I think what might make the next plebiscite particularly interesting is the recent emergence of a new political party during the last gubernatorial election. This party is advocating a pro-Puerto Rico platform, yet refuses to take a definitive stance on PR’s status, which has always really been the focal point of each of the parties here. In any case, I’m interested in continuing to follow this story!

(Report comment)

The bigger problem is what Hal has pointed out: what do these options really mean? In the 1990s (under a pro-statehood governor), the government wanted to eliminate the ambiguous options. The vote would (and should) have been statehood vs independence. But one of the two big political parties (the PPD, which is pro-Commonwealth) managed to lobby for a third (ambiguous, in my opinion) option. It has been called “commonwealth” since the 1950s and some have recently been calling for a “republica asociada” (independence with a loose association). In 1998 it was simply “none of the above”, because that party (PPD) didn’t agree with the definitions that were on the ballot. They won. Go figure.

Then when the PPD was in power (8 years) there was little discussion on the status, of course. Now that the pro-statehood party is back in power, the discussion is reborn.

But the “commonwealth” is an obsolete status, a product of the 1950s and not a true option today. The “republica asociada” is a made up term, mostly undefined until today, which is now taking away votes (because it is a gray area between commonwealth and full independence). Statehood probably won’t be accepted by the US without an overwhelming vote for it (over 90% in the case of Hawaii, which is an island with a different culture, just like Puerto Rico). Independence has never reached 10% in any vote.

Now the vote is structured differently, which is a strategy by the current government (pro-statehood) to FORCE out the commonwealth option and FORCE change. So the first vote will ask for “current” vs “different”. In other words, this pits the pro-Commonwealth people vs EVERYONE ELSE (the statehood people + the independence people + the ‘republica asociada’ people). It seems obvious that the three groups will band together, because then, on the second vote, Commonwealth won’t be an option.

The interesting thing to watch is what the PPD (the pro-Commonwealth party) does in that second vote. Will it push towards independence (the original wish of its founding father)? Towards “republica asociada” (and perhaps define it in the process)? Will some jump into the statehood camp?

I really can’t wait until the Commonwealth option is killed. It only leads to conformism: “things are ok now, so why change?”

(Report comment)

What I’m wondering is what exactly “independence with a loose association to the United States” is.

(Report comment)

(Report comment)