people pro-statehood. The story is different today. The independence party always is going to be a minority, but the commonwealth party/status is going to change now by creating a huge division of people wanting more "freedom" making the rest wanting the statehood instead.
2010-03-09
14:04:01
Juan: I assume you don't got to Harvard, am I right? So what if there's a "fight" in the pro-Commonwealth party? The bottom line that your brain can't comprehend is that the pro-Commonwealth party will always be the anti-statehood and anti-indepence party. Just because they have always won every single referendum and plebiscite in the past 60 years doesn't mean you will exclude them from the next referendum called for in H.R. 2499 so statehooders can, for the first time, win a freaking election! Please go back and rethink your nonsensical stand, or perhaps, write it in English se we can understand it better.
2010-03-09
14:31:28
Another problem with this article is that it erroneously states that the second plebiscite is between statehood and independence. This is utterly false. The second plebiscite has three options: statehood, independence, and a freely associated state option, which is now being supported by some in the commonwealth party. Given that in the first plebiscite, voters will have voted for or against the current status quo commonwealth option, it is not necessary to insert it again in the second plebiscite. Opponents to this bill have argued that a forth option should be included: an enhanced commonwealth whereby PR would have almost all the benefits of being a state yet it would also be able to sign treaties as if it were a foreign country. However, legal precedents as well as many scholars have argued that this form of government would be unconstitutional. If this bill is not passed by Congress, perhaps the solution would be to have a local plebiscite with four options: statehood, independence, freely associate state (or associate sovereignty), and the current commonwealth status. These are the only options that fit within the US constitution.
2010-03-09
16:20:54
It is true- there is a third option. It is, however, a form of independence and it is not supported by the PDP, not even by the minority that supports what is known as "free association".
Nonetheless, neither this or the PDP's ideological struggle are the main points of this article. The clear and evident strategy to favor statehood is what's being criticized. All other subcategories within the status issue can be subject to multiple articles -and even books- about the issue.
It is true that the status quo is being voted on, however, it is not being voted on equal grounds between all other options. It would be the same if there were a Statehood:yes or no vote.
On enhancements: The PDP has been clear that it seeks enhancements to the present relationship, but not that it wishes to change it. The degree of autonomy sought is disputed, but there is common agreement that even if these were not possible, the status quo is better than the other options.
2010-03-09
21:11:07
Today's political landscape is different from 1998. For instance, the commonwealth party pro sovereignty wing is a majority right now. The former governor pushed the sovereignty issue to a level never seen before in that party, he clearly stated that the commonwealth option has to be a non colonial non territorial option and that Puerto Ricans need to have the sovereignty in their hands, he got 800,000 votes or 46%.
All the polls show that the mayor of Caguas and a fierce sponsor of the Sovereign commonwealth option (with a free association treaty between both nations, Puerto Rico and the USA) is the most popular politician in the island according to the poll published by El Nuevo Dia newspaper.
Today is different from 1998, the Sovereign option is not only a majority within the PPD but also pro independence supporters not affiliated with the pro independence party, which are the majority, have also given an ok to the Sovereign commonwealth option as a big step away from statehood while achieving decolonization at the same time, there are talks about this alliance in favor of sovereignty between the PPD leaders and pro independence supporters and movements, alliance that has been growing in recent elections at all levels. For instance, the pro independence movement MINH supported many PPD candidates in the past elections, this has been going on for many years and is growing into a anti statehood and pro sovereign block to push statehood option as far away as possible.
2010-03-10
07:24:09
I need Puerto Rican statehood like you need a tumor.
2010-03-10
07:38:01
It is true that statehood has lost all plebiscites in the past but as it has bee stated in the comments before mine there is a huge argument on what the meaning of the term "free associated state" within the PDP. But there is another issue that hasnt been explained here, in the past groups that defend the independence for Puerto Rico knowing they cannot win a plebiscite have shown support to the "free associated state" because they know statehood would crush theyre agendas for independece so we can say that they have been stalling in some way by keeping the status in some sort of "limbo" to give them time to press for independece. You can say that a false majority has been deciding also the outcome of past plebiscites. If a true meaning of the term "free associated state" is given to the people of Puerto Rico results will probably be a lot different than in the past but since the PDP cannot reach an agreement of the definition of the term they cannot be added to the ballot.
