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
13:32:27
The author is manipulating the facts about Puerto Rico, he seems to be advocating in favor of the PPD to maintain us Puerto Ricans as a colony of the USA. With 1898 Treaty of Paris that ended the Hispano American War, Puerto Rico that was a colonial property of Spain, was given to The United Status as compensation because of war expenses. Since them Puerto Ricans have unsuccessfully tried to get out of the colonial control of the US. In 1952 the Commonwealth (ELA) was created given just an appearance of self governing country. Completely false statement which the US Supreme Court and two Presidential Task Force have reiterated false and have stated that PR still under the plenary powers of the US Congress, by definition a colonial possession of the US. We were and we still a colony because the historical processes have shaped in Puerto Ricans a colonized personality that resist change. We are partly responsible for this situation and are issues that we have to overcome in order to promote change in this relationship. There has never been a Federal referendum to survey the Puerto Ricans about our opinion of the present status. Not only the US wants to maintain their plenary powers over the people of PR but them also in confabulation with the PPD and PIP denies the democratic and constitutionally right of the People of PR to express their opinion about the status. All parties of PR have had and still have the opportunity to amend HR # 2499 that for the first time in history will start a direct communication process between the US Congress and the People of PR.
2010-03-10
13:50:35
Logan: Good points. Just to add to that, the enhanced ELA or ELA “Mejorado” has been studied by scholars and there are also several legal precedents which state that this option would be unconstitutional given that PR would have pretty much all the benefits of statehood, yet it would also have most of the rights of a sovereign or independent nation. Hence, PR would have the best of both worlds. Again this is an unconstitutional option which will NEVER be approved by Congress. PR has four constitutionally viable options: statehood, independence, freely associated state (or associated sovereignty) and the current status quo commonwealth status. That’s it. everything else are PPD dreams
2010-03-10
13:53:08
George:
What do you mean, you dont go to Harvard?
Are you asking: You dont have the $200,000 my daddy pays so I can go to Harvard?
Because of people like George, there are people in Puerto Rico that dont want statehood. Because of people like George, most of the world hate us american citizens.
George, you should educate yourself and learn other languages, like Spanish or Portuguese, Can you??
George is the result of too much playstation.
2010-03-10
14:30:32
CM: I would like you to provide any citation of those legal precedents and/or "scholars" you are referring to. It is evident that you have never read US Supreme Court opinions on the subject such as Rodriguez v. PPD, 457 U.S 1 (1982). In addition, scholars such as Dean Alexander Aleinikoff, from the Georgetown School of Law and attorney Charles Cooper (both real intellectual authorities) have written on the subject and concluded that there are no constitutional obstacles to the Commonwealth enhancement proposals that have been proposed.
2010-03-10
14:40:46
McLaughlin I will like to know what business you have in the issue of Puerto Rico. Every Tax payer should know that the US spends many many many millions of US tax payer’s money for 4million people that do not pay anything or give anything back. The only thing they do is get submitted to all Federal Laws, Presidential and congressional decisions that may affect them with NO real representation in Congress. They must submit their children to the US military draft if necessary. So, the reality is, not only it should be of great interest for the US Tax payer but for the Puertorican population itself to become a State and have them pay Federal Taxes. And don’t worry they will only be entitled to Two Senator and about 6 Congressmen that’s it. Then again that will be too much Power for a State with a 100% of Puertoricans that are considered minorities in this beloved USA. That is scary; right McLaughlin? It will be worst than electing a Black President.
2010-03-10
14:42:24
One does not acquire a moral obligation to respect an unjust law. “An unjust law is no law at all.” (St. Agustine).The laws that have been adopted by the US Congress since 1898 to justify and perpetuate the colonization of the Puerto Rican nation are illegitimate and void as “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.”
Colonialism is a constant state of oppression that threatens the respect for human rights and violates the recognition of “the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family.” We are morally obliged to disobey unjust laws that violate the basic tenets of liberty, freedom and democracy. For Puerto Ricans able to break free from the chains of oppression (mentally), our only call of duty is to rebel against imperialism. Puerto Rican patriots, irrespective of the individual consequences, have the moral obligation to uphold the values of liberty, freedom and democracy at whatever costs and by any means necessary, including arm struggle.
It is not up to the slave master to dictate the rules of engagement. The US regime - much like Nazi Germany or the Roman Empire in earlier times - will certainly continue to legislate and use semantics to perpetuate the exploitation of the Puerto Rican people as well as to criminalize any and all attempts by the oppressed to break away from slavery. Colonialism is wrong! Colonialism is a crime against humanity!
True, those who spouse ideals of freedom, justice and independence for Puerto Rico constitute and has historically constituted a minority culture. State sponsored terrorism and the fierce repression unleashed on independence proponents is one good reason why many Puerto Ricans have cultivated a rooted but distorted fear of all sorts over the ideal of independence. Many, in fact, reject supporting today the ideal of liberty in fear of the retaliation by local administrators as well as the regime itself.
