Puerto Rico’s former governor and current candidate for that post, Pedro Rossello has announced a shift in strategy in obtaining Puerto Rican statehood as a means of ending the islands centuries-old colonial dilemma. The former Governor now says that it will be necessary to take a page from the lessons of the civil rights movement of the 1960’s “I believe,” Rossello has stated, “that history is clear in the need to demand your rights rather than merely assuming a passive posture.”

According to Rossello, Puerto Rico’s quest to end its territorial status also mirrors the suffrage movement of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries which ultimately recognized the right of women to participate in the nation’s political process through the act of voting. Furthermore, the governor now believes that the the topic of Puerto Rico present colonial status has to be more effectively brought before international forums, as well as, within the halls of Congress. (more…)

Early this month a million New Yorkers seemingly came together for a common celebration in apparent unison, namely the Puerto Rican Day Parade. However, while they were all chanting the same slogans, it was doubtful to me many truly knew what they were actually celebrating. You see, for many “¡Que Viva Puerto Rico!” is simply something that they have said about a place they have never visited. For others it is for a place they haven’t seen in 45 years. Regardless of the particular circumstances that apply to each individual, “Puerto Rico” is something you think about occasional to identify yourself amongst the masses of Gotham. However, thoughts about what it actually means to identify yourself in this way, unfortunately does not get as much attention as the parade that gets celebrated every year on the second Sunday in June. (more…)

On Monday, April 23rd, the Wall Street Journal printed an Opinion piece, “Puerto Rican Limbo” by former governor of Pennsylvania and former U.S. Attorney General Richard Thornburgh which I thought was very interesting. I wonder what you think?

“Puerto Rico’s undefined political status is a serious national policy issue involving civil rights and democracy for four million U.S. citizens. (more…)

In October 2000, in one of his final acts as president, Clinton signed an
executive order creating the President’s Task Force on Puerto Rico’s
Status. The task force aims to keep an ongoing discussion with Puerto Rico’s
governor, political parties, and other groups that advocate a change to the
island’s status. In April 2001, the Bush administration adopted Executive
Order 13183 and began appointing the Task Force’s members.  Ruben
Barrales is the Chairman of the task force and if you wish to contact him write
to his email  jburke@who.eop.gov.  The
Report By The President’s Tasks Force on Puerto Rico’s
Status is now out.   Follow the link below to read the full report. 

“Report By The President’s Task Force On Puerto Rico’s
Status”
(PDF -
1M)

Other information and links:
Presidential
Executive Orders
Congressman
Joseph Crowley
Congressman
Mike Rogers
Congressman
Jerry Weller
Senator
John McCain letter to President Bush
Senators
Jeff Bingaman and Pete Domenici letter to President Bush
Senators
Bob Graham and Mary Landrieu letter to President Bush

Flash! A leading Puerto Rican legal scholar has recently published a Law Review article in the University of Chicago Law Review under the title “Untied States: American Expansion and Territorial Deannexation”. This article is sure to cause shock waves among students of Puerto Rico’s political status and the issue of the decolonization, to say nothing of the political parties in Puerto Rico. It will no doubt have a long and lasting impact and serves as a precursor of the long awaited White House task force report which is due in December.
Here is your opportunity to read it in full (PDF – 2.3M)

Recently, the Congressional Research group issued a report on the Puerto Rico status dilemma. Although the report did not offer anything new to the debate it did provide an outline of Puerto Rico�s colonial history while under U.S. control, past and recent efforts by island and mainland elected officials to resolve the undetermined political status, and a short description of the various status options available. The information was presented in an effort to shed light upon recent developments concerning the resolution of the status issue.

First, it discussed a historic move made by the Puerto Rico Legislature in March and April of 2005 through its debate and approval of legislation which called upon the President and U.S. Congress to express their commitment to resolving the political status issue. Second, the report informed readers about the upcoming proposal by the President�s Task Force on Puerto Rico which is expected to be presented by December 2005. More importantly, the report written by Keith Bea, brought up extremely valid points regarding why the political status of Puerto Rico has yet to be resolved and the responsibility both legislators on the island and mainland have towards making the issue move forward.

Resident Commissioner Luis Fortu�o has already taken the initiative to send copies of the CRS to House and Senate leaders and chairmen of committees dealing with island status. In his mission to inform others regarding the importance of this civil and social rights issue Fortu�o acknowledged that although educating one another is very important it is not all that is needed. He contends in order for the process to move along bilateral agreements must be made between the people of Puerto Rico and Congress. But, this is a reality that has been recognized time and time again during discussions regarding status. What will make this recommendation different this time around? What will it take for the people of Puerto Rico to break political gridlocks? What must be done for Congress to decide to bring an end to years of inaction? When will the people of Puerto Rico be given the opportunity to decide between non-colonial, non-territorial alternatives?

The results of the 2004 elections in Puerto Rico marked the beginning of the end concerning the ability of island leaders to set aside their differences and pursue joint efforts in the name of the island�s best interest. In fact, many predicted that the rationality of creating a compatible relationship between an executive government headed by the Popular Democratic Party (PDP) and legislative government controlled by the New Progressive Party (NPP)would be equivalent to mixing gasoline with fire (simply not a good idea). Following the elections, legislators pledged to uphold the shared government based on the premise that �the people of Puerto Rico had spoken�. However, that has yet to be seen as the island�s legislative and executive branches continue to demonstrate an increasing lack of reliability through their failure to openly discuss, consider, and/or accept the proposals presented by their counterparts.

The most recent example relates to the resolution of the island�s undetermined political status. In this case, members of the island�s main political parties reached a historical milestone as they attempted to develop a tri-partisan status bill clearly requesting that Congress should provide Puerto Rico with �non-colonial and non-territorial� status options. The bill called for a July 10 referendum, where Puerto Rican voters would choose for or against a petition calling on the U.S. Congress and President to pledge that the results of another decision on the status of the island would be honored. Although the bill passed both chambers and Governor Acevedo-Vil� gave the impression that he would sign it, he did not. Acevedo-Vil� refused to sign the bill based on a developing contention over the exclusion of the Constitutional Assembly, a process favored by the PDP as a mechanism to determine status. In the spirit of compromise, a substitute bill was then created, which included an amendment stating that the House and Senate were committed to legislation that would allow the Puerto Rican electorate to choose a mechanism to determine status-either by means of a constituent assembly or a request for a direct congressionally binding referendum, in case the U.S. government did not commit to a process of free determination before Dec. 31, 2006. The new bill (Spanish text) passed unanimously, but was met with a surprising response by Governor Acevedo-Vila, who decided to veto it altogether based on the premise that �it is deceptive to the people� because it did not give solid guarantees for the method he prefers to resolve the territory�s status.

Download Adobe Acrobat…Free!

(more…)