Last night the island of Puerto Rico experienced a historic election. Not only did Puerto Ricans go to the polls to vote for Governor, Resident Commissioner, and other legislative positions, they also voted in yet another non-binding plebiscite that tried to determine whether Puerto Ricans favored its current commonwealth relationship with the United States, and if not, whether it favored statehood, independence, or associated free state.
The biggest news of the night was that Republican pro-statehood incumbent governor Luis Fortuño of the island’s New Progressive Party (PNP) lost his re-election bid to Alejandro García Padilla, the Democratic pro-commonwealth challenger of the island’s Popular Democratic Party (PPD). The independence candidate, Juan Dalmau, as well as the other third-party candidates, didn’t even play a role in the tally, which is still being counted. The following screen shot showed the latest results as of this morning, with over 96% of the precincts reporting.
The Fortuño loss confirmed what many Puerto Ricans had said all along: his policies and personality were too polarizing. While he was being praised by FOX News for being a new Latino conservative, Fortuño could not break away from his critics and detractors. Double-digit unemployment and a consensus that Puerto Rico was heading in the wrong direction, a Gasoducto project gone bad, and the Ley 7 protests gave García Padilla the little boost he needed. Of course, it wasn’t a landslide and with pro-statehood Democrat PNPer Pedro Pierluisi winning his re-election bid for Resident Commissioner, the Fortuño loss is not a clear mandate for García Padilla. He is going to have to work with the PNP since the role of Resident Commissioner (the island’s non-voting member in Congress) is seen as the island’s second-in-command. Pierluisi is Puerto Rico’s Washington voice and the uneasy alliance between the PPD and PNP will be interesting to watch, to say the least.
Yet I will argue that this is all a good thing for Puerto Rico, since no matter what García Padilla or the PPD are saying today, the island’s formal Washington-San Juan relationship is now a bipartisan status issue (it doesn’t hurt that both García Padilla and Pierluisi are Democrats). And given the results of the plebiscite, that is a good thing. A really good thing.
Which brings us to the status questions, and why in the end, Puerto Rico wins.
Here are the latest results. Question 1 basically asked if Puerto Ricans prefer to keep the status quo (commonwealth) or reject. The status quo was rejected. (FYI, there were over 64,000 blank votes, more to come on that.)
García Padilla, Puerto Rico’s governor-elect, favored a YES vote. He lost.
When it came to what options Puerto Ricans favored (statehood, independence, free associated state), here are the latest results:
Statehood was what Fortuño favored, and so did Pierluisi. So in essence, Fortuño won this one. However, it gets complicated when one takes into account that over 468,000 votes (so far) were blank for this category, which is the strategy García Padilla declared. Because a blank vote meant that you were voting for the status quo, which by the way was already rejected in Question 1. Therefore if you take into the account the blank votes, here is where it stands:
Let’s face it, García Padilla made a strategic mistake on his part, and that is actually great thing for Puerto Rico. Here is why: Question 1 basically said NO to the status quo, which is what García Padilla favored. Question 2, which only listed three options (BLANK was not an option), made statehood the winner. As uncomfortable as that makes García Padilla today, the reality is that political games that telling people not to vote backfired.
Voting BLANK doesn’t count. It doesn’t mean anything. It just means BLANK. It means you didn’t want to vote or even provide an honest choice, especially since Question 1 already rejected the status quo or the BLANK people were trying to defend in Question 2.
If the PPD were smart and savvy about Question 2 and if they wanted to have statehood lose the vote, they should have pushed for either independence or associated free state, or they would have initiated a real write-in campaign for the status quo. But they didn’t, and this morning they are left defending a political system that around 1 million Puerto Ricans don’t want and a status option the PPD can’t support. Already, García Padilla has lost control of the status agenda. He will be forced to resolve it by engaging those who favor other options.
So governor-elect García Padilla needs to be careful right now. He cannot start his administration by refuting and ignoring the results of the plebiscite. He will be making a huge mistake in putting the political history of the PPD ahead of a vote that clearly says that the status quo must change. I am not suggesting that García Padilla should all of a sudden push for statehood, but what he SHOULD do his first day in office in tell Pierluisi to demand that Congress move the process on resolving Puerto Rico’s political status. Staying stuck in the past will keep the island in neutral and eventually going backwards, instead of doing the right thing and putting the people over one political party’s stubborn preference.