Puerto Rico is a territory military occupied by the United States and it’s highly organized for military conflict and violence, as an effective method of mass control. Understandably, a majority of Puerto Ricans, again, have been psychologically traumatized in over 400 years of tyranny and imperialism, first at the hands of Spain and later, and for the past 112 years, at the hands of the most brutal regime in modern history, the United States of America. Keep in mind that when I say modern history, it must not be forgotten that Homo sapiens have existed for approximately 200 thousand years. Government sponsored terrorism and repression in the spectrum of harassment and forced exiled and all the way to the extra judicial killings of our independence leaders, have caused profound psychological trauma across the board among all Puerto Ricans. Yet, we will eventually break the chains of oppression!
To better understand statistics - one of the three kinds of lies - as it relates to percentages of the electorate in Puerto Rico who have presumably favored statehood or colonialism, we would do well to review what historian Robert Calhoon wrote in 2000, concerning the proportion of Loyalists to Patriots in the Thirteen Colonies:
Historians' best estimates put the proportion of adult white male loyalists somewhere between 15 and 20 percent. Approximately half the colonists of European ancestry tried to avoid involvement in the struggle — some of them deliberate pacifists, others recent emigrants, and many more simple apolitical folk. The patriots received active support from perhaps 40 to 45 percent of the white populace, and at most no more than a bare majority.[6]
As a side bar you’d do well to remember some prominent loyalists, like William Franklin, governor of New Jersey and son of renowned Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Hutchinson, governor of Massachusetts.
In any event, in Puerto Rico, once we conquer our freedom, we’re not going to celebrate traitors. The names of glory in Puerto Rico are in the thousand fold, such as Ramón Emeterio Betances, Pedro Albizu Campos, Filiberto Ojeda Ríos, Julia de Burgos, Mariana Bracetti, Blanca Canales, Oscar Collazo, Juan Rius Rivera, Rafael Cancel Miranda, Oscar López, Víctor Gerena and many, many more patriots.
Once, McCartyism and the House Committee on Un-American Activities was the rule of the land in the United States. Interracial marriage was unconstitutional in the USA until 1967. Additionally, the Jim Crow laws, mandating de jure racial segregation in the USA, were enacted until 1965. Moreover, around 1956 J. Edgar Hoover formalized a terrorist program under the name of COINTELPRO, similar to the Patriot Act and the despicable acts in Abu Ghraid and the Guantanamo US sponsored international torture centers. Puerto Rican freedom fighters, including our political prisoners, would confirm that COINTELPRO is still operational to this day.
Again, “[a]n unjust law is no law at all.” The criminals in Capitol Hill can say whatever they wish and jump through loops to explain the unexplainable. Puerto Rico is a colony and has been militarily occupied since 1898, regardless of what Congress or the White House says; irrespective of what colonized slaves in Puerto Rico also say (i.e., Stockholm syndrome). After all, is not as if the world has not seen this type of pathological behavior before. Mass murderer George Bush lied over 700 times to justify the invasion and destruction of Irak and no weapons of mass destruction have ever been found.
¡Que viva Puerto Rico libre! Freedom to Puerto Rico Now! Freedom to all Puerto Rican Political Prisoners Now!
Elliot Monteverde Torres
March 10, 2010
elliotmtorres@yahoo.com
2010-03-10
14:52:13
Is this Hernandez a friend of Mc Laughin? Geez...His whole shtick is to use Ad Hominems against those "bad..bad..men" that note what they perceive are the author's motivations.
The real problem here with this article is that the author insist that the current colonial status, is the answer to the colonial status. No mister Hernandez, the problem cannot be the answer.
For all the euphemism that are used a colony is a colony. There is a saying in Puerto Rico that states "A monkey ,even when dressed in silk, a monkey still is".
For over 60 years the colonial party (PPD) has blocked any meaningful movement of the resolution of our colonial status, claiming that the majority prefer it and don't want to see it change. In reality, it is the Colonial party interest to retain power since it has aligned itself with the colonial status.
What the author claims (not surprisingly the colonial PPD position also), is analogous as the right of a slave to remain a slave if it so wishes. Well...slavery is not legal anywhere in the World and no man, or country, has a right to become or remain one, even if he chooses that. Colonialism is the same thing, as it is proscribed internationally as a crime, and all nations (including the USA) have vowed to free the remaining colonies under three accepted formulas. Statehood, Free Association, or Independence. The last two are sovereign independent status.
The author's point "don’t put the colonial status to a vote"., or if a vote is taken "include the colony as an option". Spoken as a true colonized demagogue
People of dignity and democratic ideas shudder at the though that such a monstrosity would be allowed. We need to end the colony. I am an independence militant, but forcing the end of the colony is what is right, and I for one do not want to continue to condemn future generations to the slavery and poverty of a colony. Whatever our people choose is ok with my, even if I don’t get my way. But let them have the chance to vote and choose democratically.
