PR and DC Statehood

M

mqt

Well-known member
I saw a similar argument online, so I wanted to ask here as well:

Can someone provide a cogent argument against statehood for Puerto Rico and DC statehood that doesn’t involve the demographics of the voters currently being disenfranchised? Every argument from the right that I’ve seen decries it as a power grab from the Left, but doesn’t provide an economic or social reason to object. Is there any actual reason at this point that we should be telling several million American citizens that their voice doesn’t matter?
 
There are some good arguments against DC. First, the land to make DC was ceded by Maryland and Virginia. If it's only about giving those voters representation, then giving the land back to Virginia and Maryland makes the most sense. You also have issues if you have dual sovereignty over DC. If DC becomes a state, then the state would have the general police powers (regulate the health, safety, welfare, and morals of the state) and so it would make the seat of our Federal Government dependent upon the state of DC for certain protections. Finally, the Constitution provides for DC's status. It would likely require an amendment to grant it statehood.

Puerto Rico has a better argument. The problem with Puerto Rico is that the actual citizens of Puerto Rico have generally been tepid as to the idea of statehood. Statehood would grant them representation in Congress but it would also subject them to federal taxation. I feel the primary push for Puerto Rico to join the Union would be the hopes to quickly add two Democrat senators. But considering the relatively slim margin supporting statehood in Puerto Rico, I think moving slowly and exploring all their options is probably best. It's not an argument against statehood, just more an argument that the process be taken slowly and all considerations taken into account.
 
striker42 said:
There are some good arguments against DC. First, the land to make DC was ceded by Maryland and Virginia. If it's only about giving those voters representation, then giving the land back to Virginia and Maryland makes the most sense. You also have issues if you have dual sovereignty over DC. If DC becomes a state, then the state would have the general police powers (regulate the health, safety, welfare, and morals of the state) and so it would make the seat of our Federal Government dependent upon the state of DC for certain protections. Finally, the Constitution provides for DC's status. It would likely require an amendment to grant it statehood.
Click to expand...

I’m fully on board with just putting the citizens/land of DC into VA or MD. It would seem like a reasonable compromise politically as well, since it would increase representation in Congress for whichever state it went to and add EC votes to that state to account for the citizens in DC while also keeping the Senate makeup the same.

As for the arguments of the Constitution and protections, I think it’s quite reasonable to say that DC’s growth into the city it is today is very much against the spirit of the provision for an enclave as it was established. I would imagine it wouldn’t require an amendment to re-draw the map for land provided, as it is not specifically mentioned. I also think that the government could pretty easily come up with ways to protect lawmakers without involving DC either as a state or part of a larger state.

striker42 said:
Puerto Rico has a better argument. The problem with Puerto Rico is that the actual citizens of Puerto Rico have generally been tepid as to the idea of statehood. Statehood would grant them representation in Congress but it would also subject them to federal taxation. I feel the primary push for Puerto Rico to join the Union would be the hopes to quickly add two Democrat senators. But considering the relatively slim margin supporting statehood in Puerto Rico, I think moving slowly and exploring all their options is probably best. It's not an argument against statehood, just more an argument that the process be taken slowly and all considerations taken into account.
Click to expand...

I can see the point that support is divided on the issue, but it appears to be a growing movement in Puerto Rico. The most recent referendum on the issue favored statehood, and it would seem like if we wanted to make it a reality, we could allow the people of Puerto Rico to make that decision. What I object to is the idea that allowing Puerto Rico to make that decision and then grant them statehood is anything other than a fair Democratic process.
 
Last edited:
sturg33 said:
Do citizens in PR really wanna start paying federal taxes?
Click to expand...

A large portion do not. A growing group wants statehood though or at least greater access to federal funds. The aftermath of Hurricane Maria had an impact.

It's still a divisive issue there so just ramrodding it down is a bad idea.
 
striker42 said:
A large portion do not. A growing group wants statehood though or at least greater access to federal funds. The aftermath of Hurricane Maria had an impact.

It's still a divisive issue there so just ramrodding it down is a bad idea.
Click to expand...

I’d be willing to bet the majority of the residents won’t factor paying federal taxes into thier votes. They’ll buy into ‘free stuff’ if we vote to become a state.
 
A landlocked state inside the USA

I’m sure that would work out great for it’s 200k citizens haha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top