Funny, and probably what I was running into, from only one side of the debate.
Actually, THAT was an original proposal in the '98 bill and in the draft of this bill, and guess what, the pro-commonwealth faction lobbied hard against it, decrying it as a trick to empower statehood by attrition (their POV is if we’d just all sit down and be quiet the commonwealth would evolve into Wonderland, I guess…)
I find this fascinating. I can’t decide what I think about it. Ultimately, PR as the 51st state sounds like a swell idea to me, but this vote arrangement seems pretty weird. The second vote only needs a plurality. Half the people could want to change (including some for independence), then only about a third of the people could determine statehood? It seems to leave a huge potential for buyers remorse, as astorian described. I’d have set the bar higher.
As AM Radio Retard explained it to me this afternoon, this is all a ploy by the Ds to secure a permanent D majority, and to unAmericanize America by ending her history of English language superiority.(!!!1!) He was also apoplectic over the fact that “even PRs in the continental US get to vote!” Has that not been the case in past votes? He also said this bill mandates a vote every 8 years until the first vote passes. Because Nancy Pelosi is a bad person.
on preview: exceptional post JRDelirious! “… likely to die in the US Senate of 41-vote disease” lol
I could see that being their POV.
Also, if it evolves into Wonderland, you could charge a pretty penny just for admission, even before all the hotel/rental car/restaurant/etc stuff. Something to consider…
worth mentioning here:
on April 29th, 2010, H.R. 2499 passed the House with a 223-169 vote.
Hey, I’m okay with secesh. 
Actually, the table of plebiscite results (in OP’s linked wiki) shows very low voting support for full independence. I had always understood it to be closer to a three-way split, but the numbers don’t actually bear that out.
So maybe it will be a basically legit mandate for statehood after all. Good, I don’t care for these in-between conditions of territories and people. Get all in or go your own way.
Can we just trade Arizona for Puerto Rico and keep 50 states?
Let Arizona join Mexico and that will take care of all of their immigration BS. Wonder how the pale faces will like it when the Mexican cops start asking for their ID?
The most recent island-wide poll revealed that a majority of Puerto Riquenos favored independence for the first time:
It’s worth noting that the newspaper which published the poll, El Nuevo Día, generally favors independence in its editorials.
That was a 2008 poll in the middle of an election campaign that resulted in a landslide for the pro-statehood party; so let’s take it with a few grains of salt, as if the voters wanted “change”, statehood is a change. Today the results may look very different, with a pro-statehood government struggling to reverse the budget meltdown. (Around here, governance politics are inextricably, and IMO unfortunately, entangled with constitutional politics; very often the results of status votes turn out to be really votes to censure or applaud the sitting governor)
El Nuevo Día traditionally does not so much favor independence as reducing Feds’ intervention in PR; used to be they’d be happy with a “states’ rights” version of statehood, that allowed “identity politics” to flourish locally. However they’ve been turning more “Latinoamericanista” in recent years.
HR2499 now does contemplate repeated, every-8-years votes; after the floor amendments now it DOES provide, after the Change/No Change first round, a multi-choice 2d round of what kind of change that’ll read: Statehood/Sovereign Association/Independence/*Improve the “Commonwealth” *; this kind of takes the wind off the sails of the sneak-statehood argument and will likely result in the hardliners in the pro-statehood faction crying betrayal. It also includes some grandstanding USEnglish-inspired language warning that we gotta learn more English and use more English in public documents and education and use it in the ballots; this latest is poison-pill-ish as it’s a way to drag in identity politics and culture-war issues, as mentioned elsewhere ESL is ALREADY a requirement through K-12, what government business is transacted between the Island and Mainland is already in English, and the US Government already translates documents into Spanish at the end-user level.
Off to work, folks – if anything else comes up during the day, I’ll see what I can say about it.
No, it says they want statehood.
You mean statehood, right? The cite you provided was of a poll that showed a clear majority in favor of statehood, not independence.
Edit: Beaten to it.
Wonder how the wetbacks will like it when most of the pale faces leave and Arizona turns into another third world shit hole?
Let’s see… there are at least 460,000 Mexicans who hated Mexico so much that they crossed the border illegally. I’m sure THEY’D love you for putting them back under the control of Calderon.
That’s one thing that cracks me up about the protests I’ve seen in Arizona. All those illegal aliens waving Mexican flags! They sure love Mexico! They love it so much that they got the hell out the first chance they could, and are infuriated at the suggestion they should go back!
:rolleyes: They did not “hate Mexico.” They were dissatisfied with Mexican wages.
Drop the Arizona and Mexico hijack immediately, please. It’s irrelevant to this thread.
This is a formal warning for being a jerk, LonesomePolecat. Next time you feel like sharing a racial slur, post it somewhere else.
I don’t see “pale face” as a racial slur in this day and age, but this is off-topic and inappropriate.
Strictly speaking, the illegal-immigration issue is completely irrelevant to the question of Puerto Rico’s future status.
Politically, however, it will be relevant. Even if the referendum goes for statehood, PR doesn’t get into the Union unless Congress says so, and there will be grassroots politicking (on an issue where there never has been any significant politicking before, on the mainland), and a lot of people involved in it will see no distinction between Puerto Ricans and “wetbacks.”
That’s just how it is. 
Maybe it would. A discussion of how statehood or independence would affect immigration to or from Puerto Rico would be fine. But we don’t need another argument about the Arizona immigration law in this thread. It’s being discussed in enough other threads.
Well, at present, PR has about 100,000 legal residents (Wiki gives no estimate for illegals) who are immigrants from Spain and Latin American countries. But, statehood would not change their status any, would it?
Nevertheless, I confidently expect RWs to raise the specter of a State of Puerto Rico as an “illegal immigration conduit,” with large numbers of immigrants from other countries sneaking in and “passing” as native-born Puerto Ricans, and then moving to the mainland. Even though there is no obvious reason that would be any easier to do post-statehood than it is now.
I also foresee linkage with the statehood-for-D.C. issue, which is more arguably relevant.