2010-03-10
14:57:16
@Jose
Charles Cooper is an intellectual authority? He may be a great trial lawyer. He even won Bush v. Gore for George W. Bush at the Supreme Court (a feat of judicial overreaching we are paying for to this day). He also won the "pivazos" case (Rosselló v. Calderón) for Anibal Acevedo Vilá.
But, he is usually on the wrong side of history. He is the defense attorney for Proposition 8, the anti-gay constitutional amendment which is probably the most odious, prejudiced and intentionally discriminatory piece of legislation ever to be approved in the State of California.
So, if you're going to commit logical fallacy of appealing to authority then let me say this: Charles Cooper is no authority I care to listen to.
2010-03-10
15:01:42
News in Puerto Rico say that this article was manipulated by puertoricans in Havard.
2010-03-10
15:12:44
Pablo,
you don't have any idea what you are talking about.
2010-03-10
16:21:41
Pablito: Your just repeating what your dad tells you. By the way, he's not gonna be governor of Puerto Rico.
2010-03-10
16:23:20
PR’s 40-year and counting demise is correlated to the monopolization of our political and civil capital by the status ideological discussion; the discussion above is simply one more “dance” within the very sad story of our island for the last forty years. The beginning of this disaster dates back to 1967 with the first plebiscite that posed the illogical question of "solving the status question" before due time.
Puerto Rico’s stellar record of growth and development in the three decades ending on that plebiscite has turned into one of the worst economic disasters of all time – perhaps rivaled only by Argentina’s drop from being a Top 5 economy in the world to its place today in less than 100 years. Long gone are the days of practical politicians who had the right goals in mind: the economic development of a country, which can then provide the resources to better educate ourselves, promote our culture, and ultimately become "Free" - in whichever "status" we choose (when we are truly prepared to choose it), or whatever "constitutional (to US or international courts :),!!) alternatives" there are at that point.
PR is deadlocked because of the status question and it has a perfect correlation to the its drop in the world in relative terms. Long gone are the days of seeing this little star in the Caribbean be an example to the world and be a welcoming home to Presidents, Master Musicians, and Nobel Prizes. It was the "practical" genius of a determined Puertorrican that took this island from being the 2nd poorest in the hemisphere to the richest in Latin America in less than three decades. Today, not only are we less than half as poor as the poorest state in the US, but, also poorer than various Latin American independent nations that we had breezed by forty years ago. We barely have money to keep our government open; how can we even think of analyzing the investments that will provide prosperity for the next 50 years.
While the facts of what we were in the world and what we are today are indisputable, there can be different versions to explain why this happened. Some may say its actually due to the current status, and that the solution only lies in choosing between other “constitutional” solutions. I respond to those people that while the current status could have disadvantages to statehood in certain matters (usually focused around higher “welfare” benefits – which drug us from developing), and to independence in others (like signing more advantageous treaties with other countries to enhance trade), it is also true that it brings advantages relative to both (like the indisputable value of having a US citizenship that provides free movement outside of an island that is 100x35 and access to the best education in the world). What I do know, is that having politicians that agree on basic principles of economic development voting against each other because of status ideology reasons is unquestionably the biggest drag on our own development. We have become less able to choose our destiny precisely because we have been on a useless march to define our destiny for forty years.
Let’s be practical – the status situation will not be solved given current conditions, why don’t we do something to put it to rest for the next 25 years and unite behind a common purpose, like those we used to have more than forty years ago. I say we create a plebiscite to bury the status question until which time we reach the level of economic development as the poorest state in the US (or any other benchmark of our choosing), which would then trigger another plebiscite asking our nationals if we want to go for a higher goal in the next 25 years or simply give it another try (in solving the status question).
Besides the political reality – what does a status have to do with the improvement of our human capital and our ability to produce goods and services that are competitive at home and abroad. Only by focusing on the productivity of our human capital will we become richer, and only by becoming richer will we be able to achieve all of our goals – social, cultural, developmental, etc. The status question doesn’t have anything to do with our development – its pure ideology, for pumping our chests (which we do more than most people in the world anyway) or late night drinking (which we also know how to do pretty well in relative terms) – and its has acted as a drug against our own development – ultimately the development of our children, our ambitions, and our culture.
Its time we put a stop to it and unite behind real goals just like true leaders were able to do more than forty years ago.
2010-03-10
17:20:22
See this is one of the reasons Puerto Rico is in the situation that it is. People love to advocate for freedom of speech, except when they have to give that liberty to people who don't think like them. I want to congratulate all those who, if they opposed the article's viewpoint, did so with statistics, information, and actual arguments (i.e. not arguing against it with personal attacks like "btw, he's not gonna be governor"- yeah, because that makes you sound so smart).
