Despite last November’s referendum in Puerto Rico, in which a majority of voters cast ballots in favor of statehood, Congress remains divided over the question of whether to make the island a state, leaving its status in a kind of colonial limbo.
Although Puerto Ricans do not pay federal income taxes, they do pay payroll taxes, which fund programs such as Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
The divisions were on full display in a Congressional hearing on April 14, when a number of experts, officials, and other stakeholders addressed two bills under consideration in Congress. Puerto Rican Governor Pedro R. Pierluisi argued forcefully for a bill that would enable Puerto Ricans to participate in a legally binding referendum for statehood. Others advocated on behalf of a bill that would provide Puerto Ricans with more time to deliberate on statehood and other options.
Although the witnesses differed over the best approach, they largely agreed that Puerto Rico’s current status must change. “There should be no room in the American family for colonialism,” Pierluisi said in a written statement.
For more than a century, the United States has cast a long shadow over Puerto Rico, a Caribbean island that is home to more than three million people. Since 1898, when the United States acquired the island from Spain, both the Supreme Court and the Congress have played a central role in setting policies that have kept Puerto Rico under U.S. control and influence.
During the early 1900s, the Supreme Court issued a series of rulings known as the Insular Cases, which deemed that Puerto Rico and other U.S. island colonies are “unincorporated territories” of the United States. The Insular Cases established a legal justification for the United States to maintain control over its island colonies without admitting them as states or granting full rights to their inhabitants.
The territory clause of the Constitution, which grants Congress authority over U.S. territories, has enabled Congress to play a decisive role in Puerto Rican politics. Historically, Congress has deliberated over several major political changes in Puerto Rico, including the island’s adoption of its own constitution in 1952.
In 2016, Congress displayed the extent of its authority when it created a controversial federal oversight board to restructure the country’s finances. The move imposed new constraints on Puerto Rican autonomy that led to major cuts in social services. Many Puerto Ricans refer to the oversight board as “la junta,” a term indicating that it is beyond their control.
One of the biggest questions about Puerto Rico’s future concerns the issue of U.S. citizenship. Although Congress granted U.S. citizenship to Puerto Ricans in 1917, the people of Puerto Rico have never had equal rights. Puerto Ricans cannot vote in presidential elections. They do not have representation in the U.S. Senate. They have one non-voting representative in Congress, instead of the four or five voting representatives they would have under statehood based on the island’s population size.
The people of Puerto Rico are also deprived of social and economic benefits. Although Puerto Ricans do not pay federal income taxes, they do pay payroll taxes, which fund programs such as Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Puerto Rico receives less money for these programs than the states, despite the fact that nearly half of Puerto Ricans live in poverty.
“Many in Puerto Rico would view Congress pushing statehood not as an end to colonization, but the culmination of it.”
The recent devastation brought by hurricanes, earthquakes, and the coronavirus pandemic have only exacerbated social and economic inequities between the mainland and the island.
Given the fact that so many Puerto Ricans are suffering as second-class citizens, some Congressional leaders are moving to end the island’s colonial relationship with the United States, as reflected in the two bills now being debated.
One bill, the Puerto Rico Statehood Admission Act, would allow Puerto Rico to become a state in the event of a majority vote for statehood in another referendum by the island’s population. Introduced by Representative Darren Soto, Democrat of Florida, the bill has received the support of Governor Pierluisi and Resident Commissioner Jenniffer González-Colón, Puerto Rico’s non-voting representative in Congress.
“Our historic legislation will finally end over 120 years of colonialism and provide full rights and representation to more than 3.2 million Americans,” Soto said in a press statement in March. “Back-to-back hurricanes, earthquakes, and now the COVID-19 pandemic have proven that the island’s colonial status is simply not working.”
Another bill, the Puerto Rico Self-Determination Act, would create a lengthier and more deliberative process that would leave Puerto Ricans with more options. The bill, introduced by Representative Nydia Velazquez, Democrat of New York, would create a political convention in Puerto Rico. Elected delegates would consider several options for Puerto Rico’s future, send the options to the Puerto Rican people for a vote, and provide the results to Congress for approval.
The bill has the support of many of the most progressive members of the Democratic Party, including Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democrat of New York.
“A colony is incompatible with democracy,” Ocasio-Cortez said in a press briefing last month. “We should all be able to enjoy the right to equal treatment, and self-determination is how we can accomplish that in a process that is respected by all.”
The debate over the two bills has grown so intense that officials on both sides have accused one another of supporting policies that perpetuate colonialism.
At the April 14 hearing, advocates of statehood repeatedly argued that any alternative to statehood would leave Puerto Rico under U.S. colonialism. Pierluisi described the self-determination bill as “the epitome of colonialism.” He said that it ignored the island’s recent referendum, in which a majority of Puerto Ricans voted for statehood.
“Anything short of statehood is colonial and unequal,” Pierluisi said.
Opponents of statehood portray that as a form of annexation, warning that Puerto Rico would lose its unique cultural and historical heritage that distinguishes it from the United States.
“Many in Puerto Rico would view Congress pushing statehood not as an end to colonization, but the culmination of it,” Velazquez and Ocasio-Cortez wrote in an op-ed last year.
Despite the ongoing divide, most residents of Puerto Rico seem to agree that any change to Puerto Rico’s current status must preserve U.S. citizenship for residents of the island. Only a small percentage of Puerto Ricans support complete independence from the United States.
Past referenda, including the one this past November, indicate that Puerto Ricans are split between those who prefer statehood and those who are open to some other option that preserves U.S. citizenship. Perhaps a slight majority of Puerto Ricans prefer statehood.
“We know that Puerto Rico's relationship with the United States is rooted in the history of racism, exploitation, and oppression,” Representative Jesús “Chuy” García, Democrat of Illinois, said at the April 14 hearing. “While many may disagree about the future of Puerto Rico’s status, we must recognize that the decision should come from those who will be impacted most, the people of Puerto Rico.”