People who have been paying attention to Puerto Rico—its politics, its ongoing battle to recover from Hurricane Maria (which has still not occurred, after over four years) and the debate over the island’s colonial status in relationship to the United States—are probably aware that a draft “compromise” bill in Congress has been announced, addressing the island’s future.
The question of the status of Puerto Rico—a nation with its own culture, its own flag, Spanish as its language, with about 2.7 million residents on the island, and about 4.2 million people on the mainland who identify as Puerto Rican or “Boricuas”—has been an issue since Oct. 18, 1898, when the U.S. took control of Puerto Rico near the end of the Spanish American War. That was followed by the enactment of the Jones-Shafroth Act on March 17, 1917, which made Puerto Rico a “territory” and any Puerto Ricans U.S. citizens if they were born on or after April 25, 1898..
What may confuse outside observers is that island politics don’t split along the mainland lines of Democrats vs. Republicans. Instead, Puerto Rican politics tend to be organized around the status issue, with two main political parties, as well as a third independence party, and several new entries.
Caribbean Matters is a weekly series from Daily Kos. If you are unfamiliar with the region, check out Caribbean Matters: Getting to know the countries of the Caribbean.
Over the years, many people who are not Puerto Rican (mostly Democrats), tend to do several things when discussing Puerto Rico’s current status as a U.S. colony. First, they tend to lump the island’s status debate in with the decades-long Washington, D.C. statehood movement. This is problematic, as pointed out in a 2021 article by Tufts student Sara Kessel, which includes this plea: “The issues of statehood in D.C. and Puerto Rico are not the same. Stop conflating them.” Kessel also points out that while an overwhelming majority of D.C. residents are pro-statehood, Puerto Rico’s situation differs.
The situation in Puerto Rico is much more nuanced, with a 2020 referendum reporting that 53% of Puerto Rican voters favored statehood while 47% rejected it. There are some benefits to making Puerto Rico a state rather than a territory; having full access to federal benefits would help the territory deal with financial difficulties, natural disasters and the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, having voting representatives in Congress would give Puerto Rico a greater say in their government.
However, many Puerto Rican citizens are concerned that becoming a state is just another neocolonial measure by a Western power. Mariana Janer-Agrelot, a first-year from Puerto Rico, wrote in an electronic message to the Daily that, “PR should be an independent country. We are essentially being oppressed by an imperialist country that does not bother to care for the needs of PR. We have suffered too much under their abuses.”
That 2020 Puerto Rico referendum is often called into question, since turnout was extremely low—and voter participation is usually much higher in Puerto Rico than on the mainland. Diego Panzardi Serra even framed the referendum as “meaningless” for the Harvard Political Review.
After a long election cycle, the results of the Puerto Rican polls are in. The Partido Nuevo Progresista — New Progressive Party — is celebrating two major victories: their candidate being elected and Puerto Ricans voting “Yes” for Puerto Rico to be annexed to the Union as a State — the latter with around 52% of the votes. Pro-statehood politicians argue that this is an obvious majority and the island should be “admitted immediately” to the United States of America. The day after the election, The New York Times published a piece titled “Make Puerto Rico a State Now” by Christina D. Ponsa-Kraus, a constitutional law scholar who writes frequently about the political status of Puerto Rico. The opinion piece suggests the message from the plebiscite is clear — Puerto Ricans want statehood — and Congress should therefore act upon it. However, as a Puerto Rican, I can assure you that the matter is not that simple.
First, the referendum was nonbinding, which may have affected the results and turnout of the election. If people decided not to participate because they thought the vote to be inconsequential, the ‘majority’ captured by the vote would not be legitimate. Additionally, over 37,000 people decided to cast their ballots blank, which in Puerto Rico is a popular act of protest. Ultimately, just over 50% of the voters that showed up actually voted “Yes” — approximately 600,000 people out of Puerto Rico’s total population of 3 million.
The validity of the vote may be further questioned due to the irregularities in scrutiny that are being reported by various parties. More than 170 briefcases with untallied ballots were found a week after the election, each containing anywhere from three to 500 ballots. Given the nonbinding nature of the referendum, the tiny fraction of the population that voted for statehood, and the possibility of large numbers of untallied votes, this result is essentially meaningless and undemocratic. Nonetheless, this does not stop pro-statehood politicians from using it as a prop.
Democrats on the mainland have also weighed in on the issue of statehood for Puerto Rico, with many of them assuming that Puerto Rican statehood would automatically create two new Democratic senators, and add several more Democrats to the House roster. This focus doesn’t prioritize what is best for Puerto Ricans themselves, and reeks of opportunism; such an outlook is resented by many islanders. It also ignores the reality that the current (non-voting) elected representative to Congress from Puerto Rico, Jenniffer González, is a hard-core Republican and Donald Trump supporter.
Yet another argument Democrats on the mainland often make? Had Puerto Rico been a state when Hurricane Maria devastated the island, it would not have received the terrible response from the federal government under Trump.
I can only roll my eyes at this position and say, “See Katrina.”
All of this context brings us to the present, where the status issue for Puerto Rico is once again on the table in the House, with a draft compromise bill that offers self-determination.
NBC News:
The newly unveiled draft of the Puerto Rico Status Act would let voters choose statehood, independence or sovereignty in free association — effectively excluding the current territorial status as an option.
Members of Congress sponsoring competing bills on how to resolve Puerto Rico’s territorial status and its relationship to the U.S. have come together to introduce new legislation combining both.
House Majority Leader Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., has helped lead a monthslong effort to get lawmakers on opposing sides of the Puerto Rico territorial status debate to make some compromises under the newly unveiled draft of the Puerto Rico Status Act.
Hector Luis Alamo, senior editor at Latino Rebels, has written a short clear summary of the bill.
I suggest you read Alamo’s entire analysis, as I’m only highlighting the main feature: a call for a binding vote.
Plebiscite
A plebiscite on Puerto Rico’s status will be held on November 5, 2023, presenting all eligible voters in Puerto Rico with three options: statehood, free association, or independence. The option that wins a simple majority will be carried out.
The ballots will be in English and Spanish, with the effects and consequences of each status defined in clear and concise language.
Should no option win a majority of votes, a runoff plebiscite will be held on March 3, 2024, between the top two options.
Each camp has made a major concession here, with the statehood side agreeing to a plebiscite with three options instead of a simple yes-no vote on statehood as the statehood bill wanted. On the other hand, the self-determination side has agreed to said plebiscite instead of holding a status convention as their initial bill called for.
Alamo just expressed his thoughts on the potential outcome in the currently impotent Congress. (Note: A piragua is a Puerto Rican shaved ice dessert.)
I’ll be keeping an eye on how this plays out over time, and agree with Alamo, given the current power dynamics in the Senate. It’s highly doubtful that Republicans will allow a shot at statehood for a place they consider to be full of people of color, even if that isn’t an accurate refection of the makeup of Puerto Rico’s population.
Join me in the comments for more, and for the weekly Caribbean Twitter Roundup.