I would like to throw out there the idea that different viewpoints is... actually a great thing in order to look at all the different aspects of an issue and arriving at the best conclusion possible.
2010-03-10
17:32:20
Carlos L Irizarry:
I do not know the guy, but the rage his article caused in these comments makes him a-ok in my book. Truth be told, I do not completely agree with Hernandez. I just have enough sense to recognize a puerto rican lynch mob when I see one. The way people have invaded this comment section is shameful, their remarks about the quality of this student's scholarship is shameful, and their attitude and general lack of respect is extremely shameful. In fact, most of you act like asperger patients who just discovered a loudspeaker. Were you not making such complete fools of yourselves, I would not have to adopt this persona and heckle you until the cows come home. You bring dishonor to yourselves and your country/territory/colony.
Manny:
I will address your comments point by point:
"McLaughlin I will like to know what business you have in the issue of Puerto Rico."
I find your hysterics hilarious.
"Every Tax payer should know that the US spends many many many millions of US tax payer’s money for 4million people that do not pay anything or give anything back."
I am a taxpayer, and I know enough about economics to realize your statement is incorrect. In fact, should you bother to research how much money American corporations make in Puerto Rico (a bastion of consumerism) you would realize how silly that statement is.
"The only thing they do is get submitted to all Federal Laws, Presidential and congressional decisions that may affect them with NO real representation in Congress. They must submit their children to the US military draft if necessary."
You say this as if it's an unfair (and/or unique)situation. The draft is a moot point, but if your friend Pierluisi was not twiddling his thumbs you would have a small semblance of representation.
"So, the reality is, not only it should be of great interest for the US Tax payer but for the Puertorican population itself to become a State and have them pay Federal Taxes. And don’t worry they will only be entitled to Two Senator and about 6 Congressmen that’s it. Then again that will be too much Power for a State with a 100% of Puertoricans that are considered minorities in this beloved USA. That is scary; right McLaughlin? It will be worst than electing a Black President."
First: WTF?
Second: Why do you self-righteously presume I am a white anglo-saxon racist? That attitude won't win you many friends in the States. Or anywhere else, really. And it shows how bigoted and ignorant you really are. Of course, your extremely poor communicational skills already show this. Your problems clearly do not stem from the language barrier, that argument would be just as harebrained and incoherent if you had said it in Spanish.
love, McLaughin'
2010-03-10
17:42:11
Ya todo está dicho.
He leído TODOS los comentarios, y no hay que insultar a nadie para exponer su punto.
(Ahora, yo soy Independentista que NUNCA voto PIP, sí voté por PPR, y estoy de acuerdo con el que dijo que el artículo está biased, no sabía que este tipo es nieto de Hernández Colón, lo debió haber escrito un Chino, o Francés, alguien que fuera como Fox News, yeah right!)
Así que no insultaré a nadie creyendo ser mejor que nadie ni que soy más dotado por dinero, raza, color, credo, ideología, religión, pueblo donde nací, o medida de mi pene.
Punto final, ambos lados tienen sus puntitos que sí, que tienen razón.
Pero lo que yo sé, y ya otros lo han dicho, es que NO seremos estado simple y sencillamente por el IDIOMA.
Habrán muchos Puertorriqueños que hablan Inglés gringo perfecto ( I, myself included ), ( no sé si han notado el crecimiento exponencial de todas estas escuelas bilingües/modernas/privadas )y que nos siguen metiendo la generación MTV/celular/Internet por boca, nariz, ojos y c#$%, para eso mismo, para asimilarnos más como gringos, y dejar de ser Puertorriqueños.
Eso de que alguien dijo que 3 ó 4 generaciones de Boricuas en EUA, son hasta más Puertorriqueños que nosotros los de la isla, BULL-CACA... You do NOT speak Spanish, you have NOT eaten pasteles every day of the Navidades, and you have NOT gone out in The Bronx to llevarle una parranda a los vecinos del building, porque los gringos, negros, asiáticos que viven con ustedes, are gonna call NYPD Blue on your arses!
Pero, como dijeron, hay gente en todas partes, que son o no son PNP, PPD, o PIP, que simplemente no quieren, no tuvieron la oprtunidad o no había disponibilidad de ir a una escuelita bilingüe, que no hablan nada de Inglés, o muy poco, muy poco.
Lo que te hablan es lo que como el papagallo repitieron en 3er grado.
Teacher: Good morning children!
Children: gud molnin tíchel.
Teacher: How are you?
Children: Fain ten-quiu en yú.
DEFINITIVAMENTE, los gringos NO van a aceptar un estado que no hable Inglés al 100% como ellos.
AHORA, AHORA...miren bien lo que SÍ puede pasar...de aquí a 100-150-200 años ( no lo vamos a ver ).