Many Puerto Ricans will criticize Fortuño, and those criticisms have merit, but Fortuño should be commended for establishing a plebiscite process that rejected the status quo and initiated a real tangible dialogue about where Puerto Rico goes next. García Padilla, if he is smart enough, could actually go down as the Governor who finally moved the needle on the island’s status and resolved it. He can also thank Fortuño for that because that is why leaders do: sacrifice politics for the greater good, even if it means losing your own election.
Now for a different take on this, read what my dear friend Gil the Genius has to say about it. This time around, we follow different paths about yesterday’s results and come to the same conclusions: we need more “adults” in Puerto Rican politics. The PPD leadership missed a huge opportunity to be “adults” and to clarify the plebiscite question by actually fully participating in it, instead of trying to be clever about it. Being clever is the old way. Being honest about where Puerto Rico goes next is the new way. Here is to the new way. It it will win.
As usual,the Puerto Rico case gets more bizzare……they vote to end the unincorporated territory.
They vote for statehood by 61%……they put in a governor who is part time Independentista in free association & part time pro colony.
He AGP gov elect ALREADY stated that he doesn’t care about 60% pro statehood vote, nor the majority for rejecting the current status.(the “no” victory.) HE FALSELY CLAIMS THAT COMMONWEALTH AS IS WAS NOT ON THE BALLOT. YES IT WAS. That’s what the yes/no was about. Why the hell would commonwealth reappear on the second round? No only that, the demogogue is a Free Association(ELA Soberano) supporter, yet abandoned the status, when it became clear most populares want perm union ties & citizenship to continue. What a mess!
Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless
What Padilla and many PDP want is an Enhanced Commonwealth which was not on the ballot. And I believe the voters who left the 1st question blank really should have answered the 1st question with a NO and then leave the second question blank. Oh well, I’m sure there will be a next time, and a next time, and…well, you all know where I’m going with this. You gotta make the sheeple feel empowered while the puppeteers keep pulling their strings.
Or just maybe people are tired of playing the “carrot and stick” game and refuse to let the puppeteers fool them again. If that’s the case then good for them.
Please stop sending me these emails
You commie pigs….stop sending these emails…..
The problem is that the status quo is NOT what the PPD favors. NO ONE favors the status quo, but the PNP didn’t get that memo and designed a plebiscite that misled people to believe that the status quo is an option.
The PPD believes in an Autonomous ELA within the Territorial Clause of the U.S. Constitution but granted much greater autonomy than the island enjoys today. If that were negotiated and agreed upon, Puerto Rico would cease to be a traditional colony and instead assume a fully legitimate status. The democracy deficit — the application of federal laws without the consent of the governed — would no longer be an issue because we would be autonomous.
Another way of looking at this is to see the Autonomous ELA as if it were the ELA Soberano, with exactly the same negotiated arrangement, but without the sovereignty. That, combined with the state-like constitution in place since 1952, would end the colony and still keep Puerto Rico within the U.S. federal system.
That said, let me clarify that while constitutionally possible, the PPD has been at this for 60 years and hasn’t come close to achieving it. And given the party’s internal dynamics, party leaders stopped explaining the vision this way when Hernández Colón left the governorship in 1992. Since, the message has been muddled and utterly confused with the ELA Soberano rhetoric.
Which brings us back to yesterday’s plebiscite. The PDP leadership is right to have opposed it claiming that the whole process was skewed to favor statehood. And by the way, not even Fortuño could have done much with the results of the plebiscite with only fortysome percent of the vote (802,000 votes for statehood vs. the total number of votes in the election). That gets you nowhere fast in Congress.
My hope is that the new government will live up to its status promise of going back to Obama’s suggested process to take care of the issue, with ALL options on the table: Autonomous ELA, Sovereign ELA (free association), full independence and statehood. And may the best one win.
I understand the Enhanced commonwealth argument. There’s only one wrinkle. The US constitution only recognizes (acccording to Balzac insular cases) 3 statuses in the USA,…..Unincorporated territory subject to Congresses territorial clause, Incorporated Territory enroute to statehood, or full US Statehood. Incorporating Puerto Rico as an incorporated territory of US would secure permanent union with USA. It could keep its Olympic team, International pageants, receive more federal funding while paying Federal income taxes. Since its now permanently incorporated into the US, Puerto Rico can now cease to worry about its status, language, and Culture.
