Should Puerto Rico Become a U.S. State?

Should Puerto Rico Become a U.S. State?


  • Total voters
    6

Mirage

Administrator
Staff member
V.I.P.
#1
This continues to come up.

What do you think? Should Puerto Rico become a U.S. state? This will be voted on in the very near future once again.

I think it should NEVER become a state. It's almost a different country altogether. The culture is different and so is almost everything about it. We don't need these people voting on things that will effect the rest of the US.
 
Last edited:

Swiftstrike

Registered Member
#2
This continues to come up.

What do you think? Should Puerto Rico become a U.S. state? This will be voted on in the very near future once again.

I think it should NEVER become a state. It's almost a different country altogether. The culture is different and so is almost everything about it. We don't need these people voting on things that will effect the rest of the US.
Ultimately it is their choice since they are the ones voting it down every time it arises.

You could say the same thing about Hawaii. I think in general your viewpoint is very xenophobic with that stance.

Each state is different and values different things.

Conservative spin: Texans value American exceptionalism and isolationism which what this nation was found upon. While New York values socialism and the perpetual welfare state.

Liberal spin: Texan presents a distorted and narrow view of what defines America, while New York a city of immigrants values diversity and community more accurately represents our nation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

dDave

Guardian of the Light
V.I.P.
#3
I would be completely fine with it if Puerto Rico voted to become a state, as long as the correct procedures were followed.

Puerto Rico could vote at any time on whether or not they want to become a state they've done so 3 times since 1967 I believe, and they have not voted yes ever.

But when Congress passes a bill requiring them to vote on it at their demand it's a bit different.

The question presented to Puerto Ricans will not be "Do you want to become a state?" Like it has been for the past 3 votes on this, it's definitely the most clear way to state that question.

If this bill passes the question will not be "Do you want to become a state?", no, no, of course not, it's "Do you want the island to keep it's current status?"

HR 2499 — if it passes — would force a yes or no vote in Puerto Rico on whether Puerto Rico should maintain the "current status" of the island. Wait, that's not a vote on statehood. That's a vote on do you want to "maintain the status quo."
What it's basically doing is asking if people want change and then if they vote yes there's only one option.

Well I guess technically there are three options, however 2 of them are so wildly unpopular that they would never win.

1. Statehood
2. Full Independence
3. Modified Commonwealth



Statehood is really the only option that they will have if they vote that they do not want to maintain the "current status".


Remember, full independence and modified commonwealth historically get less than 3 percent of the vote. So those options will be the only thing standing in the way of Puerto Rico becoming a state.
Source: Puerto Rican Statehood Ahead? - Glenn Beck - FOXNews.com





Under these conditions I vote no. If Puerto Rico voted on it themselves, independent of what Congress is forcing down their throats, then I'd be fine with this.

This is all about politics and power though. Undoubtedly PR would vote very liberally.
 
Last edited:

ExpectantlyIronic

e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑
#4
dDave said:
Statehood is really the only option that they will have if they vote that they do not want to maintain the "current status".
Not so. According to the AFP:

Under the measure, Puerto Ricans would vote first to determine if they want to change the status from a self-governing commonwealth of the United States.
If they vote for change, they would then be asked on whether they would favor statehood, independence, or sovereignty associated with the US. [emphasis mine]
-source
------
Oh, I see what the issue is. The fact there's two votes. It doesn't matter. The last time "no change" was put on a ballot alongside the other options, it only received around 1% of the vote. Granted, on that ballot, there was a "none of the above" option and no "sovereignty associated with the US" option, and the "none of the above" option got the most votes; but I doubt the "none of the above" voters really wanted to vote "no change", and all accidentally checked the wrong box. In any case:

The island is considered fairly Democratic. McClintock concedes that a six-member congressional delegation from Puerto Rico would probably break down four-to-two in favor of Democrats.

But Puerto Ricans, he added, are not easy to put into a political box. "Although we would benefit from many social programs that people identify with the Democratic Party, we tend to be personally conservative in many things," he said. "For example, Puerto Rico's much more pro-life than pro-choice," owing to a deep Catholic tradition and a growing evangelical movement, McClintock said.

And even if Puerto Rico is Democratic today, that doesn't mean it won't change in the future, McClintock said, citing the historical precedents of Alaska and Hawaii.

During the debate over statehood in the 1950s, then-Sen. Lyndon Johnson, a Texas Democrat, opposed the entry of Hawaii, arguing it was too Republican. Then-Sen. Everett Dirksen, an Illinois Republican, opposed Alaska as leaning too far toward Democrats. Both have proved two of the last century's greatest politicians to be poor forecasters. When it comes to statewide voting patterns, Alaska's a deep Republican red, and Hawaii's as blue as the Pacific.