Cuando los Hispanos en EUA, se conviertan en la súper ( sí gente, la palabra súper, aceptada en Español, se escribe con acento ) mayoría, y cuando EUA, siga las modas de la mayoría de los países Europeos y algunos de Asia, y algunos de África que hablan 2, 3, 4 ó más idiomas OFICIALES DE GOBIERNO, ENTONCES seremos estado.
Now for the English version.
Man, if you can't read Spanish, nor Spanglish, you're S.O.L.!
2010-03-10
20:15:42
I just love to read the horrible grammatical errors in these statehood supporters answers. They can't speak or write in english correctly and they want to become a state. Nothing more mind numbing than to watch a bunch of fanatical halfwits chant their incoherent slogans for statehood and still have the guts to say that they are "proud" Puerto Ricans. If statehood is in spanish, why is Guaynabo and San Juan renamed San Juan City or Guaynabo City? They don't tell us that do they? It's sad to watch supposed "proud" Puerto Ricans renounce their cultural heritage for welfare money. It's disgraceful.
P.S. Stop calling the ELA (commonwealth) a colony and simultaneously advocate for statehood. Let me ask you this? Are you willing to knowingly renounce your cultural heritage and nationality in exchange for a couple of senators in congress and for most of the economic benefits that we already receive? If your objective is to "decolonize" Puerto Rico then statehood is not for you. You cannot decolonize a nation by stripping it of its language, culture and history and imposing federal taxes that Puerto Ricans do not have to pay in our current political status.
Pure Mathematics:
100 x 35 ≠ 51
2010-03-10
22:12:00
Pure Mathematics:
100 x 35 ≠ 51
I love it@@!!!!
2010-03-11
00:38:58
The following was my response to a recent article in the Washington Times. It fits perfectly here.
Gentlemen,
When I suggested a two stage process to finally solve the political status problem of Puerto Rico, I certainly didn't have the slightest intention of rigging a political status decision by the US Citizens in Puerto Rico.
My suggestion was made in September of 2005 to Mr. Rubén Barrales, former Director of the Office for Intergovernmental Affairs and co-president of the Presidetnt's Task Force on the Political Status of Puerto Rico. The Task Force adopted the recomendation and inserted it in its first report on December of 2005.
As you can see, this process was adopted under the republican administration of former president George W. Bush. Therefore, your accusation against the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives is totally unfounded. But more serious is the fact that your editorial personnel did not even bother to really look into this issue, even skin deep. Not only are you shooting from the hip; you are making a serious accusation of fraudulent action against the Democrats in the House. I am a Republican, very conservative indeed.
My recomendation for a two stage process did not come out of the blue sky. It is based on many considerations which revolve around the fantasy that the commonwealth is our political status. It is also based on the fantasy that an "enhanced commonwealth" can be ahieved if the Congress had the political will to grant it. Judge for yourselves.
Such an ehnaced commonwealth is the option that has won all plebiscites since the first one in 1967, and it represents a significant departure from the original one approved in the process of Public Law 600 of 1950-52. The trick is, however, that the enhancements never appeared in the ballots. In short, the wording promised to enhance the commonwealth's autonomous powers to the maximum, with American Citizenship and under the protection of the US Constitution.
There was nothing specific until after the plebiscites, when all hell broke loose. None of the conditions for which the people of Puerto Rico blindly voted in those plebiscites have been implemented because all of them are unconstitutional. All of these efforts have been a waste of time and money. And in spite of all the warnings by Congress, the leaders of the Popular Democratic Party, the creators of this hoax, today still insist on misleading the people by offering them a political status that is "better than full statehood or independence," but that cannot be.
Look at some of those conditions: It was a mixture of statehood and independence. With parity in federal funds transfers with the rest of the States, but without paying federal income taxes. Funds would come in block form, and we, not Congress, would decide how to use them. Our US citizenship would be natural and irrevocable. Puerto Rico would achieve a certain degree of independence under the US Constitution, to such degree that we would determine which sections of the US Constitution may or may not apply to us; furhter, we would decide which federal legislation apllies and does not apply to us. And all these goodies, and some other more specific, can be had with US Citizenship and the protection of our privileges and immunities clause of the US Constitution.
We would achieve "popular sovereignty," which means that the body politic would be sovereign and detached from the territory, where Congress is sovereign. Our government would act accordingly without being attached to the US Constitution and Federal Law. We would conduct our own international affairs (with embassies, etc), including having international treaties of all kinds. We would control immigration and, in some cases, determine when our children join the Armed Forces and when not in case of war.
Naturally, the two plebiscites that were held under these conditions were won by the
"enhanced commonwealth" offer. After all, who does not like candy? But all of this fantasy has
been created by hiding from the people that our true political status rests on our territorial condition
as a US possession under the Federal Relations Act and not on the commonwealth, which is locally
called in Spanish "Estado Libre Asociado." If you make a literal translation, it woul read Free
Associated State. Doesn't the name sound as belonging to a political status separate from the US?
