Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Monday, March 26, 2007
Phyllis Schlafly :: Townhall.com Columnist
Deceitful tactics used in effort to make Puerto Rico a state
by Phyllis Schlafly
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Even though Puerto Rico has three times voted against becoming a U.S. state, yet another effort is being made to persuade Puerto Ricans to change their mind. Of course, the Democratic Party thinks making Puerto Rico our 51st state is a cool idea because that would give the Democrats two additional U.S. Senators and 6 to 8 additional Members of the House, more congressional representation than 25 of our 50 states.

Despite millions of dollars being spent to promote statehood, on Dec. 13, 1998, Puerto Ricans voted 46.5 percent for statehood, 2.5 percent for independence, and 50.5 percent for "none of the above," which must be seen as an endorsement of its present commonwealth status.

The Puerto Rican independence faction is small, but that doesn't mean its members would acquiesce to being outvoted in a democratic election. They are among the most militant groups in the world and are responsible for domestic terrorist incidents in the United States.

The 1998 percentage of Puerto Ricans favoring statehood was approximately the same as in the 1993 referendum. It is asking for big trouble to admit a state in which nearly half the people oppose the idea.

The most important issue about Puerto Rico statehood is that it would transform the United States overnight into a bilingual nation. Puerto Ricans speak Spanish and are antagonistic to the idea of learning English.

English is the language of the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. It would be divisive and troublesome to admit a state whose people don't speak the language of our founding documents.

Puerto Rican statehood would cost the U.S. plenty in taxes. The average income of Puerto Ricans is less than half that of our poorest state, and infrastructure and the environment are far below U.S. standards, so statehood would bring immediate demands for massive federal funding.

The smoking gun proving that Puerto Rico statehood is designed to make us a bilingual nation is House Concurrent Resolution 11, or English Plus Resolution, introduced by Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y.. Serrano is also the sponsor of HR 900, the Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2007.

A concurrent resolution is a legislative proposal that must be passed by the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate but does not require the signature of the president and does not have the force of law. Concurrent resolutions are generally used to express the sentiment of Congress or to amend the internal rules of the House and Senate.

Serrano's resolution, introduced Jan. 4, levels a stinging attack on English as our national language and demands that the federal government "oppose" the many state laws and bills that designate English their official language. The resolution demands that U.S. government provide services in languages other than English and even encourage all U.S. residents to learn languages other than English. The bill falsely asserts that our nation has "drawn strength from a diversity of languages." The truth is having English as our common language is a principal factor in "e pluribus unum," which is Latin for "out of many one," a U.S. motto.

Serrano's resolution is dishonestly entitled "English Plus Resolution" and is dressed up in flowery rhetoric to make it appear that its purpose is to protect American Indian languages. That ruse fools no one; it's obvious that the bill is just cover for the impudent demand that we accept Puerto Rico as a Spanish-language state.

Serrano's Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2007, would set up two plebiscites that rig the process to deceive Puerto Ricans into voting for statehood. In the first plebiscite, scheduled for this year, Puerto Ricans would be given a choice of: 1. remaining as a U.S. territory; 2. or pursuing an (undefined) "constitutionally viable permanent non-territorial status."

If the majority chooses No. 1, Puerto Rico would be required to vote again at least every eight years (presumably until they are bamboozled into voting for statehood). If the majority chooses No. 2, a second plebiscite would be held at which Puerto Ricans could choose between "only" two "nonterritorial" options: statehood or independence.

Not only is the double-plebiscite procedure rigged to prevent a vote to continue the present commonwealth status, but the ballot propositions are written so that only a lawyer can figure out what they really mean. A vote on Puerto Rico would have momentous effects on whether the United States of America remains "one nation, indivisible" or whether it starts down the road of countries that have fought bloody wars when minority populations tried to maintain a separate language and cultural identity within another nation, such as Quebec, Ireland, Bosnia and Iraq.

With a 92 percent turnout in the Oct. 30, 1995, referendum in Quebec, secession lost by only a razor-thin margin: 50.6 percent of Quebeckers voted to keep Canada one nation, while 49.4 voted for Quebec to secede from Canada. The close vote adversely affected Quebec's financial markets and caused a flight of capital and people.

Puerto Rico is a vestige of 19th century colonialism; we got it as booty in the Spanish American War of 1898. In the 21st century, colonialism is so retro; we should give Puerto Rico its independence.

