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
2010-03-10
09:21:32
creo que se le olvida algo a pablo hernadez,cuando el partido popular democratico gano los referendum,el partido ppd, todabia no estaba tirando ala independencia,desde que el gobernador anibal acevedo vidal , hablo de soberania, el pueblo se tiro a votar y perdio por mucho, el pueblo le dijo que no queria un status soberano con poderes mayoritario,bajo el estado libre asociado soberano,ademas creo pablo que escribistes este reportaje con infruencia partidaria,ya el pueblo de puerto rico quiere un cambio,y el cambio seria en tres formulas,y tu sabes muy bien que los puertorriquenos de ahora, la juventud adoran su cuidadania americana y no la van a querer perder con una soberania independiente, como lo quieren ustedes,basta ya de mentiras.statehood para puerto rico.
2010-03-10
09:21:53
Congress runs the show. Not the people of Puerto Rico nor the people of the fifty other states. If Congress wants to give PR statehood, PR will get it, come hell and high water, or negative reaction from its constituents! If Congress wants to give Independence to PR then it will give it to PR, again come hell and high water!! Remember, folks: in our corporate democarcy he who owns Congress own democracy. We learned that on our first day at Havard Business School.
2010-03-10
09:23:27
To Fernando:
"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."
The past tense of bleed is bled, not bleed. Also, im pretty sure involve ends with a "d". e.g. "involved" when used in the past tense. Learn your english before posting a pro statehood opinion anywhere, specially when referring to our fellow Puertorican soldiers.
P.S. I'm just playing man haha.
2010-03-10
09:23:39
So..we don't we dont need the statehood. We need a real economic system...a good one. The statehood fail to meet that requirement.
2010-03-10
09:24:36
ademas pablo no es pdp,ni tampoco ppn,aprende primero los nombres de los partidos politicos de puerto rico, es pnp, y ppd.
2010-03-10
09:31:16
This is a very interesting article. I don't want to start debate by a bias article.
Ask any person that is pro ELA (Commonwealth) if they had to choose between independence and statehood, what would be their choice. Their answer will most likely be statehood.
ELA has served its purpose. It moved Puerto Rico ahead economically in the region. Being a US territory and receiving the federal funds helped.
The US can pretty much do whatever they want with Puerto Rico and I can't vote for the president?... and to top it off I have voice but no vote in congress. I can get drafted, by the way I am a veteran, I can go to war but I have little representation.
For a lot of US politicians is the political power that Puerto Rico will have as a state. Due to our population density Puerto Rico would have 5 or 6 congressmen, and very likely democrats. This is something a lot of people don't like to talk about.
The interesting thing is that if HR 2499 passes and Puerto Ricans vote for statehood, what will congress do? Can you imagine that after all that they vote Nay? What then? That would be a clear sign that the US does not want Puerto Rico as a state and we can all move on. That is the big crapshoot from the Statehood party, the fear of the Commonwealth party and the "I TOLD YOU SO" from the independent movement.
For a lot of Puerto Ricans the commonwealth is all they know as a political system. Most supporters of statehood have only visited the US for leisure, and most of the supporters of independence, have no idea which kind of Republic Puerto Rico could be. The uncertainty is there. I have been lucky enough to have worked internationally in countries with different types of political systems. All have their good things and bad things its their la makers and their culture which will dictate that.
2010-03-10
09:33:19
This is for the people who don;t live here (PR) or for the people who has no idea waht the F is Puerto Rico. Do you know that PR work force is about 44%? 15% less than USA. Do you know why? Becuase we receive too many Federal Funds for the "poors". Do you think that PR is a real option to be a statehood? Puerto Rico is a real pain! We need to resolve our problems first. USA will kick our behind like USSR did with Cuba. We are too expensive!
2010-03-10
09:33:59
How the colony can be a valid option? The slaves were never offered to vote slavery...yes or no. Why? Because slavery is an insult to human rights. The colonialism is a form of slavery, that under the auspices of the UN was rejected by all the people. The US constitution has no room for colonialism. The 4million US citizens living in Puerto Rico deserve a better future. Some of our families have paid with blood the freedoms of our nation. Don't we deserve better tratment?
2010-03-10
09:36:46
WOW! How come HPR will publish articles with such poor content!
Other than the usual bickering by the colonial parties in PR, we have such statements as "self determination relies on choosing from the most favored alternatives." The most favored alternative in PR is remaining Puerto Rican and not denationalizing into something else. You would never vote against that, would you?.