McClintock has one question for lawmakers working in these men's shadows: "If LBJ and Dirksen got it wrong, what makes you think you'll get it right?"
-source

Really, is opposing the statehood of Puerto Rico on the grounds of how it might effect the congressional makeup any better than supporting it on such grounds? In either case, I can't imagine any action being taken unless there is a clear majority of Puerto Ricans in favor of one action or another.
 
Last edited:

dDave

Guardian of the Light
V.I.P.
#5
Not so. According to the AFP:

-source
------
No I completely understand that technically there are 3 options. I actually had them listed above.

1. Statehood
2. Full Independence
3. Modified Commonwealth (Same thing as sovereignty associated with U.S.)


They're twisting the way this has been done in the past, that's what I don't like about it.

Since it actually already passed, Puerto Ricans only need to vote for changing the status of the island for this to be a fairly secure and done deal, since statehood would definitely win if they voted to change the status. The Democrats in Congress would definitely vote in approval of adding them as a state.


Right now Puerto Rico reaps the benefits of U.S. tax dollars but the citizens do not pay income taxes, seems a bit odd to me, while I think that they should pay income taxes I don't want them to become a state by these means Congress has forced on them.

From what I've heard 80% of the island is below our poverty line. (not confirmed, I've only heard that several times)


Check this out though, this is the final result of the 1993 vote on this issue.
A) Keep current status
B) Be independent
C) Be a state
D) None of the above with the results
A) 0.1% (!)
B) 2.5%
C) 46.7% or
D) 50.3%


Judging by that it's pretty much impossible that Puerto Rico will vote to keep the current Status, since it's a yes or a no on keeping the current status, there are enough people in support of being a state and being independent combined that they could potentially put this through, especially if many "none of the above" voters decide they don't want to keep the current status. Since it's a yes or a no, it could be interpreted differently since there are no other options.
 

pro2A

Hell, It's about time!
#6
I'm going to say no, mainly because I don't want to have to get new flags. Plus they have voted 3 times not to become a state. Leave em be.
 

ExpectantlyIronic

e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑
#7
dDave said:
Right now Puerto Rico reaps the benefits of U.S. tax dollars but the citizens do not pay income taxes, seems a bit odd to me, while I think that they should pay income taxes I don't want them to become a state by these means Congress has forced on them.
Commonwealths generally get out of having much tax burden. Mainly because of the whole, "no-taxation-without-representation" thing. Imposing the income tax on them without giving them statehood would almost certainly be met with far more disapproval by Puerto Ricans than simply imposing statehood.

dDave said:
Since it actually already passed, Puerto Ricans only need to vote for changing the status of the island for this to be a fairly secure and done deal, since statehood would definitely win if they voted to change the status. The Democrats in Congress would definitely vote in approval of adding them as a state.
I think too much is being inferred from past polls. If there is one thing I know about polls, it's that you can get drastically different results just by replacing a single term with a synonym. So we can't predict past results will carryover to this poll, particularly since this one has been ordered to be conducted by the United States Congress; making it different sorta deal. Though, it is only a poll. I don't know that I necessarily see Democrats in Congress taking on a big fight to make Puerto Rico a state unless this poll comes up really strongly in favor of such things.
 

dDave

Guardian of the Light
V.I.P.
#8
Commonwealths generally get out of having much tax burden. Mainly because of the whole, "no-taxation-without-representation" thing. Imposing the income tax on them without giving them statehood would almost certainly be met with far more disapproval by Puerto Ricans than simply imposing statehood.
Well I completely understand the no taxation without representation.

What I meant by that was that I think they should pay taxes, and to do that they would have to become a state, however I don't want them to become a state, thus they will not be paying taxes, of course it'd be unfair to make them pay taxes without representation. (just to make sure we're on the same page)




As far as past polls, I agree, simply changing a single word can make it drastically different, I'm just not so sure about making it 50% different that seems like a big number maybe a bit far fetched.


The Senate actually hasn't passed this yet I don't believe, but they're expected to.





But looking at it, I don't think a lot of people are going to vote to keep the status quo, given a yes or a no, I think most people would vote yes, and then they're given the three deadly options.
 

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
#9
I'm having a hard time figuring out why I should be opposed to Puerto Rico being a state or why I should even care. This is the same plan they used for Alaska statehood and that worked out fairly well. Many of my friends in Alaska would disagree, but statehood has seemed to be mutually beneficial for both Alaska and the US.

I guess the only real question I have is what can Puerto Rico bring to the US by being a state? If they can benefit the US by being a full state, I'd be all for it.