2010-03-10
07:52:10
Self-determination is a process (means), it is not a goal. The goal is to end colonial or quasi-colonial status. When the process is confused with the goal, articles such as the one above are the result.
As a process, self-determination with the most broad liberal interpretation of choices is indeed the morally correct option. However, in the case of Puerto Rico, that process has produced gridlock, resulting in a situation in which nobody is happy. That is why there constantly appear majorities in the legislature ready and willing to approve plebiscites.
When the usual process of self-determination devolves into a stalemate and results in no change and no determination at all, then it becomes immoral and must be changed. How long must Puerto Ricans go without being able to elect their Head of State or those who make their laws before it's too long?
Not a single mainstream political leader in Puerto Rico supports the current status as is. However, the current administrators of the Popular Democratic Party (PDP) want to have their cake and eat it too. They say they want to modify the current commonwealth but when confronted with the clear option to say "we want a type of commonwealth that is different from the commonwealth we have", which is exactly what HR 2499 does, then they cry foul because they know they will never get a majority for that.
The more intellectually honest members and elected officials of the PDP actually support HR 2499 and the commonwealth definition it states for the second round of voting. Why do they do this? Because the definition is lifted ad-verbatim from the PDP's latest majority approved platform.
Finally, the most troubling thing about this article is that its writer Pablo Hernandez is apparently the son of the PDP's head of status affairs, Jose Alfredo Hernandez Mayoral, and does not disclose this information. This is a conflict of interest and an ethical lapse of the worst sort and the Harvard Political Review should not be a party to it.
2010-03-10
07:54:49
As you can see, there is many opinions in Puerto Rico about the issue of the status. U.S. Congress, can't wait no more for us to reach an agreement. It's time that the U.S. take responsibility in this issue and promotes a democratic process in which all puertoricans can decide which type of relationship we want to establish with the U.S. Nation and what the US Congress is willing to accept in terms of the political and economical relationship with us. No more excuses, we need your ACTION!
2010-03-10
08:02:20
Mr Professor your article makes sense when you read it because is made from an incorrect statement that more PR's do not want to becocme a state. If you want to use statistics you should have used last election results that if you add PPD voters and PIP voter is less than PNP voters got. Also the previous plesbisites where manipulated by the PPD as they where in power. Whoever is in top controls the game!!! that's american corporate democracy at it's best. Isnt' that what is taught at Harvard business school?
2010-03-10
08:18:00
I think that another point that has been missed, and it is of utmost importance, is this:
The options to resolve the present status dilemma must be non-territorial and non-colonial. No one, including the pro-commonwealth, is satisfied with the status quo. Apparently, there is a move now among the PDP leadership to promote a new concept of sovereignty through a new pact to remove P.R. from Congress' territorial clause and become a true "Free Associated State." All this might be a moot point until Congress is clear on which status options they are willing to offer and abide by .
2010-03-10
08:18:37
Pablo when you write an article in a prestigious magazine you should really state when you have a conflict of interest, namely when your father is a past and possible future candidate for the party that supports your views.
Second I believe you should change your the topic titles to the following, to better represent what you're really saying.
1. "An incomplete and biased history of voting".
2." The meaning of democracy, when it benefits my party and family of course".
3." Letting present losers and past winners win, by changing the game in favor of the losers".
I'll let this bad article slide this time, the snowstorms in the northeast must have kept you away from Puerto Rico for far too long to really know what's going on here.
2010-03-10
08:22:46
First of all, I want to address my comment to George. Mister, you don't win any points by making fun at other people. Now, in regards to the article, I have to say that I have been living in Chicago for the past 40 years, but I listen to WKQ daily. I know what people in the island say about this issue. Although a large portion favor statehood, the majority of the people favor the status quo. So like the article states it has to be part of any plebiscite. To my judgment, the ""soberanistas" in the Popular Party have the right idea, but the problem that they encounter is that the boricuas are afraid of the word "self-government". In regards to the ëstadistas" you travel to the mountain towns and talk to people, and there are those who favor statehood and don't speak English and have never travelled outside the island. They think that statehood will bring and end to the crime and corruption that takes place in the island. Little do they know, that the same thing happens in Chicago where our governors tend to land in jail, and the crime statistics tell us that from January 30, 2010 to March 1, 2010 the total of crimes reported is 26,850 including the killing of many school children.
