Discussion of
statehood for the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico is becoming intense as
the Biden administration begins to take shape. Part of the intensity is the
result of fear that a recalcitrant US Senate under the iron thumb of GOP
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will frustrate the ambitious goals of the new
president. Adding four new senators might change the political math of the US
Senate and reduce McConnell’s power.
The expectation that
the new states would send Democrats to the senate may turn out to be wishful
thinking on the part of Biden supporters. There are, however, legitimate
reasons to grant statehood to both of these entities, regardless of partisan
concerns. Although the characteristics and history of DC and Puerto Rico are quite
different, their political status is the same: residents of both are US
citizens, but they are not allowed to exercise fully their citizenship rights
for only one reason…where they live.
Nearly fifty years
ago, I completed a Ph.D. dissertation that addressed the status of
“US-Administered Overseas Areas,” which included Puerto Rico. In the study I
acknowledged the reluctance of Americans to admit that the US is a colonial
power and our difficulty in reconciling the traditional American support for
the right of self-determination with continuing to govern overseas areas as
dependent possessions. That conundrum still exists today.
Although the
Constitution grants to Congress the “Power to dispose of and make all needful
Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to
the United States” (Art. IV, Sec 3), there never has been a conscious,
consistent policy to guide the country’s governance of dependent territorial areas.
Most such dependencies were acquired for strategic reasons related to American
military involvements, and little planning has gone into their political and
economic development.
Puerto Rico was acquired
in 1898 along with the Philippines and Guam as result of the Spanish-American
War. The island’s residents were not granted US citizenship until 1917 under
the Jones Act. They were not allowed to elect their own governor until 1948.
The election of Luis Munoz-Marin led in 1952 to what was touted as a unique
creation: the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
Originally, “commonwealth”
was to be a transitory status between independence and statehood within the US.
Under this arrangement Puerto Ricans were to enjoy self-government in all
domestic matters, electing their own government and passing their own laws, as
long as they did not contradict the US Constitution, law and regulations.
Foreign affairs remained the purview of the US government. The Eisenhower
administration used the status to persuade the United Nations to remove Puerto
Rico from its list of non-self-governing territories.
Autonomy has been illusionary under commonwealth status. Puerto Ricans were drafted into the US military, but they have not been allowed to vote for the US president or representation in the US Congress. Until the late 1960s, it appeared commonwealth status might produce economic progress for the island, but that too has proven a false promise.
Despite US
corporations receiving significant tax breaks for the thirty years between 1976
and 2006, the latest available household income data indicates residents of
Puerto Rico have an annual income of a little over $20,000, less than a third
of that for US residents. Forty-three percent of the island’s residents live in
poverty, including fifty-seven percent of the island’s children, according to
recent US Census Bureau data (2018). With no regard for the deprivation
reflected in these numbers, Puerto Rico is not allowed equal participation in
essential social programs such as Medicaid and food stamps.
Ironically, since
Puerto Ricans hold US citizenship, they may move to any US state and
participate fully in all programs, including voting for President and Members
of Congress. The past decade has seen a significant increase in migration of
Puerto Ricans to the mainland, Florida being the primary magnet. As a result,
there are over 5 million people who identify as Puerto Rican in the US today,
while the island’s population has decreased from 3.6 million in 2000 to an
estimated 3.2 million today.
DC, with its
population of an estimated 717,000, is not governed under the same legal
authority as US territorial dependencies. A provision in Article I, Section 8
of the US Constitution created the District and authorized Congress “To
exercise exclusive Legislation in all
Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may,
by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the
seat of the Government of the United States,…”
Over the years
Congress has subjected DC to a variety of governing structures. For ninety
years it was governed as a municipal corporation with three commissioners
appointed by the President. Congress was DC’s legislature. In 1961, DC
residents were granted by constitutional amendment (XXIII) the right to choose
electors for President “equal to the whole number of Senators and
Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were
a State, but in no event more than the least populous State;…” It was another
decade before DC was allowed a non-voting delegate to Congress.
The Home Rule Act,
passed in 1973, provides the governing structure currently in place. It gives
DC residents the right to elect their own mayor and a 13-member council which functions
as a legislative body. Congress still retains the right to review all
legislatioin passed by the council before becoming law and has authority over
the DC budget. Also, the President appoints DC judges, and there is still no
voting representation in Congress.
In terms of
population, both DC and Puerto Rico compare favorably to existing states. With
717,000 citizens, DC is larger than Wyoming and Vermont and is approaching in
size Alaska and North Dakota. Puerto Rico’s 3.2 million makes it larger than 20
existing states and DC. The large number of people claiming Puerto Rican
descent living in the US today over 5 million, increases the urgency of providing
statehood.
From an economic
point of view, DC residents pay a higher per capita federal income tax than
residents of any current state. Puerto Ricans do not pay as much as DC
residents, but net federal expenditures (expenditures minus taxes) of the
island are less than those of 19 current states, including South Carolina.
Puerto Rico is also home to 12 of the world’s 20 top pharmaceutical companies
and five of the top selling drugs are manufactured on the island.
It is increasingly
problematic that the US citizens who reside in the District of Columbia and in
Puerto Rico can reasonable be denied the right to full participation in their
own governance when granting statehood to both DC and Puerto Rico would
effectively accomplish this objective. The alternative makes little sense in
terms of fairness and national security.
DC, our national seat
of government, originally had a population of less than a few thousand souls.
Today, it has nearly three-quarters of a million US citizens. Is it wise to
continue treating them like “wards” of the federal government?
Puerto Rico has been
a US dependency for more than a century. Its strategic importance was the
original motivation for retaining control over the island. That has not
diminished. The Roosevelt Roads
Naval Station is the cornerstone of our Caribbean Defense System. Welcoming
Puerto Rico into the US family will enhance respect for our nation among Latin
Americans.
The fiscal costs of
granting statehood to DC and to Puerto Rico are infinitesimal. The political
and security costs are difficult to underestimate.