Your suggestion of a Soveregn ELA within the Constitution of USA, is possible. I guess ANY status is possible if the US decides to settle the issue with an Amendment to the US constitution to allow the ELA Mejorado. Problem is, it may never be rattified, since many states will covet and demand the same treatment. That’s not possible for them as states, so no state will vote to give a PR a status superior to statehood. (At least in their eyes. What do you or anyone else here think about a possible amendment for Enhanced Commonwealth?
Luis, really, Enhanced Commonwealth? If PRico does ever get this status, there will most certainly be another civil war in the US. And you can bet PRico will be dragged into this one.
Not only was this an historic election(s) in PR, but it open a clear channel regarding the status of PR. With the PPD winning and having a candidate that supports the US Democratic Party it brings up an interesting conundrum for future candidates that will be running for US president. I believe that the elections/referendum in PR will hamper support for statehood in the states. If there is one thing certain IF Puerto Rico was the 51st state, it clearly would have been a swing state. Where the conundrum does comes in effect? Is that future candidates for US pres. Will not be guaranteed the electoral votes of PR, because it is not loyal to one particular party (Rep or Dem.). Statehood is not supported in the US as PNP makes it seems to voters.
Now if you a republican rep? Why support statehood? Mitt Romney received between 20-25% of Latino voters, what is PR considered? Latinos, so what advantage does Rep. have if PR becomes a state? Non what so ever. So dems would push the issue in PR and try to garner votes, the issue with that so some republicans would be against statehood because it can lead to red states would lose electoral votes to PR. Why dems wouldn’t support statehood? Because same applies, if PR was a state back in 2008, it would lean towards republican John Mccain. The referendum and status should be enforced by the new Gov to be addressed by congress during this term. The issue with that based on the Insular cases, US has not intention to incorporate PR as a state of union.
But I wouldnt put that much energy on referendum, 6 parties participated in the elections, someone needs to step up and clear things. I think many of PR are tired, but voters in PR as like voters in US. It seems that you can only vote rep. or dem.
I disagree with your statement that the result of the non-binding plebiscite is cause for Puerto Rico to win. Win what? Did I miss something in translation about non-binding? In my opinion it was a futile exercise that costs millions of dollars and provided no clear definition to the political status of the island.
On the contrary, it creates more confusion since the people who turned their ballot blank, as you said, it just means blank! Did they forget to place a mark on the paper? I mean we could keep asking questions in order to try to ascertain the wishes of those who turned their ballot blank.
Some in the island are already discussing that the ELA soberano and the blank ballots are 50.37%. Their point is that numerically 50.37% (24.31% ELA soberano plus 26.06% blank) is greater than the 44.62 % statehood has. Again this is getting more complicated than a majarete. No wonder continental people look at us and say, “WHAT? We thought you decided for statehood! What are you saying now? Do you want a change or not?” Obviously the Anglo mentality is clear cut. There is no room for ambivalence. It results in them not taking us seriously. We say one thing, do another and then agree on some other thing. Or we keep doing the same thing expecting a different result (by the way, Einstein stated that the definition of insane is just that)! We keep on thinking that some how Puerto Rico’s problems are to be fixed by someone else but us.
Related to this is the perception of many Puerto Ricans that the status issue was resolved in 1952. They question who are the United Nations or other groups to question our decision making. The 1952 Assembly resolved the status question, in the opinion of many, creating a sovereign state, associated permanently to the United States. If it has worked for sixty (60) years, why change it? Many ask the question that that no one answers without rhetoric and pressing a definite path away from the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth provides for U.S. citizenship without paying federal taxes, some claim. I disagree since we pay federal taxes indirectly. Then the Commonwealth tacks another tax for importation and sales tax (IVU) at the register, making Puerto Rico the highest taxed territory and more than the majority of the states. (NOTE: • ^ “Puerto Ricans pay import/export taxes”. Stanford.wellsphere.com. Retrieved August 14, 2010.
• ^ “Puerto Ricans pay federal commodity taxes”. Stanford.wellsphere.com. Retrieved 2011-10-30.
• ^ “Internal Revenue Service. ‘, Topic 903 – Federal Employment Tax in Puerto Rico’,”. Irs.gov. December 18, 2009. Retrieved August 14, 2010.
• ^ a b “Reuters. ‘, Puerto Rico hopes to gain from U.S. healthcare reform.’, 24 September 2009″. Reuters. September 24, 2009. Retrieved August 14, 2010.
• ^ Schaefer, Brett. “The Heritage Foundation, 11 March 2009. ‘ D.C. Voting Rights: No Representation? No Taxation!’ By Robert A. Book, PhD”. Heritage.org. Retrieved October 16, 2010.