Tell your Representative to vote no on both Puerto Rico bills.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Phyllis Schlafly is a national leader of the pro-family movement, a nationally syndicated columnist and author of Feminist Fantasies.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Phyllis Schlafly‘s column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.

Puerto Rico needs statehood...
...like I need a tumor.


Let democracy win
I'm a US Citizen (a Puertorrican) who lived in the US territory for 22 years. I'm currently living in the state of Maryland. I disagree with a lot of the statements written in this column. The writer should have done more research before writing this article.

First of all, during the 1998 plebiscite the people of Puerto Rico for the first time rejected the current commonwealth status. The writer of this article is wrong when she states that "none of the above can be seen as an endorsement of the present status". The present status was in the ballot and received 0.1% of the total vote. Nobody want to stay with the current status. Puerto Rico needs a change.

I also disagree the statement that "Puerto Rico statehood would transform the United States into a bilingual nation". The United States is a multilingual and a diverse nation with different races living together. Puerto Rico is a US territory since 1898. Every single Puertorrican is a US Citizen by birth. There is no Puertorrican Citizenship. There is no Puertorrican passport. There are more Puertorricans living in the states right now than in Puerto Rico. I felt offended by the bias statement in this article saying that "Puertorricans speak Spanish and are antagonistic to the idea of learning English". I learned English in Puerto Rico with the public school system and I am part of the Public University System in Puerto Rico. I was not antagonistic to the idea of learning English as Mrs. Schlafly's states. Mrs. Schlafly let's be "Fair and Balanced"

The 2004 G.O.P platform states the following: "We support the right of the United States citizens of Puerto Rico to be admitted to the Union as a fully sovereign state after they freely so determine." I can't believe that the republican party would write something like this if the state would be a democrat state. The only representative of Puerto Rico in Congress is Luis Fortuño (elected in 2004), a Republican.

So far 57 Puertorricans have lost their lives fighting against terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan. If we decided to free the Iraqi people and let them decide who will be their President then why is that right denied to 4 million US Citizens, the people of Puerto Rico. If I move to Mexico or to Canada, I can still vote for the President of the United States but if I come back to Puerto Rico I lose that right.

The United States invaded Puerto Rico in 1898. It wasn't Puerto Rico who invaded the United States. Congress has a moral debt to Puerto Rico. The only human and democratic choice to solve this problem is that Congress sponsor a plebiscite (non of the previous plebiscites were sponsored by the US Congress which has the final word on Puerto Rico) and with non colonial choices. Let the 4 million US Citizens that can't vote for their own President and have no vote in Congress decide what their future is, but don't support this humiliating colonial status.

Independence or Statehood!

If you believe in democracy call your representative and ask for his/her support for H.R. 900.

If you want more information on this issue, read the report written by President Bush's Task Force on Puerto Rico's Status: http://24.38.50.170/Status/PuertoRicoBooklet.pdf


Dale
It is not a matter of what Puerto Rico wants or you believe it deserves. It is a matter of what is a good idea for the current fifty states. What is the advantage for a state to dilute its voting power in the House of Representatives or in the Electoral College by admitting Puerto Rico to the Union? The smallest states would retain their single representative and therefore it is logical that representatives would be taken from states like mine, Colorado. Colorado was only recently provided a seventh district at the expense of another state that had a shrinking population. Why should Colorado accept Puerto Rico? Similarly, the addition of two votes to the Senate, making for 102, will dilute the votes of each of the current fifty states. I'm not speaking republican / democrat here. I am speaking overall influence in the Congress and in the election of our president. Puerto Rico statehood must be to the advantage of the majority of citizens of the current fifty states. What does Puerto Rico bring to the party?

I oppose statehood for the reason I cited earlier. This would create a balkanization of our country and until English is the predominant language of Puerto Rico I would not and could not support statehood. Your example of California simply does not coinicide with the problem I am identifying. How many people in California who are in the Congress speak Spanish as their only language? How would this be addressed in the halls of Congress? Would all bills and printed material have to be printed in two languages as is done in Ottawa? Such a nightmare should be restricted to Canada.

On truths bright light shinning.
Phyllis,

Sorry but this.

http://www.wnd.com

Jerome Corsi's latest on Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales.

Never Forget Mr. Corsi's work was 100% OK as we
of the swiftboat veterans of the swiftboat vets disscusion board (blog) dug it up at the Texas Tech Vietnam Arcivies and into the film and into the book, and into the win for Bush in 2004 now
we work for truth still, you?