But is it true?
As the notion that the Estado Libre Asociado was perceived as our "new political status," out
of the territorial condition, separate from the United States, the people truly beleived that such blind
enhancements could be had.
In consequence, the territorial condition has never been discussed in any process, much less
the Federal Relations Act and the US Constitution. For this reason my recomendation included an
up front decision by the people that "they are eager" to really solve our territorial status problem,
before a permanent status option is adopted in a final plebiscite. Thus the first stage would call for
a decision by the people whether they want to continue under the territorial status or not.
In a plebiscite that would solve the status of the territory, you cannot match a non-permanent
status, like the territorial condition, with options that offer permanent solutions, like statehood and
independence. Even more where the territorial condition offers blind options that, while later found
unattainable, cannot be had. If the "enhanced territorial"conditions that have won those plebiscites
are not met by Congress, we wind up under the territorial status until another rigged process
evolves. And the cycle starts again.
Whoever wrote the editorial sounds very much like those in the Popular Democratic Party,
when you make the accusation of "stacking the process in favor of statehood." The reasoning is that
those opposing commonwealth would band together to vote agiants it. But you are missing the
point. You are accepting, tacitly, that the commonwealth is not the option of the majority of the US
Citizens in Puerto Rico. And the Popular Democratic Party has used all possible resources to
makke sure the people of Puerto Rico do not make that decision, because the majority is against the
territorial status. And you are giving them a helping hand. You wrote: "There's nothing wrong with
letting a free people occasionally reanalyze their governing status. Everything is wrong with
dishonoring that free people by rigging the very democracy statehood is meant to celebrate."
Shame on you.
The ones who really stacked all previous processes were the leaders and creators of the
enhanced commonwealth formula, that offered "the best of both worlds" to the people.
When we finally put an end to this crazy "territorial commonwealth," the English language
will not be used as a political weapon by anti-statehood forces in the Popular Democratic Party to
stop statehood. Our public schools system will rid itself of so many anti-American officials and
teachers that have disallowed the proper teaching of English in our public schools. And you will
see a superb bi-lingual State flourish rigth under your chin.
I wish I could have the opportunity to meet with you and explain how English has become a
political tool to stop statehood. The entire public school system has been controlled by
independence forces and followers of the PDP since the 1950's, and have used it to impede the
teaching of English. It has been an abuse against the future of our children. The premise has been,
for so many years, that if our children learn English well, statehood is inevitable. And your
expressions seem to prove the point!
Reality is, however, that parents do care for their children and are abandoning the public
school system by the thousands and sending their children to private schools under great economic
sacrifice. Why? Because of English. As a result, private school enrollment has swelled to around
350,000, from some 100,000 some ten years ago, while public school enrollment has been reduced
to under 500,000 from a high of around 800,000 just a few years ago.
I can tell you this: If it weren't for the inmense economic sacrifice that paying for private
schools entails, public schools would be empty. Indeed, many years ago a voucher proposal was
rejected by the Popular Democratic Party controlled local Supreme Court. The vouchers could be
used to pay for private school tuition. This was simply a NO, NO for the PDP.
Of course, I must bring to your attention that English is already an official language in
Puerto Rico. But I do not think that is the meaning of what you are thinking. What you really
meant is that all Puerto Ricans, US Citizens, should be able to express themselves in our common
language - English. And I fully agree. But I also do not think you meant that Puerto Ricans, nor all
Hispanics in the US - 40 millions strong, should not speak Spanish also. We Americans have
always admired fellow citizens that are able to communicate in more than one language.
I can conclude this short letter by stating, unequivocably, that the best way to have all Puerto
Ricans speak English is by admitting the territory as a State. The teaching/learning of English will
flow quickly and smoothly without any kind of imposition on the part of Congress, nor opposition
from local forces, just as it happens now in the private school system. And our children, at last, will
all graduate being fully bilingual. Which is nothing different from what is already happening
everywhere in our Union of Citizens of the United States of America.
2010-03-11
01:53:02
It would be considered unthinkable but it appears that Harvard U., has not instructed youcorrectly on what Liberty and Democracy are. Freedom and Liberty are inherent and unalienable rights of individuals and people/countries as such. While the choosing of Democracay can be subjected to choice for a people in search of a social system of conviviance, Freedom and Liberty are not. There are more than a million Puerto Ricans who, like me, want Freedom and Liberty for ourselves and our nation, Puerto Rico and we are entitled to them. If there are Puerto Ricans who have answered positively to the colonial mind-set and consider themselves Americans, they are entitled to live in their chosen nation and, while doing so, allowing us our right to be Free Puerto Ricans in a Free Puerto Rico. Of course, the US government nor leaders are going to tell you that; the colonial status has converted itself in a "hand ball wall", where the millions sent by Congress are spent inmediately in the great US mercantile enterprises there; Sears, OfficeMart, WalMart, Walgreen, etc.. If you check statistics you will find that heir biggest and most profitable branches are those in Puerto Rico. From those millions of dollars spent in them the US Congressional politiciasn get their share for their capaign expenses that enable them to stay there forever. If you care to concienciate yourself, join us and our country, otherwise move and stay in the US. An also, tell your professors what Freedom and Liberty really are.