• ^ “Puerto Rico Manufacturers Association, CEO Summit. ‘, Federal and Local Incentives: Where we are, where we want to be. Anaya Iraolagoitia, Partner, Tax Dept.” (PDF). Retrieved August 14, 2010.
• ^ a b “Joint Committee on Taxation. An Overview of the Special Tax Rules Related to Puerto Rico and an Analysis of the Tax and Economic Policy Implications of Recent Legislative Options” (PDF). Retrieved August 14, 2010.
• ^ Members of the military must pay federal income tax
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
Bottom line is Puerto Ricans agreed in 1952 to this arrangement. In my opinion it should be changed. Eventually we either should have two options on the table. Statehood or independence. Each has its positives and negative. I hope to see that the people of Puerto Rico really study the implications of each choice without the enslavement of “partidismo-politico” that keeps everyone in status quo.
To conclude, I agree with you in that the PPD leadership lost a grand opportunity clarifying the plebiscite question by fully participating in it. Lost opportunities are just that: LOST.
AGP should do the right thing and be a leader on this. It will be a huge disappointment if he just goes back and rejects the vote. The time to lead is now. If he does that, PR wins.
“However, it gets complicated when one takes into account that over 468,000 votes (so far) were blank for this category,” Julito
I’m not sure where you get this number from considering 1,311,727 votes were counted on page 2. In fact, only 934,238 votes should have been counted on page 2. Why? Because if you voted YES on page 1 then the voter should have been instructed to stop at that point. If you voted NO on page 1 then you should have been instructed to complete page 2. And since we know 934,238 voters voted NO on the 1st page, then only this number of voters should have voted for a new status on page 2.
Also, as I said before the referendum, each status should be explained so the voter has a fairly good idea what they are voting for, especially the Free Association status. Would they retain US citizenship? A huge requirement by a large number of voters. The PRican leadership should have taken the time and worked with Congressional members and at least come up with a rough draft that would be accepted by Congress if an overwhelming amount of voters voted for this options. Sad loss because I personally believe this is the best option for PRico if US citizenship is retained.
Lastly, the only page that should matter to Congress is page 1. 54% for change as opposed to 46% to maintain the status quo does not constitute a mandate. Congress needs to see at least a 2/3 majority voting for change before they will act. 64,000 blank votes would not change the results in a way that would matter. Using the actual number of votes, 1,730,245, a 2/3 vote should look like this; 1,153,496 for change to 576,748 votes to remain the same. In my opinion, Congress should put this referendum in the round file.
That 46800 number came from the official PR election agency at the time I wrote the piece, Bruce. Thanks. You can go check the latest numbers there
But only 934,238 votes should have been counted on page 2 if the voters were following the instructions. Do you agree with that assessment Julito? It doesn’t really matter though at this point. The entire referendum shows the average voter is extremely confused and this confusion can be blamed on the leadership and the lack of preparation that went into this even though they had 2 years notice to plan for it. Sad.
It is confusing, agreed. AGP made it even more confusing by telling people to vote blank on question 2. It is typical of PR politics.
The first question , in my opinion, was the key aspect of the plebiscite. I beleive a clear majority of the people rejected the status quo. Whatever steps are taken from hereon they must built on said result, o sea, the Ela is no longer welcome. The options need to be 3 , not four since any so called autonomous development under the territorial clause it is still colonial in nature. We need to decolonize so Congress may not interfere in our future decisions.
Agreed. That is why AGP is on a slippery slope if he starts to reject the results.
“I beleive a clear majority of the people rejected the status quo.” Jose Ortiz
934,238 to 796,007 is not even close to a clear majority. A clear majority result is a 2/3 to 1/3 vote. That would equate to 1,153,496 to 576,748. Now that would represent a clear majority rejecting the status quo.
Resident Commissioner Romero-Barcelo, Testimony before the House Natural Resources Committee, October 4, 2000, p. 46. [The reason why Enhanced Commonwealth proponents rejected our invitation to appear before the Committee] is because they realize that their proposal is indefensible. They can only propose this new enhanced commonwealth, as they call it, publicly from a platform and speaking to their own people and do it on the radio and the television [in Puerto Rico]. But to come into a place where they are going to be asked hard questions about all of these things that they propose, they would be very, very hard – in a very difficult position to answer in a serious, logical and enlightened manner. So that is why they shy away from coming here to testify and they refuse to confront the issue.