Edmat58
That's one bad argument you present.
My ancestors came to Pennsylvania 300 years ago from Germany, 200 years after Columbus, but I'm not hollering about making German an official language of the USA.
How do you expect to succeed in the US if you don't speak English? You can speak Spanish with your friends and family all you want, but I won't deal with someone who doesn't speak English. There's absolutely no reason to have two official languages, it's divisive at best.

Secondly, you say: "...allow the Puerto Ricans living on the island to decide their future.
I am most certainly sure that they will vote to be part of the greatest nation in God's green earth."
Perhaps you've missed the last several elections in Puerto Rico, but as Ms Schafly has pointed out clearly, your fellowmen don't want statehood.

Phyllis is factually wrong on this issue
I am a Republican and have never been to PR. However I support statehood for PR. If the majority of the voters there were to support independence I would support that. Since the majority does not want that we should not force it upon them.

But Phyllis is factually wrong in her reasons for oposing statehood.

It makes no difference how many states PR would be larger than in its representation. The people of PR deserve this representation. However the new state would not get 6 or 8 but only 5. They may or may not become Democrat seats but that should not matter to one who cares about the rule of law and the privilege of the majority and the rights of the minority as given us by the Founders. And those five would be taken from the pool of 435 seats for all the states, so some present seats would disapear, presumably both "Democrat" or "Republican". It was never the intent of the Founders that one or the other party should have a majority, or even that a balance should be maintained. In fact the attempt at maintaining balance between parties contributed to the tension that led to our civil war.

In the senate PR would receive equal representation with both Alaska and California and all in between, and that too is as it should be.

As for being bilingual, California has been legally bilingual since 1850, and so far I have not seen any great problem with that.

Sorry; last
post was in the wrong thread.

To GunnyG
Due to the Firearms Owner’s Protection Act of 1986 you can not legally own an automatic weapon unless it was manufactured before 1986, thus producing a sunset clause on the 2nd amendment.

http://www.guncite.com/journals/hardfopa.html

The provision for automatic weapons was added by the House at the last minute (House controlled by Dems) and accepted by the Senate (Republicans had a 6 person majority, meaning that with the RINOs the dems controlled the Senate also.)

In order to own a post 1986 auto weapon you must have a class III dealer license.

Cut 'em loose now!
Independence for Puerto Rico now! And without plebescite. It should be up to us, US citizens, if anyone other than Congress, to decide whether we should keep the commonwealth relationship intact, not the Puerto Ricans.

Give 'em tough love, cut the island loose now! And let's give all those holding dual citizenship a choice-stay and assimilate (even as little as we require it now, in this Marxist-tainted America of the '00's) or go home to Puerto Rico, keep your language and your culture, and make a go of it on your own.

It's enough, already!

Hillary delenda est.

Love the deceit
Have to love the interesting way this vote is set up:

The serritory or something else vote gets both indepence groups and statehood groups to join together to form a majority. Then the state or independent vite gets the majority, who oppose independence, to vote for statehood.

I suggest they propose a two tiered vote for president as well. First, the Republican or someone else, then a second vote to decide between the deomcrat, the green, the libertarian, etc. Amazed the democrats haven't thought of this idea sooner for the presidential race.

Two identities & Mississippi
NATIONAL REVIEW years ago when Tom DeLay foolishly forced a referendum regarding Puerto Rico's status put to bed the concept of Puerto Rican statehood. The reasons were many. One was that although it might be said that Puerto Rico has two identities, the dominant identity is Hispanic and it always will be. Another major reason to reject Puerto Rican statehood was that, even with federal tax breaks, the per capita income of Puerto Rico is less than half of Mississippi's, America's poorest state. Another reason against Puerto Rican statehood is that America would be bringing within the union a state which will always have a separatist presence like that of Quebec, Corsica or the Basque country.

As an anecdote, I am reminded of the Pan American games held in Puerto Rico in the late 1970s where the Cuban team was cheered and the American team was jeered. The Yankee republic of northern European antecedents to the north of the Rio Grande is hated and resented by Latin Americans and always will be.

Ignorance
I can not believe how much stupidity and ignorance is being written in this article and subsequent messages.
I AM Puerto Rican, I am A Proud Republican; Not all Puerto Ricans are Democrats. My DAD (Luis H. Matos) donated money to the Reagan campaign while being a second class Citizen. You see Puerto Ricans are good enough to fight our nations wars but not good enough to vote for the Commander in Chief if you live on the Island. He Proudly displays the Letter and Flag sent by the Greatest President in my generation to him as appreciation for his support.