2010-03-11
08:55:21
Pablo Hernández:
"You can only enter the final chamber free, or not free." Jean Paul Sartre. He was one of the leading figures in 20th century French philosophy, existentialism, and Marxism. He was awarded the 1964 Nobel Prize in Literature but refused the “honour.”
Dignity is a term used in moral, ethical, and political discussions. It is an extension of Enlightenment-era beliefs that individuals have inherent, inviolable rights, and thus is closely related to concepts like virtue, respect, self-respect, autonomy, human rights, and enlightened reason.
On this basis, irrespective of whether a chamber is a chamber or that death is inevitable, Puerto Ricans that have dignity will chose – as Sartre said – to enter the final chamber FREE.
Caveat – Puerto Ricans with dignity and people of the world with dignity know enough not to expect people with their minds enslaved or people in a state of subjugation and in love with the very same chains that curtail their freedom, to opt to enter the final chamber with dignity, free. No way, that ain’t happening. And we got ourselves lots of slaves in Puerto Rico and in the metropolis, too. We all know that those slaves lovers of their captivity will only chose to enter the final chamber on their knees! And I don’t even feel pity for them. Pablo Hernández and all those politicians he cites on his writing are on his knees and they’ve probably been on their knees since birth!
¡Que viva Puerto Rico libre!
Freedom to Puerto Rico Now!
Freedom to all Puerto Rican Political Prisoners Now!
Elliot Monteverde Torres
March 11, 2010
elliotmtorres@yahoo.com
PS I think that the reflection below can shed some light on Pablo Hernandez’ state of mind as well as some of the people who have commented on this backward piece of writing.
=======================
Malcolm X: The House Negro vs The Field Negro
"There was two kind of slaves. There was the house negro and the field negro. The house negro, they lived in the house, with master. They dressed pretty good. They ate good, cause they ate his food, what he left. They lived in the attic or the basement, but still they lived near their master, and they loved their master, more than their master loved himself. They would give their life to save their masters house quicker than their master would. The house negro, if the master said "we got a good house here" the house negro say "yeah, we got a good house here". Whenever the master would said we, he'd say we. That's how you can tell a house negro. If the master's house caught on fire, the house negro would fight harder to put the blaze out than the master would. If the master got sick, the house negro would say "What's the matter, boss, we sick?" We sick! He identified himself with his master, more than the master identified with himself. And if you came to the house negro and said "Let's run away, Let's escape, Let's separate" the house negro would look at you and say "Man, you crazy. What you mean separate? Where is there a better house than this? Where can I wear better clothes than this? Where can I eat better food than this?" There was that house negro. In those days, he was called a house nigger. And that's what we call him today, because we still got some house niggers runnin around here. This modern house negro loves his master. He wants to live near him. He'll pay three times as much as the house is worth just to live near his master, and then brag about "I'm the only negro out here. I'm the only one on my job. I'm the only one in this school." "You're nothing but a house negro. And if someone come to you right now and say "Let's separate.", you say the same thing that the house negro said on the plantation. "What you mean separate? From America? This good white land? Where you gonna get a better job than you get here? I mean, this is what you say! "I di-I ain't left nothing in Africa" That's what you say. "Why, you left your mind in Africa". On that same plantation, there was the field negro. The field negro, those were the masses. There was always more negros in the field as there were negros in the house. There negro in the field caught hell. He ate leftovers. In the house, they ate high up on the hog. The negro in the field didn't get nothing but what was left in the insides of the hog. They call them chit'lins nowaday. In those days, they called them what they were, guts! That's what you were, a guteater. And some of you are still guteaters. The field negro was beaten, from morning til night. He lived in a shack, in a hut. He wore cast-off clothes. He hated his master. I say, he hated his master. He was intelligent. That house negro loved his master. But that field negro, remember, they were in the majority, and they hated their master. When the house caught on fire, he didn't try to put it out, that field negro prayed for a wind. For a breeze. When the master got sick, the field negro prayed that he died. If someone come to the field negro and said "Let's separate, let's run." He didn't say "Where we going?" he said "Any place is better than here". We got field negros in America today. I'm a field negro. The masses are the field negros. When they see this mans house on fire, we don't hear these little negros talkin bout "Our Government is in trouble. They say thee Government is in trouble." Imagine a negro, "Our Government". I even heard one say "Our astronauts." They won't even let him near the plant, and "Our astronauts". "Our neighbors" That's a negro that's out of his mind. That's a negro that's out of his mind! Just cause the slave master in that day, used Tom, to keep the field negroes in check. The same ol slavemaster today has negros who are nothing but modern Uncle Toms. 20th century Uncle Toms to keep you and me in check. Keep us under control. Keep us passive and peaceful. And nonviolent. That's Tom making you nonviolent. It's like when you go to the dentist and the man is going to take your tooth. You're going to fight him when he start pulling. So they squirt some stuff in your jaw called novocane, to make you think their not doing anything to you. So you sit there and because you got all that novocane in your jaw, you suffer peacefully. Hahahaha. There's nothing in our book, the Quran, as you call it, Koran, that teaches us to suffer peacefully. Our religion teaches us to be intelligent. Be peaceful. Be courteuos. Obey the law. Respect everyone. But if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery! That's a good religion. In fact, that's that old-time religion. That's the one that ma and pa used to talk about. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and a head for a head and a life for a life. That's a good religion. And doesn't anybody, no one resist that kind of religion being taught but a wolf who intends to make you his meal. This is the way it is with the white man in America. He's a wolf and you're his sheep. Anytime a shepherd, a pastor, teach you and me not to run from the white man, and at the same time teach us don't fight the white man, he's a traitor, to you and me. Don't lay down our life all by itself, no, preserve your life. It's the best thing you got. And if you got to give it up, let it be Even Steven. .
