Talk:Proposed political status for Puerto Rico

What happens next

As I understand it there is now a popular mandate that Puerto Rico becomes the 51st State of the USA. What happens next to allow this to happen and what is the timetable for such a change? yorkshiresky (talk) 11:20, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

The timetable is unknown and it is not certain that it will happen. First, the Puerto Rican legislature must formally petition the U.S. Congress for admission. Simultaneously, a constitutional convention would have to be called within Puerto Rico, to draft a state constitution, which would then have to be ratified by another plebiscite. Then Congress must pass, and the president sign, a statehood bill into law, which would admit Puerto Rico into the Union. This is a big step in the statehood direction, but it's a long, slow process - on purpose. polarscribe (talk) 06:08, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Vote for statehood

In November 2012, Puerto Rico achieved a first clear electoral mandate rejecting the present form of territorial status, and requesting the U.S. Congress to admit Puerto Rico as the 51st State of the United States of America. In all earlier referenda, votes for statehood were matched almost equally by votes for remaining an American territory, with a small balance of votes cast for independence. Support for U.S. statehood has risen in each successive popular referendum until a clear majority of 61.2% was attained on November 2012. The most recent referendum process began in October 2011 when Governor Luis Fortuño proposed a bill, following the recommendation of the President's Task Force on Puerto Rico's Status to provide for self-determination. The proposed bill set the date of August 12, 2012 to hold the first part of a two-step status plebiscite. The first question on the plebiscite would ask voters whether they wanted to maintain the current commonwealth status under the territorial clause of the U.S. Constitution or whether they preferred a non-territorial option. A second question on the plebiscite would offer three status options: statehood, independence or free association. This bill was brought before the House of Representatives of Puerto Rico, then the Senate of Puerto Rico in 2011 to effect the governor's proposal. The bill passed on December 28, 2011. The date was revised such that both steps were voted on in a single ballot on November 6, 2012. As a result of that ballot, 54% of the population voted to change the territorial status quo, with 61.2% of the population voting for statehood as the preferred change from the status quo.

The Plebiscite proposal and guidelines was recommended by the following U.S. Government Reports:

• Report By the President's Task Force On Puerto Rico's Status (December 2005) - President William J. Clinton.
• Report By the President's Task Force On Puerto Rico's Status (December 2007) - President George W. Bush.
• Report By the President's Task Force On Puerto Rico's Status (March 2011) - President Barack Obama.
• Political Status of Puerto Rico: Options for Congress - Congressional Research Service (CRS Report)
• Puerto Rico’s Political Status and the 2012 Plebiscite: Background and Key Questions - Congressional Research Service (CRS Report)

The Democratic Party platform of 2012 says:

As President Obama said when he became the first President to visit Puerto Rico and address its people in 50 years, Boricuas every day help write the American story. Puerto Ricans have been proud American citizens for almost 100 years. During that time, the people of Puerto Rico have developed strong political, economic, social, and cultural ties to the United States. The political status of Puerto Rico remains an issue of overwhelming importance, but lack of resolution about status has held the island back. It is time for Puerto Rico to take the next step in the history of its status and its relationship to the rest of the United States. The White House Task Force Report on Puerto Rico has taken important and historic steps regarding status. We commit to moving resolution of the status issue forward with the goal of resolving it expeditiously. If local efforts in Puerto Rico to resolve the status issue do not provide a clear result in the short term, the President should support, and Congress should enact, self-executing legislation that specifies in advance for the people of Puerto Rico a set of clear status options, such as those recommended in the White House Task Force Report on Puerto Rico, which the United States is politically committed to fulfilling. The economic success of Puerto Rico is intimately linked to a swift resolution of the status question, as well as consistent, focused efforts on improving the lives of the people of Puerto Rico. We have made great progress for Puerto Rico over the past four years, including a sharp, historic increase in Medicaid funding for the people of Puerto Rico and fair and equitable inclusion in the Recovery Act and the Affordable Care Act. Going forward, we will continue working toward fair and equitable participation for Puerto Rico in federal programs. We support increased efforts by the federal government to improve public safety in Puerto Rico and the United States Virgin Islands, with a particular emphasis on efforts to combat drug trafficking and crime throughout our Caribbean border. In addition, consistent with the task force report, we will continue to work on improving Puerto Rico's economic status by promoting job creation, education, health care, clean energy, and economic development on the Island.