As for the language; the Official language of Puerto Rico is English and Spanish. Puerto Rico was discovered by Christopher Columbus in 1493 the second voyage to discover America some 514 years ago. Colonized by Spain. and in 1898 captured by USA in the Spanish-American war. Recognizing that we have two identities (Spanish, American) we have recognized both languages as official languages.

Yes it's time the USA Congress and All Americans Stop the Fear mongering and allow the Puerto Ricans living on the island to decide their future.
I am most certainly sure that they will vote to be part of the greatest nation in God's green earth.

Wake up and get the facts right.

Eddie Matos

Free PR
Due to extreme cultural difference between the US and Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico should be given unilateral independence. We should part as friends but with the recognition that we are separate nations.

PR is dual language
When I first read this article the discussion regarding English vs. Spanish bothered me because I had previously known people who were native to Puerto Rico and who had no problem whatsoever speaking English. In fact, their English was probably technically better than my Southern-fried version. What bothered me is that after over 100 years of being a US territory/commonwealth the occupants would still be Spanish only (as implied by the article). After a little research I have been able to determine that PR is NOT a Spanish only country. Officially, it is dual language with a low percentage who do not speak English. (Probably because, like the US, there is a lot of illegal immigration from Spanish only countries.)

And Bush...
...would be the last one to stop all this.

Looking at this from PR's angle, it might be lured by all the money but that money always comes with a lot of liberal imposed strings attached. Puerto Rico is a Catholic nation and secular liberalism, backed by Fed authority, has already shown a virulent hostility to it and all Christian denominations, and this would not be the end of their destruction of PR culture and customs, not to mention that much of their home rule would evaporate.

The Civil War was fought because many southern states didn't like the DC/Fed deal. PR should really consider carefully the costs and benefits of the statehood deal, which is more than ever one made in hell.

Statehood
I spoke to one of my Puerto Rican friends about this subject a couple months ago and we both agreed that the current situation was not a good idea, and that either statehood or independence was a necessary.

When the topic of language came up we both agreed that it was perfectly fine for people in Puerto Rico to speak Spanish however in order to integrate into the larger American society steps must be taken to get the population to speak English. While it won’t be a short process it would be the best viable option.

Further more on the topic of native languages there are so many people from such diverse backgrounds in the U.S. that without a common unifying language, discourse in this country would break down. Places like Singapore who population is made up of Chinese, Indians, and Malaysians chose to make English as the official religion because it was easier then the problems with trying to use one of the native languages. This compromise was one of the reason they had a peacefully transition from a colonial possession into a fully functioning nation state and helped stop the ethnic politics and strife that has accompanied such transitions in other countries.

On the money it would cause to bring Puerto Rico up to a comparable level with the states it would be ridicules not to want to help do that, although it is up to the people themselves to bring about changes, honestly if we can dump billions of dollars into countries who don’t appreciate the U.S. and just want the hand out, why can we help our fellow Americans in Puerto Rico build up their infrastructure? We have failed the people of Puerto Rico just as much as they have failed themselves in many respects and we must all as make the effort to fix the problems just as we wouldn’t abandon Iowa after a tornado. We can’t and should not hold their hands and don’t look for big government/nanny state solutions but we help can give them the proper start they deserve by investing in infrastructure, schools, and business.

Marc of CA
I suppose I should place this statement on the Jack Kemp site because, like you, I think if pure folly to provide representation to DC. Like you I also think that statehood for PR is a horrible idea. The last thing we need in this country is the balkanization that would follow admission of a state that possesses a common language that is not English. Witness Canada and the problems that surround Quebec and one can see why.

Phyllis, Call Jack Kemp!!
Jack's column today is asking for about the same thing for DC.

While the Republicans were goofing off and blowing any chance to correct the mess in Washington for the last 6-12 years the Democrats have been keeping a list. A "to do" list.

You can expect at least one of these "things to do" to come up everytime there is a lull in the news or they can crow over a victory for a few days.

The plan is to continue to protray the Republicans as bad managers of everything. Unfortunately the Republicans have opened the door and laid out the cold cuts for the party now in power.

I have been saying this for years. Two Parties; the evil and the stupid. You guess.

Just wait until the next public shooting to immediately bring out the gun banners in force again. Or an oil spill. You name it. They have the talking points already printed.

And GW Bush was in Mexico assuring everyone that Ted 'hic' Kennedy is a great legislator and can help write a great guest worker (amnesty) plan.

Betcha Kennedy votes for PR Statehood too!
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.