Here's a local Puerto Rican Liberal Congressman's point of view on statehood for Puerto Rico.
Puerto Rican statehood? No thanks, Gutierrez saysMay 02, 2010|By Katherine Skiba | Tribune reporter
WASHINGTON — Observers say a House-approved measure that could open the door to Puerto Rican statehood has bleak prospects in the Senate.
The bill passed the House on a 223-169 vote on Thursday over the objection of some Puerto Rican-American lawmakers including U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez of Chicago.
Gutierrez, 56, a Democrat and the son of Puerto Rico-born parents, was elected to Congress in 1992 and owns property on the Caribbean island.
The bill, the Puerto Rico Democracy Act, authorizes the U.S. commonwealth to conduct a vote asking its people whether they favor the island's political status.
If most said no, a second round of voting would ask whether Puerto Rico should be a state, a commonwealth, a sovereign nation associated with the U.S. or fully independent.
The voting, however, would not be binding. Admission to the union as state would require the approval of the U.S. Congress, for example.
Puerto Rico became part of the U.S. in 1898, its people won citizenship in 1917 and it became a commonwealth in 1952.
Gutierrez was a Chicago city councilman before entering the House. He owns a home and rental property near extended family in Rio Grande, Puerto Rico, visits often and may retire there, his spokesman, Douglas Rivlin, said Friday.
Gutierrez last week assailed the measure as the "Puerto Rico 51st state bill." An early version would not have featured the second-round option of keeping Puerto Rico a commonwealth.
Gutierrez, a proponent of independence for Puerto Rico, observed leading up to the House vote that Puerto Ricans rejected statehood in votes in 1967, 1993 and 1998.
In remarks from the House floor, he said he could support statehood if Puerto Rico still could field an Olympic team, keep Spanish as its main language and retain other aspects of its identity.
"Maybe these 4 million American citizens don't want to become a state because they love their language; because they love their culture; because they love their idiosyncrasies; because they love applauding their Olympic team…because so many Miss Universes come from Puerto Rico," he noted.
Illinois lawmakers who backed the bill were Democrats Deborah Halvorson, Phil Hare, Jesse Jackson Jr., Jan Schakowsky and Republicans Judy Biggert, Mark Kirk and Aaron Schock.
Most, however, were like Gutierrez opposed: Democrats Melissa Bean, Jerry Costello, Danny Davis, Dan Lipinski, Mike Quigley, Bobby Rush and Republicans Tim Johnson, Don Manzullo, Peter Roskam and John Shimkus.
A key supporter, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat, said the relationship between the U.S. and Puerto Rico was the "product of a bygone era."
He said Puerto Ricans are subject to U.S. laws and have fought in each the country's wars since World War I. But they are not allowed to vote in presidential elections, have no representative in the Senate and have only a delegate in the House, he said.
Gutierrez is one of three, full-fledged House members who are Puerto Rican-American, according to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. The other two split on the bill.http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-05-02/news/ct-met-gutierrez-puerto-rico-0501-20100501_1_puerto-rican-statehood-puerto-rico-democracy-act-island-s-political-status
Puerto Rican Statehood has been a hot issue for several years. Currently, there are three views on this issue. The first is state-hood, second is independence, and last is for Puerto Rico to stay a territorial commonwealth of the United States. In this report, I hope to show each view clearly and back it up with documentation.
In a worse case scenario, Puerto Rico will operate under a combined budget of six billion dollars. Puerto Rico would receive revenue from sources such as customs, parks, excise taxes, user-paid tolls, and service fess. That is what several other small, independent nations are doing right now.
This is probably a wee-bit to the left of FreeRepublic.
For if you want to believe you're always right ;-).
you must have gone to the wrong one.....
"Why of course because with the Arizona
Why of course because with the Arizona