We continue the Puerto Rican Plebiscite Seriers with part two of Gil C. Schmidt‘s “Puerto Rico: Never a State” essay. If you are interested in submitting your blog (500 words) for publication, add your comments here expressing your interest and we will run your blog unedited. (NOTE: This three-part column was originally intended for a piece I wrote when I was contributing to Being Latino magazine earlier in 2011, and Schimidt’s response was never published by BL, so we are following up on an invitation we extended to Gil to have it published here).
Puerto Rico: Never a State (Part Two)
By Gil C. Schmidt
Statehood for Puerto Rico is not going to happen for three unimpeachable reasons: 1) Ethnic and economic differences, masked or open, covered in Part One; 2) History has spoken and 3) Under domestic and international law, the ultimate decision is not “theirs”: it’s ours.
History has spoken: Oklahoma, 1907. New Mexico, 1912. Arizona, 1912. Alaska, 1959. Hawaii, 1959.
Puerto Rico has been the property of the U.S. since 1898. Three States were added since the Spanish-American War to form the contiguous 48. The addition of non-contiguous states happened once, for Alaska and Hawaii, 61 years after Puerto Rico became war booty.
To complete the nationalization and permanence of the territorial limits in geopolitical terms, essentially, to make everybody belong to the same government, it made perfect sense to add Oklahoma (in the central portion of the country) and Arizona and New Mexico in the southwest (on the border with Mexico.)
Adding Alaska, a landmass equal to roughly 25% of the entire “lower 48”, and Hawaii, a Pacific sinecure, also made sense, as both were long-held territories where American interests were ripe for development. In the case of Alaska, it turned into federal reserves; in Hawaii, tourism-related development.
So, if Puerto Rico were to ever become a State, it is clear that post-1898 decisions about statehood have shown what the basic criteria are for being invited:
1) Political expediency, i.e., the forging of a potentially stronger geopolitical unit, or…
2) Economic enhancement.
Do we satisfy either or both of them?
No.
Are we being invited?
No and no and no.
By 1959, we were already being plucked by American interests and as they say in my neck of the woods: Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free? There’s no doubt the U.S. makes tons of money off of Puerto Rico, so statehood is really not an economic enhancement for them and in fact, it is widely portrayed and considered as either a mistake that leads to carrying welfare freeloaders or a bottomless pit of economic rehabilitation expenses. Usually both.
So what about political expediency? Well, check out point #1 above. We’re not Anglo-Saxons. Or Protestants. Or native English speakers. Or descendants of the same parts of Europe that they are. Toss out all that as a unifying factor. We are way south of the border, and unlike Alaska, we are tiny with no natural resources and unlike Hawaii, we don’t occupy a strategic location under U.S. interests. We did in 1940; we didn’t by 1945.
If Puerto Rico–in the eyes of its political owners–were deemed worthy of statehood, it would have been decided between 1912 and 1945, when our economy was nonexistent, the potential for American investment was very high, our strategic location could have been considered vital, our population small enough (and in their eyes, malleable enough) to absorb and the “lower 48” were a unitary done deal. That it didn’t happen then means it isn’t going to happen at all. Ever.
Bio: I lived almost 20 years in the U.S., spanning states from Nebraska to Texas to Mississippi. My appearance and name are those of a White, Anglo-Saxon Protestant, the proverbial W.A.S.P. But I was born in Puerto Rico, a fourth-generation Puerto Rican and have lived on the island continuously since 1987. You can find more of my writings about Puerto Rico at Gil The Jenius: http://gilthejenius.blogspot.com
Franky Benítez 
So what the Jenius says is that we were on our car and suddenly the US took the steering wheel and parked us. While we were parked the US took five other cars and drove them into their garage while telling us “don’t worry we’ll let you in…some time”. And pro statehood fanatics still believe that we will enter the union. As the Jenius says the decision is ours but as long as they keep themselves on the driver’s seat we will remain on parking watching others move.
Agreed
A very thought provoking series that has inspired excellent reader comments. I look forward to the third installment.
Agreed. The goal of this blog in 2012 is to allow the different voices of Puerto Rico to come together and create a POLITIQUERÍA-free zone.