So, to my friends in the island, statehood does not bring and end to crime.
2010-03-10
08:25:43
I have to say, I'm a proud member of the PDP, but an article on the Harvard Political Review that is headlined in Puerto Rico's major news outlets as " Harvard expert criticizes status' proyect" (http://www.elnuevodia.com/revistapoliticadeharvardcriticaproyectodepierluisi-683686.html) should also note the major conflict of interest that the author's family connections bring to the table. Excellent job in unbiased journalism from the "prestigious" Harvard Political Review.
2010-03-10
08:28:18
Puertoricans woul never vote for state or independency, They love the easy $$$$ without paid federal taxes they don't care vote for the USA president they care for the USA passport and all the benefits for the lazy people witch are the majority. If the island for any reason became independet the next day will be at least 3 millions of Puertoricans flying to the states the other millions will survive for few weeks, the comonwhealth is beautifull please USA keep sending my money! Thank you! Otherwise I need to work or hunting, fishing etc...
2010-03-10
08:29:11
Este es el reflejo, claro y contundente de que los Estados Unidos no están dispuestos a otorgar la estadidad. El problema es que no lo dicen y ya es tiempo de que hablen. Ciertamente se plantea el problema que representaría para los EU aprobar un proyecto que en virtud tiene una votación para que los puertorriqueños se expresen a favor o en contra del status actual pero en defecto tiene la segunda votación que comprometería los EU con la formula de la estadidad. Lo absurdo y hasta cierto punto irresponsable del planteamiento del profesor Shepsle es someter al pueblo a escoger entre el status actual (Estado Libre Asociado) y la estadidad. Es como decir que en la época de la esclavitud la opción de liberar a los esclavos no se podía presentar por que eran pocos los ciudadanos que la apoyaban. Recuerde usted profesor Shepsle que el único derecho inalienable entre las alternativas de status es la independencia y plena soberanía y que si el pueblo puertorriqueño favorece las otras alternativas que ahora a EU no les conviene es por que EU a propiciado esto. EU tenia unos intereses geopoliticos hace algunas décadas y propició una dependencia extrema a cambio de permanecer en el area. Le vendió al mundo que el problema del status se había resuelto a cambio de ese trueque con políticos de la isla. Esto hizo que estos dos partidos crecieran y que los favorecedores de la independencia fueran perseguidos y encarcelados. La historia esta ahí, examínela.
2010-03-10
08:42:47
"Pablito si te vas, deja la pistola acá. Pablito si te vas, deja la pistola acá ...." Deja la vaina chico. El ELA se acabó. Mira a ver lo que quieren Willie y Fas Alzamora y ponte pa tu número que el guame ya se les acabó. Tu y tu Pay que se decidan si quieren la estadidad o la independencia (con o sin asociación con los Estados Unidos.). ¡Que viva el fin de la Colonia!
2010-03-10
08:52:20
Pablo, congratulations for being published. There's is a proverb that says: " if is not broken, don't fix it" Since 1952 the PDP is looking for alternatives to perpetuate a status that was created to developed a territory of the US. They have admit that PR is a colony, but non the less they always interfere when we try to end this establishment. Remember the: "non of the above option". They want to continue to be US citizens, but not be subjects to the obligations that this require,like paying Federal taxes. Injecting fear on Puertoricans of how damaging this could be. When as matter of fact we are taxed for our income and the difference between for what we pay now to what we will pay, is not a big deal, but in terms of benefits it will be another story.
I'm pretty sure that you are aware that since 1917 we have bleed for the US. Participating in all the wars and conflicts that the US has been involve. without having the right to vote for the Commander and Chief that will send us there. Without having representation in Congress that will oppose or confirm those actions. We are US citizens that due to our condition of living in a non incorporated territory, thanks to our current status, can't vote for the President or any representative with voting power in Congress. Don't you think this is targeting people for the fact that they are from a different nationality?