2010-03-11
10:49:19
I think this bill will allow Puertorican US-Citizens to get out of a 2nd-class US-citizenship because today, except for the military, citizens living in PR aren't allowed to vote for the President, their only one Congressman has voice but no vote and there's zero representation in the US Senate. It's time to decide, the US military landed in PR and took possession in 1898. 112 years is enough time to decide. Past presidents (B41/Clinton) have invited PR to start the process. The current semi-colonial state represents nothing else than political limbo. It's not a new-con/new-lib issue because Puertoricans already know democracy but democracy requires full participation. Either they want it or they don't.
2010-03-11
10:58:54
Looking at the history of plebiscites-- particularly at the mid-19th century period of France and Italy, with the annexations of Savoy and Nice, the Kingdom of Sardinia, as well as the Danish West Indies, it can be argued that traditionally plebiscites have merely been an unnecessary ratification of a fait accompli.
There has been a practical and juridical value to the plebiscite, because the justification is that you are also adding the "will" of the "majority," to what may have been in practice occupation or colonization. Internationally, the plebiscite is communicated as an adherence to democratic principles..
In my reading of the Hawaii’s statehood plebiscite, I asserted that rather than the traditional story of how 94.6% of the voters voted for statehood, a closer examination to these numbers have revealed that only 35% of eligible voters actively sought statehood. To complicate these matters further, the voting district map reveals that the bulk of support for statehood came from voting centers near military bases, bringing to issue race and colonization.
http://statehoodhawaii.org/wp/index.php/2009/05/12/the-statehood-plebiscite/
2010-03-11
11:49:23
Statehood Hawai'i, GREAT INPUT!
2010-03-11
11:53:00
After reading most of the comments posted regarding this article, I have one point to argue:
Puerto Rico's status is a complicated subject, and should be left to those who actually know what they're talking about. With that said, anyone can state their opinion, it's in the constitution. Disagreeing is permitted. Insults, and low blows are not.
On that note-
@ cr: I know Pablito personally. Not only is he a close, personal friend of mine, but our families are also close. I have grown up with this kid, and can say with 100% certainty that Pablo Hernandez Rivera does NOT repeat what he hears his father say. In fact, on some topics, I've seen him argue completely different points to those his father makes. I would also like to add, that YOUR point lacked credibility, due to the fact that YOUR (refers to an attribute, characteristic or object belonging to the person you are talking to) and YOU'RE means "you are".....It is my understanding, as a literature and linguistics student, that any point that is poorly stated looses all validity because one starts to question the person's capacity... so, next time you want to insult, question, or undermine someone's integrity/ intelligence, please have the decency to use proper grammar.
Thank you.
2010-03-12
07:03:15
People inside and outside may favor one or the other status for Puerto Rico and that is acceptable and provides a good debate for the political future of the island. What is not acceptable is to create deliberate and fictitious majorities by resorting to dubious tactics such as Mr. Pierluisi's plebiscite bill. This is a clear attempt to stifle the opposition and bring a political change that is not favored by the plurality of the people in the island. There is no question that the island's political status is imperfect and needs immediate attention, however, when elected officials that were sworn in to uphold and defend our Constitution employ their official position for personal and partisan gain, they are going against the very principles they swore to defend. You may claim that the status is damaged, corrupt, imperfect, that we are still the oldest colony in the world, all that may be true, but taking advantage of your official position for advancement of partisan political gain is criminal at best and Mr. Pierluisi should be asked to resign.