Again, more commentary rooted in everything but historical fact. Here’s the big one in this post: “Invited.” Not one single territory has been “invited” to become a state! Not one. That’s not how it works. Where does the author get this idea? First, the author wrongly claims that it takes three-fourths of states (38) to admit a new state, but that’s the requirement for amending the U.S. Constitution. Now he tries to tell us that new states are “invited” into the Union–not true.
Territories “petition” to become states once they have they have a republican form of government, a constitution, and a large enough population. (Even though the population requirement was not followed after the standard set by the Northwest Ordinance, which was roughly 60,000 inhabitants. Minnesota and Nevada each had less than 7,000, and California less than 15,000. Puerto Rico currently has as many people as all original 13 colonies combined!) Most important, all territories that petition after the original 13 became states–eight of them by force after they petition (through the Tennessee Plan).
Also, the idea that Puerto Rico is too poor to be a state–again–is nonsense and does not follow historical patterns. Territories are not too poor to be states, they are poorer BECAUSE they are not states. Alaska was a wilderness, Florida a swamp–that’s what those who didn’t want those two to be states said back then. If economics were a reason for statehood (which the Founding Fathers NEVER write about) then we would have a much smaller Union. The American Republic is about a republican form of government! Our Union of states is not about being white, or Protestant, or rich–or even a different language.
But you miss a very important point in all this. I highly doubt that a federal government in massive debt will take on the $ to allow another state in the union. There is no indication from US political parties that it is making PR a legislative priority. The end result is a plebiscite that doesn’t matter.
That’s another misconception–made primarily by those who view Puerto Rico as different. If the debt and deficits of the U.S. come into the conversation, then one cannot separate Puerto Rico from the mainland. Here it goes: Puerto Rico IS part of the debt and the deficits!
The U.S. would not be “bringing in” new debt because Puerto Rico, Guam, U.S. Virgin Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa ARE already counted there. In fact, and economic convergence proves this, if Puerto Rico were to become a state its economy (which is already larger than 15 other states) would with the passage of time converge with that of the richer states. Economic Convergence Theory basically says that when one poor entity joins the economic system of richer entities they grow to catch up. In fact, the poorer the entity, the faster the growth. Eventually slowing down. That’s how dirt poor territories have become powerful rich states.
So, again, the idea of “bringing in” poverty does not hold water. It is a pure misconception.
Right, because poverty is already a reality. It is not a perception. There is no way that certain Congressional leaders will welcome a territory that is poorer than all US States, has a higher unemployment rate that all US States, and a economic structure that has been compared to by financial firms to Greece. Add the grumblings of PR as a neo-narco state, and it is a nativists’ wet dream to deny PR a voice and a will.
Also the US govt’s position is one of not caring. President Obama was very clear about that: https://juliorvarela.com/2011/09/28/president-obamas-message-to-puerto-rico-the-us-congress-still-decides-your-fate-not-you/
I will continue to pressure Congressional leaders to put PR on their agenda and make the will of the people binding, but in the end, the essence of PR is not pure statehood. It is a more improved version of a failed commonwealth system. I wish you luck in your efforts, but I don’t agree with them.
Again, you are more than welcome to write a 500-word post about your views here and I will run unedited. JulioRVarela@gmail.com
Good luck.
Come on Javier, can’t you see you are ruining the “pity part” going on here?! Enough with the dead on facts. We want to hear of hateful white people who won’t take their jack boots off our necks! We want to hear how we will never be “invited” to America’s party because we aren’t like them. Oh why can’t we be our selves and still be liked?
I watched an interview this morning with a Mexican-American women from Iowa. The reporter asked her what the most important issue for latinos was, and her answer was the immigration issue. Not the plight of Puerto Rico, not the economy, not even jobs. It is the immigration issue that is seen as most important. If Puerto Rico is looking for help from other latinos, forget it, they don’t understand what the problem is here when all they want is a chance to live and work in the US. I’m not saying give up on trying to change the status here, I’m just saying doing it by whining and claiming racism is not the way to get change done. As JFK was said, “ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.” Some pretty good advice for everyone, everywhere.
The US voting public doesn’t care about Puerto Rico.
quoting Mr. Harris: Come on Javier, can’t you see you are ruining the “pity part” going on here?!