Based on the principles of nationality and citizenship, which are two different things, is that PDP has been able to maintain there power of confusion over all the Puertorican's. I don't think my nationality is link to a political status, if that is the case, our nationality is not that strong. My nationality is stronger than that, I am Puertorican, I am a US citizen, I want PR to become a State. I don't think my nationality will ceases because of it. Evidence of it are the 2nd and 3rd generation puertoricans that live in the US, many of those have never being on the Island, but non the less they are Boricuas.
2010-03-10
08:54:43
No polls have been published to support the conclusion that the pro-commonwealth party (or the majority of its leadership and members) now support the free association option, which is a form of independence. On the contrary, polls still show the broad support that the Commonwealth option still has among Puerto Ricans. The truth is that HR 2499 is intended to deny access to the ballot to commonwealth supporters. A true democratic process would allow for the two most favored alternatives to compete in a second round voting process. It is ironic that the pro statehood leadership want (or expect) Puerto Rico to join the US federation through the most undemocratic process.
2010-03-10
08:56:48
Los Estados Unidos no esta interesado en que Puerto Rico sea un estado, al igual que la gran mayoria de los puertorriqueños y esa realidad esta basada en las relaciones economicas, culturales, politicas, historicas y militares. Las potencias mundiales, estan interesadas en conseguir aliados alrededor del mundo, compartiendo su ciudadania, su moneda, su economia, su vision global del nuevo orden; pero no los mueve el interes de que se hagan parte de los Estados Unidos como estado, ya eso no es un requisito. Si los Estados Unidos logra( es una realidad en sus metas) que paises completos le sirvan en los aspectos economicos,militares y todo lo que conlleve el Nuevo Orden ,no tienen nesediad de anexarlos a la nacion y sus compromisos con esos paises serian selectivos por el Congreso de EU, ya que que le tomaria decadas borrarle su conciencia cultural colectiva. Solo los ignorantes politicos de Puerto Rico (no la poblacion general, que ya se a expresado en distintas consultas) piensan que , los Estados Unidos va a aceptar un pais,nacion cuando esa nacion , sus gobernantes no saben llevar una secion extraordinaria en el Senado Puertorriqueno en el idioma oficial de Estados Unidos, cuando los sitemas sociales, escuelas,periodicos, noticiarios,eventos culturales y etc se llevan a cabo en el lenguaje que las personas entienden y que demas esta decirlo,el idioma que no estan dispuestos a dejar, ya que los puertorriquenos por instinto, educacion o sentido comun saben, que abandonar su idioma es borrar su identidad del Planeta Tierra. Hagan un estudio en las colonias de Puertorriqueños en areas como el Bronx, Los Angeles, Houstn, Orlando,Chicago,Brookling, AllenTown PA, por mencionar algunos y luego atrevasen a ver la situacion de Puerto Rico en relacion con Los Estados Unidos con seriedad,imparsialidad y objetividad, ya que toda desicion que los Estados Unidos de America realise tiene que ir dirijida por los mas y mejores intereses del pueblo norteamericano y el Nuevo Orden Mundial que se esta establesiendo. Lo demas es ignorancia, preguntese ¿Que papel o rol juega Puerto Rico dentro del Nuevo Orden Mundial, en relacion con la potencia militar que es Estados Unidos? El problema es mas complejo que cojer de tonto con formulas de estatus parcialisadas y huecas a una poblacion de residentes del Planeta Tierra. Haga referencia alos estudios economicos y militares que Estados Unidos y El Congreso a realizado en las ultimas dos decadas en relacion a Puerto Rico, y El Caribe. Puerto Rico necesita personas serias que dialoguen sus asuntos, no personas mediocres e incompetentes que todavia piensan y creen que Estados Unidos desaparece como Nacion o pierde su poderio economico militar si no tiene el territorio de Puerto Rico,El Congreso de Estados Unidos de America, su Presidente de turno; debe brindarle la formula mejorada de Estatus a Puerto Rico , ya que ellos son los que realmente tienen la ultima desicion y sus congresistas y sus ciudadanos norteamericanos no se han expresado a favor de la anexion,Gracias
2010-03-10
09:02:17
Yes, it is true that there will be a third option but, this is how it is defined "national sovereignty in association with the United States" who in Puerto Rico understands what that means.
