STATEHOOD! OR INDEPENDENCE!
With one vote, Congress can give
Puerto Ricans the right to determine
their own future | Opinion
The aftermath of Hurricane Fiona in Puerto Rico is a painful reminder that there is no such thing as a “natural disaster.” The devastating scope and magnitude of the harm from so-called natural disasters in Puerto Rico are, in reality, the aftermath of a political disaster that began in 1898, when the United States annexed Puerto Rico and made it a U.S. territory.
Before then, every U.S. territory eventually became either a state, which gave it the political power to fend for itself in Washington, or an international sovereign, which gave it the political autonomy to fend for itself on the international stage.
But Puerto Rico has languished as a U.S. territory for almost 125 years — subject to U.S. law without any voting representation in the federal government. That means Puerto Rico lacks the political power either to demand the resources to which U.S. states are entitled or bargain for the resources it needs as an international sovereign.
But for the first time ever, Congress can change all that with just one vote.
Against the odds, the Puerto Rico Status Act (“PRSA”) has been voted out of the House Committee on Natural Resources. That it is now on its way to a floor vote — and could eventually make its way to President Biden’s desk — is far from business as usual on the Hill. It is, in fact, nothing short of breathtaking.
The product of months of arduous negotiations, extensive discussions with stakeholders and broad public commentary, the PRSA offers Puerto Rican voters — for the first time — the opportunity to choose among non-territorial (read: non-colonial) status options: statehood, independence and a form of international sovereignty known as “free association.” If enacted, the PRSA would finally bring a long-overdue end to Puerto Rico’s nearly 125-year-long ordeal as a politically powerless U.S. territory.
The forces behind the PRSA, Puerto Rico’s nonvoting Resident Commissioner Jenniffer González-Colón, R-Puerto Rico, and Rep. Nydia Velázquez, D-New York, belong to different mainland political parties and have long been political opponents on the issue of the island’s status: González-Colón supports statehood; Velázquez opposes it. Last year, they sponsored competing — and diametrically opposed — bills on Puerto Rico’s status. Yet they have found common ground in their life-long commitment to ending its colonial status. With the steadfast support of Committee Chair Raúl Grijalva, D-Arizona, and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer D-Maryland, they have crafted a joint bill that prioritizes Puerto Rican self-determination over political self-interest.
As residents of a U.S. territory, the 3.2 million U.S. citizens of Puerto Rico have neither voting representation in the federal government nor international sovereignty of their own. They are second-class citizens — subject to U.S. sovereignty yet unequal under U.S. law. Territorial status violates the most basic of American values: government by consent. The promise of a government “of the people, by the people, for the people” rings hollow in Puerto Rico.
As a U.S. territory, Puerto Rico cannot unilaterally achieve independence. Nor, of course, can it unilaterally admit itself into statehood. Congress has an essential role to play in Puerto Rico’s decolonization, wherever it may lead. The PRSA responds to this reality exactly as Congress should: It offers Puerto Rican voters a choice among all of their non-territorial status options. It defines the options in detail, spells out the transition to each one and requires a nonpartisan voter-education campaign leading up to the plebiscite. If none of the options receives a majority, a runoff follows. Once one option wins, the transition begins. Soon thereafter, Puerto Rico would cease to be a U.S. territory — a living monument to America’s failure to abandon its colonial past.
Of course, not everyone agrees with every line in the PRSA. And no bill — let alone one that will finally release more than 3 million people from more than 100 years of subordination — can succeed without serious compromise on all sides.
The question is whether the compromises that the PRSA requires are worth the candle. In this case, the candle finally shines the light of liberty and equality on our fellow Americans who live in Puerto Rico. If that is not worth the candle, nothing is.
Rafael Cox Alomar is professor of law at the University of the District of Columbia, David A. Clarke School of Law.
Christina D. Ponsa-Kraus is the George Welwood Murray Professor of Legal History at Columbia Law School
No comments:
Post a Comment