The Republican Party platform of 2008 and 2012 says:

We support the right of the United States citizens of Puerto Rico to be admitted to the Union as a fully sovereign state after they freely so determine. We recognize that Congress has the final authority to define the constitutionally valid options for Puerto Rico to achieve a permanent non-territorial status with government by consent and full enfranchisement. As long as Puerto Rico is not a state, however, the will of its people regarding their political status should be ascertained by means of a general right of referendum or specific referenda sponsored by the U.S. government.

About Romney

Just saying: Romney doesn't actually speak in favor of Puerto Rico becoming a state. Romney states, at best, that if the people of Puerto Rico decide they want(!) to be a state, he isn't going to stop them from wanting to become a state. Actually becoming a state is a whole different ballpark, of course! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.236.7.98 (talk) 11:25, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Romney Support Statehood for Puerto Rico and the Republican Party do it also on their Platform! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.54.198.59 (talk) 12:17, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

The Republican Party platform of 2008 and 2012 says:

We support the right of the United States citizens of Puerto Rico to be admitted to the Union as a fully sovereign state after they freely so determine. We recognize that Congress has the final authority to define the constitutionally valid options for Puerto Rico to achieve a permanent non-territorial status with government by consent and full enfranchisement. As long as Puerto Rico is not a state, however, the will of its people regarding their political status should be ascertained by means of a general right of referendum or specific referenda sponsored by the U.S. government.

Mitt Romney Supports Puerto Rican Statehood: Mitt Romney Supports Puerto Rican Statehood

Requested move

• Puerto Rican statehood movement → (ignore this part - the talk page is messed up and I had to do this to get the template to work)
• Puerto Rico (proposed state) → Puerto Rican statehood movement

– Proposing this move for a very simple reason. Puerto Rican statehood movement will still be a valid topic for an article even if Puerto Rico does become a state. Puerto Rico (proposed state), on the other hand, would logically need retargeting to Puerto Rico if this happens. This will then break a whole bunch of links that discuss Puerto Rico's attempts to be a state. The consistency argument is bunk - unlike all the other proposed states at Category:Proposed states of the United States, this proposal actually has a reasonable chance of happening, rather than being a fringe pipe dream idea like the rest. This is a huge difference, and justifies Puerto Rico getting a different treatment. Note that I moved the page to this article earlier, and another editor reverted me, but the talk page wasn't moved back. Ego White Tray (talk) 13:32, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose. WP:CRYSTAL. There can be an article about the statehood movement and one about the state proposed itself. The topics can be clearly separated. ChemTerm (talk) 13:44, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

For reference, these were originally separate and there was a clear consensus to combine them into a single article at Talk:Puerto Rico statehood movement. And saying that Puerto Rico has a statehood movement has nothing to do with Crystal balls - it does have a statehood movement, whether they succeed or not, the statehood movement exists now. Ego White Tray (talk) 13:50, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

The merger is nonsense. A proposed state is not a movement. There is a conceptual difference. I am absolutely in favor of having an article on the movement. Also of removing movement content from the state article. Regarding the so called consensus: It was, AFAICS, a 11 hour consensus by three editors. ChemTerm (talk) 13:55, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

You keep reverting a consensus merge and have made zero effort to restart discussion. Maybe I should follow your lead and revert your page move and delete this discussion? Ego White Tray (talk) 16:21, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Another reason not to have two articles is another reason why Puerto Rico statehood is different than any other proposal - Puerto Rico already exists as an undisputed entity with undisputed boundaries. All the other proposed state do require a "proposed state" article since there is no legal entity or recognition to the boundaries proposed. Puerto Rico's boundaries are already set. If it does become a state, we just edit the main article, instead of changing the proposed state article into a state article. Ego White Tray (talk) 04:09, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

• Comment I sent a notice to those who took part in the merge discussion as they had input in what the title of the article should be. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:35, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
• As I said elsewhere, I recommend having everything related to Puerto Rico becoming a state at Puerto Rican statehood movement, to avoid redundancy and because parentheses are used in titles only for disambiguation purposes, which do not apply here.  Sandstein  17:16, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Oppose. The topics can be clearly separated.