| OCR Text |
Show What Should Be Done with Puerto Rico Joshua R. Fotheringham The PIP supports independence. Supporters of independence argue that with Puerto Rico as an independent republic, unwanted vestiges of colonialism would be eliminated. They claim that corporate profits would be fully available to fuel internal improvement and the economy would be managed locally, based solely on Puerto Rican interests. A strong economy, when combined with political independence, would attract returnees from the mainland, bringing back skills and resources beneficial to the economy. International trade opportunities would bolster the economy. But opponents of independence reject the above economic scenario and argue that independence would be economically impractical for both the United States and Puerto Rico. Independence would place Puerto Rico under the immigration quota system, thus limiting the current flow of individuals and products from the island into the United States. Also, Puerto Rican exports would be subject to the American tariff system, thereby reducing the profits of American companies in Puerto Rico. In addition, opponents are concerned that Puerto Ricans on the mainland might elect to return to an independent Puerto Rico and compete with island residents for limited jobs, causing even higher unemployment rates. Ruben Berrios Martinez, President of the PIP, also discouraged the passing of H.R. 856. He believes that "the bill should reflect a sense of Congress regarding the issues of cost, language, and the size of the vote if the electorate should prefer the statehood option" (Laney 1998a, 11). He asked Congress to consider whether it is willing to face the possibility of a "Caribbean Quebec," if under statehood the next generation prefers separate sovereignty. He maintains that the bill should mandate that Puerto Ricans choose between the independence and Commonwealth options. Supporters of independence are few and far between. Hilia Matos is one of the few and faithful. Upon my interviewing Hilia, many characteristics of independence supporters surfaced. Because she does not speak English, I conducted our interview in Spanish and this is the translation of what she had to say: 1. To what political party do you belong? •Answer: I am part of the Puerto Rican Independence Party (PIP). 2. Why do you support independence? •Answer: Because Puerto Rico needs to become an independent nation. 3. Why would independence be better than statehood or co mmonw eal th ? • Answer: If you haven't noticed, Puerto Rico practically acts as though it were a state. All of our customs, our food, our language, our individuality, and our heritage are dissolving. Most importantly, our language would be destroyed under statehood rule. Also, it is important to us to show the world that we can survive on our own. Many people say that we are nothing without the economic help of the United States. I know that we can make it on our own; in fact, we will be better off. What do you think will eventually happen? •Answer: I know that the best option for us would be independence. But, I don't think that we will achieve such a feat...yet. The best that I can hope for is to remain under the commonwealth rule. If we become a state, that is very permanent. I can only hope for the best and, maybe in the future, Puerto Ricans will see that we must become independent. Right now, the United States Congress is in command and they don't know what is best for us. Most of them have never been to the island and only a few of them understand the Latin culture. I don't want them to make the decision (Matos PIP members are usually very intense in their political feelings and insist that they are correct. They are most concerned with the cultural loss of their language. Often, nationalism comes into play. This was very obvious with Hilia because she made such a big point of Puerto Rico being able to support itself without the help of the United States. Even though the chances of her party obtaining victory are slim, she still has a bright hope for the future. The Statehood View The New Progressive Party's (NPP) definition of statehood for Puerto Rico includes: • "A non-colonial status with full political dignity. • The same rights, benefits, and responsibilities of the 50 states. • A guarantee of union and the opportunity for economic and political progress. • A permanent guarantee of all rights under the United States Constitution, including the preservation of Puerto Rican culture. • A permanent guarantee of American citizenship, our two languages, hymns, and flags. • Full participation in federal programs. • The right to vote for the President of the U.S. and to elect at least six Puerto Rican representatives and two senators to Congress; and • As American citizens, we will negotiate the terms of admission, which will be submitted to the people of Puerto Rico for their ratification" (Laney 1998a, 3). Finally, the NPP supports the option of statehood. Advocates argue that as a state, Puerto Rico would continue to receive approximately the same amount of revenue it does now. It would become fully eligible for a wide range of federal grants and other benefits, especially equal treatment under major social programs (for which it is not now automatically eligible). Statehood would give Puerto Rico a greater degree of political stability, a condition that would encourage investment by mainland corporations. Also, statehood would extend to the island all parts of the United States Constitution, including, inter alia, full voting representation in both chambers of Congress, and the right of its people to vote for President and Vice President as well. One common complaint among Puerto Ricans is that they have been deemed "second-class citizens." From this view, political 30 |