Enough with the dead on facts. We want to hear of hateful white people who won’t take their jack boots off our necks!
You couldn’t ruin anything for a die hard believer of fairness/ and truth. White? The color of a man’s hue has nothing to do with it, afterall we’re all Americans, Black, white, yelow, brown, hell! that Union battle was fought a long time ago. though, for too long, skin color was use as a tool to exploit, I appreciate your view, but “pity part” has no play on my stand. I consider it very condescending , though I’m sure you were generalizing 😉 but, guy it’s been 500 yrs.
Another economic fact: Puerto Rico’s economy is slowing down because the global economy is slowing down, to include the US. This means any other country PR wants to trade with is most likely having their own economic issues.
And when did the global recession start? About the same time the governor of PR took office. Blaming the governor for the problems here is like blaming Obama for the problems in the US. Obama did not start the recession, but by printing and borrowing more money he will only make it much worse before it gets better. Governments need to let the free markets balance out, as painful for many as it will be, but todays cure will be much worse then the illness coming.
Obama’s Stimulus Package Helped Us from a Deeper Recession!!
Sorry Myrna; the stimulus package only put more money into an economy where productivity is low because consumer demand is low. The money supply has increased 200% since 2009. Where then is this money going? Into the banks. Banks are not loaning the money because people are having a difficult time qualifying. So, before the housing bust in 2008, the qualifying standards were set to low. Now they are set to high. To much money chasing to few products will eventually equal high inflation. As the saying goes, “for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.” Obama did not prevent a deeper depression, he only prolonged the eventual outcome which will be much worse. Obama recently asked for another $1.2 trillion debt ceiling increase. Just a fancy way of saying more borrowing.
New York Times 1/4/2012
Updated: Oct. 24, 2011
Since the economy began to falter in 2007, Congress has passed what amounts to three stimulus bills — a bipartisan $158 billion package of tax cuts signed by President George W. Bush in early 2008, a $787 billion bill pushed by President Obama as he took office in 2009 in the wake of the financial system’s collapse and a tax cut and unemployment fund extension agreement reached by Mr. Obama and Congressional Republicans in December 2010.
While Republicans have derided the 2009 stimulus as a failure, the consensus among economists has been that it helped stave off deeper job losses and supported a modest recovery.
Im glad that we all care about the status,but we have a new criminal record this past year,and all ready on the way to a new one,and by the way El Nuevo Dia newspaper today is showing and add in Washinton that read” NOW HIRING MEXICAN,PUERTORICANS NEED NOT APPLY” so good luck with the State Idea. Despues de todo ellos ya tienen lo que quieren de nosotros. El comercio,las playas,el correo,las lineas aereas, y el poder de determinar,y hasta el derecho de izar su bandera sobre la nuestra….Que verguenza!!!
Yes, Teo, that story is crazy! There has been nothing in the United States last year and this year that the US will welcome Puerto Rico with open arms. Anyone who thinks otherwise really doesn’t get it.
What?! Do you have a photo of that ad or a link to see it? Thanks.
I’m surprise El Nuevo Dia printed that, must have been a slow news day.. Come on! Puerto Rican generally are not loooking at lawn signs for work, It’s our latino brothers, usuallly trying to scrap by with a “day job ” looks more like nationality baiting to me… “Divide and Conquer” ?? Just saying…
Never mind. I found the photo http://www.vocero.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/nedd-not-apply1.jpg it was intended as a joke but as any joke that involves ethnicity it was offensive.
“I consider it very condescending , though I’m sure you were generalizing but, guy it’s been 500 yrs.” Myrna
Condescending? No, Myrna, I was being facetious. Think of my writings as a sounding wall. When I read many of the posts on this website, that is pretty much all I hear for the reasons why Puerto Rico will never become a state. When I was much younger and still living at home, I would get very depressed because I could not find a job. I was going through “self pity” my mother would tell me. My answer was to tell her all of the reasons why I could not get a job. To this, my mother would tell me I was not the first person to ever have a tough time getting a job, but whining about it, and blaming the employers was not the answer. Putting together a constructive plan and staying positive is how I eventually landed a job. If Puerto Rico is to become a state, we need real leadership who can put together a plan that the people can rally behind. I’ve yet to see any real plan. But personally, I think PR would be better off as a true free associated state with the US. But unfortunately there is no constitution in the making outlining this free association so the people will know what they are voting for come November 12. I predict the majority of the people will vote for the established commonwealth (colony) status because it has become comfortable and safe to so many. I hope I’m wrong.
