Puerto Rico's Political Status: Statehood, Commonwealth, and Stalemate

Introduction

Puerto Rico became a possession of the United States after the Spanish-American War in 1898, but has never been fully incorporated into the Union (Pantojas-Garcia, 2013). It later became a Commonwealth in 1952, a status it maintains to this day. The subject of Puerto Rico's political status has, since that time, been controversial. There have been multiple referendums on the subject — the latest in 2012 — but as yet there has been no change in Puerto Rico's status. The 2012 referendum indicated that a majority of Puerto Ricans want their territory's status changed, with most preferring full statehood. Yet this majority is not sufficient to break what is essentially a stalemate, and other options remain on the table. This paper examines the issue of the stalemate, its causes, and possible solutions.

Puerto Ricans face several options with respect to their future political status, ranging from the status quo to statehood to full independence. The four options that have appeared on official plebiscites — though not all on the same ballot — are commonwealth, statehood, independence, and a concept known as free association. Commonwealth is essentially the status quo vote, meaning that any change in the way Puerto Rico is governed must come within that existing structure. The Commonwealth option was popular in 1967, when it garnered 60.1% of the vote, but in 1998 it gained fewer than 1,000 votes — a 0.1% share — and was removed entirely from the 2012 plebiscite (Pantojas-Garcia, 2013). On the last two ballots, the question was split: the first part asked whether a change was desired, which effectively created a separate question for the Commonwealth option. Blank ballots on the second question — the one asking which status was preferred — thus reflected a commonwealth vote. In 1998, this represented 50.3% of the vote; in 2012, it was 26.5%. In 2012, this approach more or less divided the pro-Commonwealth vote between the status quo and the adapted idea of free association (Pantojas-Garcia, 2013).

Analysis of History

Statehood as an option gained in popularity and has received the most votes in the last three plebiscites. The statehood option would provide a pathway for Puerto Rico to become the 51st state in the Union, with all of the rights and privileges that entails. Full statehood would bring several changes to the existing structure, including greater tax obligations for Puerto Rican residents, but also greater political representation.

Full independence has never fared well in any of the plebiscites to date. Its peak vote share was 4.4% in 1993, and full independence has never come close to receiving 100,000 votes. A plebiscite vote for full independence would not necessarily create a clear pathway to that outcome, and the issue has never been serious enough for the U.S. government to give its implementation significant consideration. There is little substantive debate to be had regarding the independence option.

The free association concept was only a viable option on the 2012 plebiscite. A sovereign free associated state is akin to a more autonomous commonwealth (Pantojas-Garcia, 2013). The idea received little support in 1998, but essentially split the commonwealth or blank vote in 2012. Half of the supporters of the status quo, it seems, would prefer greater autonomy without full independence. On a practical level, this means retaining U.S. passports while minimizing tax obligations and empowering a stronger local government to run the island.

Puerto Ricans are not interested in independence, but the split between the current status and statehood has intensified in recent years. A change to statehood would represent a tradeoff between lower taxes under the current structure and greater political representation. There is also a sense among some voters that statehood would represent a step backwards in terms of distinctiveness: as a commonwealth, Puerto Rico occupies a unique position, whereas as a state it would be one of 51, losing some of that distinctiveness. In essence, Puerto Rico would be American first and Puerto Rican second — a reversal of how the island's identity is viewed today. The public representation of Puerto Rican culture would change, along with the sense of identity for the island's people (Davilla, 1997). Cultural identity is one of the underlying currents sustaining the stalemate.

The Stalemate

That the stalemate is rooted in cultural identity makes sense. It would be far easier to resolve if the arguments were strictly logical. If Puerto Rican voters were simply making a microeconomic determination of their financial well-being under different scenarios, surely one status would be preferred by a clear majority. Identity politics, however, are far more difficult to resolve.

Democratic representation is another key issue. At present, Puerto Ricans participate in the presidential nomination process but do not vote in presidential elections. They contribute to the House of Representatives but not the Senate. Ultimately, this sub-optimal level of democratic representation is behind much of the drive for statehood, so that Puerto Rico can meaningfully participate in the government that holds full legal authority over the island.

Conclusion

The stalemate, as Pantojas-Garcia posits, does not seem to be much of a stalemate at all — except in the eyes of those waiting for a majority statehood vote. It is, in fact, four votes for a commonwealth or similar structure. That is what the people want, and it is how this so-called stalemate should be resolved. The current status of Puerto Rico should be maintained by Congress until such time as there is a clearer mandate for change. It is not a stalemate to recognize that four times out of four, Puerto Rico has voted to maintain the status quo — and policy should be based on that democratic record.