Again, Like Manuel Orellana from the Pro-Independence Party told the White House Interagency task force "hearing" a week ago, "You (US) will have to decide what are you willing to offer to Puerto Rico." How can Puerto Ricans make a decision when they do not know what will be offered? Those who support statehood in Puerto Rico are being take for a ride, they are told that the US will accept Puerto Rico as a "Hispanic" state. Can anyone show WHEN in the history of this country this has happened? Don't be influenced by votes for or against independence. Puerto Rico WILL be free in a few decades. It is convenient for the US and PR.
2010-03-10
09:02:54
To all that have an opinion on this issue. Stop racking your brains on this so called "problem".
The US Congress is the only entity that has any real power to change the status of the island of Puerto Rico. They will eventually present a take-it-or leave-it solution to this issue if and when PR becomes a real problem to the USA. If Puerto Rico want's to resolve this issue it has to become an unbareable problem for the US. If not this issue will be dragged on by those in the NPP that get financial gain by proposing these "plebicites" that don't change anything, and who are those? The companies that have advertising contracts with the local government and who make campaign contributions to all the lowly politicians in PR.
2010-03-10
09:06:51
This is a Story that never ends!.......... This is a Comedy! The worst thing about it, Is that the P.R. Government is not an honest one. They are just there for the amount of money they make. They don’t care about the people needs and even careless about the status, as long as they receive the help and support of the U.S. Government it's ok to be a "Free associate state"(Colony).
2010-03-10
09:08:07
Colonialism has left the mayority of the Puerto Rican people wothout a decisive sense of sovereignty and self determanitation; our nationalism only manifests itselt in sporting events and whenever we see a Puerto Rican artist on MTV. The problem is not the political parties perse, the real problem is the system in itself...it is deliberately obstructed, parties against each other, Puerto Rican against each other. And for what? Well, divide and conquer. The U.S. does not want Puerto Rico to be independent nor a state of the Union...in order to perpetuate the colony and make it seem like its the Puerto Rican people's fault is the scheme to justify the country (U.S.) which is THE advocate of self determination, liberty and justice... and all those false ideals of the elite few. Keep the people divided with ilusions of statehood, (keep in mind that four territories have been admitted to the Union before Puerto Rico) feed the fear of an unstable Latin America, poverty, political instability and many of the other ills that plaugue Latin America (which Puerto Rico IS A PART OF) feeds the fuel which kindles the fear of independence. The PNP is a amalgam of a few idealistic traitors that look at the U.S. as the standart to meet; most of the followers of that rediculous party are people who don't speak English, lower class and and whos fear is fed by the ignorant demagougues who lead the party. If the PNP and their followers would only realize the the Anglo-Saxon, political-economical establishment of the U.S. does not want a Spanish-speaking peoples as a State...if that were the case, P.R. would have been admitted long ago. The mental insularism that has been created; looking at the U.S. as the only way is a direct product of centuries of ignorance, repression and passion. The PPD are a bunch of cowards, Puerto Ricans that want to wave the flag and AND be able to go to Walmart and buy a TV...the PIP and the micro nationalists groups will never have a chance to grasp power because they have institutionalized their leadership, are not able to communicate with the lower classes and most important are divided.
Simply put, P.R. serves as an outlet, as an additional (and very profitable) foreing market that consumes and supports the U.S. economy. P.R. has and will be a stepping stone for U.S. foreign policy on Latin America as well as a military outpost ( as described by A.T. Mahan) that has provided thousands of soldiers to U.S. wars.
In sum, the real problem is education, awareness and consciousness on society and our political future. Keep the people distracted by TV, movies and yellow journalism, feed their fears and the people will NOT REFLECT. In P.R. democracy in a farse only used to divide wills, not forge a political consensus..."¿qué les pasa a los puertorriqueños que no se rebelan?"- Betances
2010-03-10
09:15:33
Pablo's article is a well-written analysis on the Puerto Rico political status subject. That is why the article was published by this publication. Neither a disclosure is necessary nor an ethical issue exists. Those who personally criticize Pablo are probably uncapable of writing an article with the same depth of analysis.