Well folks, instead of getting defensive over the sign, look at it as non-constructive criticism. Whether the sign is for real or not, it has an intended message. They are not saying they are anti-spanish, they are saying they have specific issues with Puerto Ricans. So the constructive question to ask is why?
It was a joke that went bad. Oops. It shows a little ignorance of US Latinos and at least he took the sign down after he realized it pissed some people off.
Right.
Bruce R .Harris …..they have specific issues with Puerto Ricans. So the constructive question to ask is why?
Do you have The Answer?
Teodoro Leon; I do not have a definitive answer for you. But, if I were to guess, it might have something to do with the anti-white america racist rants that I have been reading on this web site. If this small group of posters, to include the host and his guest bloggers, represents a much larger group of anti-white americans then you might be able to understand a possible mutual dislike by many white americans. The positive note to this is you are most likely getting your message out to americans. The negative side; it may not be the message you really want to be getting out. Unfortunately for some of the posters here, whites in america will continue to be the majority in the US for a long time. These white americans will be needed to help Puerto Rico to someday acquire the permanent status it is seeking. And for the record Teodoro, I am a white american who lives in Puerto Rico. And I have said many times I support a TRUE free association with the US, because any other status would not be in Puerto Rico’s best interest.
Don’t think it is anti-white American rants that are happening on this site, Bruce. What posts specifically claim that I am anti-White? I am pro-justice and pro-democracy and pro-equality. This has nothing to do with race, although, Bruce, you are one of the few White Americans who care about Puerto Rico. Thanks for the support.
“PR statehood would be possible when whites are a minority but I do not see it happening anytime soon.” Joel Villarini
Julito; for two reasons I believe you have inferred a dislike of white americans. One is the guest blogger you invited who has made it quite clear where he stands. And two, the poster I pasted above who wrote on Jan. 1. I would have expected you to call him out on his “white” rant. Many of your posters seem to believe, wrongly, that it is white america that is preventing PR from attaining a status away from a colony. Where is the proof of this I ask?
I can’t control what others say, my only policy is to not allow personal attacks of people. My job is to open up the discussion, but I don’t have a dislike of white Americans. I have a dislike of bad politics and failed policies.
“So what about political expediency? Well, check out point #1 above. We’re not Anglo-Saxons. Or Protestants. Or native English speakers. Or descendants of the same parts of Europe that they are.” Jenius
And you did not know your guest speaker’s views concerning white americans before you invited him? As they say Julito, “birds of a feather will flock together.”
Bruce, my invitation is OPEN TO ANYONE who is interested in Puerto Rico. Gil was the first invite since his blog posts were not published by another page after he wanted to response to a post I wrote. I have invited other voices. I don’t appreciate your insinuation. The tone here is respectful and my goal is to use the power of social media and the Internet to change the dialogue in Puerto Rico. Why don’t you write a blog post about your views and we will publish it? Thank you, my friend!
Bruce,Im not Racist,but….Si vives en P.R debes hablar Español,A si que continuare en Español,yo no tengo problemas con los Estado Unidenses sean blancos o de color, ( no todos son Blancos)mi problema es con su Politica,Y como habras notado no soy el unico,EE.UU tiene problemas en Todo el Mundo,Por su Politica.Mi Bandera la quiero sola.Y eso lo Aprendi de de los Estados Unidos Tambien me enseñaron a querer ser Libre, Soberano y a Estar Orgulloso de mi Patria, Bruce estoy de acuerdo con Julito y te Agradesco seas sincero y que te preocupes e interses por Mi Patria,y para mi ser Libre no significa ser enemigo de los EE.UU o como tu dices White American. Bruce no es nada personal…..y en con nuestros comentarios no vamos a cambiar la nada,solo nos desaogamos….PAZ
Actually Teodoro, this is the world wide web (www), which is an international media, we are posting in, not Puerto Rico. And so technically, with the web being an international media, maybe we should be using the international language which is english.