As long as there is one Puerto Rican who does not consider the US his or her "nation" , he or she can only live in Puerto Rico as a Puerto Rican with a Puerto Rican government, water supply, music, and reminding his children not to become dependent on others as former generations sought to, even in an amazingly proud way.
There is no other place in the planet where Puerto Ricans can inhabit their land but in Puerto Rico. Anyone who asks that question and looks at a map will acknowledge this.
Those whose nation is somewhere else are misplaced at birth and can leave to populate their "nation" with a one way ticket and with a VISA to return. That is their choice once forewarned, even though they were born into a system which strongly contributed to their denationalization. The rest of this hot air is not worth it.
Sociologists have never answered how come some PR's want to become the, and others want to retain the "indissoluble bond" of common citizenship, with the other party which they all agree has ignored them for decades. Who can argue that colonialism does not involve pathological personalities, and deranged psyches? And we are supposed to vote for our brand of dependency?
2010-03-10
09:38:24
Something important that is being left out in all of these comments regarding leaving out commonwealth as an option is that, under the system that Puertoricans currently live in does not allow them to vote for the President of the US, but still are affected by his decisions, including going to war. This to me is the most anti-democratic system you can have.
Unless a commonwealth option that gives Puertoricans this right is developed, then any argument of leaving out the current commonwealth status as anti-democartic is foolish.
2010-03-10
09:39:23
I think the article is well written, and I agree with most of Mr. Hernandez arguements. That being said, I would like to point out to all that have left comments before me....this is just an article written, most likely by sophomore in college.....but hey, it's HARVARD POLITICAL REVIEW!!!
2010-03-10
09:49:07
Manipulating self determination is what the colonial powers that be have done in PR for six decades. Including the last plebiscite of 1998 in which the 'None of the above' column was intended to dilute the clear pro-statehood majority and to confuse the electorate. Now that there appears to be a clear majority of pro-statehooders on the island, Mr. Hernandez has misgivings about it. This 'article' has more holes than a pound of swiss cheese.
2010-03-10
09:53:58
About the author:
According to the article, "Pablo Hernandez ‘13 is a Contributing Writer."
That means:
'13 = Freshman student at Harvard
Hernandez = He is the son of Jose Alfredo Hernandez Mayoral
So, in response to the article at El Nuevo Dia's website:
The only "expert", like El Nuevo Dia says, in this article is not the author, it is Prof. Shepsle who was asked for a comment about a bill and who has not researched the issue scholarly. That is why he prefaced his comments with the word "probably". He is giving himself an out in case he turns out to be horribly wrong, which happens to be the case.
2010-03-10
09:55:30
Since I remember the problem in Puerto Rico is the colonial status. Hwy become part of the problem if we can become part of the solution. Puerto Rico estado 51. We American go to war but we cannot vote for the commander in chief what democracy is that. Politian come to Puerto Rico and have fun raising but we cannot vote for them what democracy is that. I was born in the United State (FL) and raised in the United State (PR) and I am part of this great nation. We are people proud of our citizenship and we have paid with our live for it. Estadidad o muerte
2010-03-10
09:58:34
Well, it looks like Luis dug a little deeper....I like how "El Nuevo Dia" considers this news...
2010-03-10
10:03:27
The problem is simple. As long as the USA have a captive market where they inject 25+ billion dollars and then shake back over 70 billion dollars thru companies like Sears, Walmart, Baxter, Johnson & Johnson etc. ; as long as their politicians can come here sell us a little BS and walk away with almost a million dollars in campaign funds like President Obama did; and all that can be done without giving Puertoricans any political power, The USA will keep feeding both sides to keep the money machine going on eternally. And that includes biased so called academics and political experts that concludes that the good thing to do is do nothing.
2010-03-10
10:07:15
Some of you are forgetting that everytime there is a referendum to determine wheter we should become a state or not, some of the campaings are based on lies. I remember back then, they told us that if we were to become a state we wil start paying sale taxes and state taxes, but no body had ever said that is something that is for the state to determine and as far as I know the same party that was saying this kind of stuff is the one who ended up passing the law for the sale taxes, which are pretty hefty compare to what you pay for sale taxes here in some of the states. The only way something like this will ever work is if people is told the truth and if people was smart enough to educate themselves before the go out and vote. To finish I have come to the conclusion, and Im sorry for what I'm abuout to say, but the puertorrican community want everything without any strings attached, we want to have the same benefits the other 50 states have but we are not willing to become one, we want to remain in a status quo. Shame on us for becoming this.