We welcome comments in both English and Spanish.
Bruce, como todo Estado Unidense no Hablas Espanol, o por lo menos no quieres,(de hecho no aprenden ningun otro Idioma) y and yes we may should be using What you call International Language or perhaps Latin? international or not Español en P.R esta en juego con la Estadidad Y para los que ponen a Hawaii de ejempol, no han visitado a Hawaii(solo hablan Tu internacional laguage) desde que LLEGAS! Y TE REPITO ESTO ES CUESTION DE OPINION NO VAMOS A CAMBIAR NADA. Sorry for the capital letters…PAZ
“(they only speak Your international laguage) since YOU ARRIVE!” Teodoro
And you must really be pissed at Spain Teodoro!
Im not Bruce ..They are not a treat to my country at this time…Try this link… http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/4615827/puerto-rico-pushing-to-be-51st-state
Teodoro; qué entendía de su poste anterior era que Hawaii ahora habla inglés porque los E.E.U.U. lo forzaron en él. ¿Tan le pregunté si usted es enojado en España para forzar español en usted? Pero let’ s esté el claro verdadero, I don’ ayuda el 100% de t qué el gobierno de los E.E.U.U. ha hecho durante los años. Y no apoyo especialmente la manera que han manejado mal Puerto Rico. No sé porqué cualquier persona querría convertirse en el 51.o estado. En cuanto al vídeo, es un trabajo de los reporteros pedir preguntas difíciles. Y el dinero es generalmente un motivo superior por muchas razones por las que la gente hace lo que ella lo hace. Era una pregunta apropiada que lo consideraba será los pagadores de impuestos americanos que terminarán para arriba el pie la cuenta.
Fascinante conversación. Tal vez se deban conocer. You two should meet in person. We need more voices like you two talking about this and making this a priority.
Mis mas sinceros respetos To you Bruce…Si aprendiste Español, Y creeme yo se que en muchas otrs cosas estamos de acuerdo…….(Y julito, Gracias por permitir las diferentes opiniones )Bruce thank for tour time…….. The End .. Paz
Thank you for the comments, folks. Mr. Arvelo-Cruz-Santana correctly states that territories (generally) petitioned for statehood, but the general pattern also included give-and-take, negotiations leading to join the Union (not the most popular option in many cases.) There’s a reason a “Tennessee Plan” arose and it makes interesting contrast to the “regular” procedure. Bottom line: the U.S. set the rules time and time again, but never to facilitate the path for Puerto Rico to become a State. To quote some sage: “I’m not complainin’, I’m just sayin’ them’s the facts…and you can look it up.”
Mr. Harris states we are having a “pity party.” I tend to agree: it’s a pity we waste our time with statehood. It’s like settling for the the ugly virago next door instead of courting the many smarter, more beautiful and more charming lovelies anywhere else. Our fear of “anywhere else” means we’re stuck with…what we have.
I love the Idea and sound of United States of South America………..Perdon…. Los Estados Unidos De sur America
And remember, if you do become a state you will lose your identity. As in your culture, your language, everything. You will be americanized. Are you willing to sacrifice the things you cherish just to become a state? Something to think about folks.
That, my dear friend Bruce, is a HUGE point that in the end, will be the key, in my opinion.
I love my country dearly Julito. And it is the diverseness of people who make the US so great. But I fear many are selling their souls for what they think is prosperity and security that is being offered by the leaders, both government, corporations and many organizations that cater to the fears of many. Not hand outs, but sacrifice and hard work will be the only way we get the global economy back up and running. Most people misunderstand the concept of “rugged individualism” associated with America and it’s rise to greatness. This idea in no way places lesser value on communities working together to solve problems because this in fact how Americans survived the Great Depression. Governments did very little to help, in fact they may have prolonged it. It was the “rugged individual” that rose from the groups as a leader and took the people “where they needed to go, and not where they wanted to go.” We have not seen or heard from these “rugged individuals” in a long, long time. I fear corruption and greed are at the helm and driving us straight over a cliff. All under the guise of a better life ahead.
My hat off to you Bruce,well said,I know we agreed in some things.
With a little respect and understanding Teodoro, we can always find common ground with each other. Thanks.