2010-03-10
10:11:49
Pablo is actually a freshman in college. I can't believe HPR published such a biased articles written by the son of Hernandez Mayoral, the PDP's head of status affairs. I've lost a lot of respect for the HPR.
2010-03-10
10:16:11
What's more undemocratic: not having ELA as it stands as an option, or being the citizen of a country whose President you don't elect and whose congress you have no vote in?
Don't be so patronizing. The ballot is the LEAST of the islands issues with 'Democracy'.
2010-03-10
10:17:28
Mr. Hernandez, in 1952, Congress authorized under Public Law 600 that a territory of the United States be allowed to have a Territorial Constitution for an internal ordered insular government; Puerto Rico is not a commonwealth, its present status is that of a territory as defined by the US Constitution. In 1952 the political status of the island did not change and has been the same since 1898 under the treaty of Paris, a possession of Congress under Article 4 Clause 3 of our Constitution.
Asking whether the Puerto Ricans want to remain under the present status or not, does not favor any one. What you are being asked is to continue as a territory or not? Which political party is favored? If the result is no, then the Constitutional question is whether to become a State or become independent? The Federal Constitution doesn’t describe any other alternative. However, if independence is chosen, then the question of establishing an associated free state (Associated Republic) under a mutual pact is in order, if that is the wish of the people.
One can immediately notice your political inclination in the opening paragraph of your article; if you are informing then bias is not part of the equation, however, you are trying to sway opinion, one can understand your one sided exposition.
2010-03-10
10:18:48
"Puerto Rico has been a self-governing commonwealth of the United States since 1952". With this statement the writer demonstrates ignorance unbecoming of a Harvard student. Under applicable US law, Puerto Rico is an unincorporated territory of the United States, subject to the authority of the Congress. It has been a century since the US Supreme Court decided that. Under current international law principles, that means that Puerto Rico is a colony of the United States. Colonialism, every Harvard student should be taught, is a crime against human rights. As a Harvard alumnus, I find it appalling as of 2010 to read an article in a journal associated with the Department that I graduated from that confers the illegal and immoral political condition in Puerto Rico the same "dignity" that, when I was an undergraduate, some of my peers gave to the "black homelands" that the racist South African regime of the 1980s established in order to enforce apartheid.
2010-03-10
10:21:22
To Kiko:
Thank you for the grammar class!!! Point taken, Thank God, I don't need grammar for my ideas. You can be an excellent editor, since you know your grammar very well and don't have any ideas of your own.
P.s. Just kidding..JAJAJA (laughing in Spanish)
2010-03-10
10:29:19
Congratulations Mr. Kenneth Shepsle!! You just became an entertainer in the midget minded world of the puertorican political circus!! You have been used by a 19 years old "expert"! Aside from that, you should stick to the defense of democracy and equal rights for ALL US citizens under equal conditions something the "PR self government" does not provide. What a waste of time and print.
2010-03-10
10:48:27
Mr. Hernandez, yes, Puerto Rico has had three plebiscites, of which on historical analysis, it can be concluded that the only the 1967 plebiscite was an honest presentation to the electorate. The 1993 plebiscite became involved with the issue, among others, of the “936,” and the 1998, again among others, with Viequez, where the PPD “twisted” the presentation utilizing scare tactics, as can now be deduced with documented historical data. Further, statehood received 39% in 1967 and increased to 46% in 1993, even with the continued “half-truths” politics of the PPD. In 1998, again under similar circumstances of scare tactics by the PPD, the PNP received 46% but commonwealth (as you call it, which is really a colonial territory of the US Congress) received less than 1%, repeat, less than 1%. When you speak of “none of the above” as a winner, the question arises, what does it mean? Again, incertitude because of scare tactics by the PPD is the conclusion.
I also, would like to remind you that the present government won with a true absolute majority, not plurality; with a platform of pursuing statehood.
Finally, Mr. Hernandez, as freshman of your class, you still have a lot of academic experience to pursue before any one takes your comments seriously. Academic integrity does not involve bias presentations but rather the truth of facts, where the reader has basis to formulate his or her own opinion. You are using a prestigious forum to expose positions without rebuttal, and your audience is at an above average of intelligence. Please, in your future writings don’t be so insulting and defend your position in academia with arguments that are worth discussing in a two way avenue.
2010-03-10
10:57:24
Excellent English skills all around the table! I am shocked that Americans have not offered statehood to "Porto Ricans" yet. No, wait, I'm not. Enjoy your dreams of "jíbaro statehood," buds.
Love, McLaughin'