Gov. Pedro Pierluisi: ‘Puerto Rico will be the first truly Hispanic state’

[hollodero]

(03-10-2021, 03:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Here's the thing though, say PR has a vote and votes no, which, as pointed out, has already happened five times in the past.  How many times do we go through this process?  Will we have a vote every time the Dems feel like they need two extra senators?  It's rather like Scottish independence or Brexit.  Have your vote and abide by the result.  I'd be fine with a time limit between votes, as of course attitudes and positions shift over time.  But there needs to be a set time frame that is abided by.

Before 2020, there never was a straight up "statehood, yes or no" referendum.
The 2017 one doesn't count (it also resulted in over 95% in favor of statehood, but as I said, this was worthless)
The 2012 one was weird, they first asked keeping the status quo or no, with a majority going "no"; of those no votes a 2/3 majority was for statehood. I don't think that counts as a relevant referendum either, and the result is inconclusive at best.
In 1998, a "none of the above" option gathered 50,5%, statehood as one of the above options gathered 46,6%. One can read that as rejecting the statehood idea. But this, as I said, was the last more or less conclusive referendum on that, and it was over 20 years ago. I feel 22 years is a long enough period of time to bring up that question again.

- Then there are even older referendums, I would consider none of those particulartly relevant in 2021, many also were quite inconclusive, and none of those ever addressed statehood in a yes or no fashion.

(03-10-2021, 03:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I don't think you can call allowing US citizens to vote a "power grab". 

Well.... allowing the Puerto Rican citizens to vote was described by you as just that. I know you rather addressed the two additional senators idea by saying so, and I get that. But in doing so, you also imho deny US citizens the right to vote, as they are now denied that right.
This is my main issue, the statehood thing is just tied to that so it ends up being about the statehood question.

And yeah I agree, you can't call allowing US citizens to vote a power grab. But it does help democrats. And accusing democrats of power grabs just on the basis that it would help them could just as well be applied to voter suppression laws. Which is why I find this perspective too narrow and flawed in the first place, that's what I was trying to get at.

(03-10-2021, 03:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I think advocating for some avenues of voting can be, and I, personally, would have zero issue with requiring a free government issued ID be presented to vote.  If I have to fill out a form every time  to exercise my Constitutional right to buy a firearm and be subjected to a NICS check then a person can be bothered to present an ID to vote.  Like I said, make the ID completely free and easy to get.

Oh yeah, that is my take on this as well and I had a debate a few years back taking that exact position.
We all have to present IDs to vote, it makes perfect sense to me and I find it weird that the US handles this differently. Ojwei, that will be controversial.

(03-10-2021, 03:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Absolutely.  Just as Dems would be against northern CA breaking off into the state of Jefferson.  It's all partisan.  What I fear is that this will set off a round of near balkanization, in which states splinter into more and more pieces.  For example, rural CA is heavily red and consists of millions of people.  Those people, not wanting to be dictated to by the three major population centers in the state, could make the case that there views are entirely ignored, necessitating a break off from the rest of the state.

I don't see Puerto Rico statehood as a slippery slope leading to California splintering up.

(03-10-2021, 03:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It tilts that way due to most states being largely rural outside the coasts.

I know why it tilts that way. It's just an argument why two Puerto Rican senators that potentially are blue imho is not a power grab, in the sense that it would not result in an overall advantage. If anything, it would narrow the overall advantage the GOP has.

(03-10-2021, 03:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It would depend how the referendum was worded.

Well, the 2020 one was worded "Should Puerto Rico be admitted immediately into the Union as a State?" I'd think that's fine.
And given that the question was never posed in that manner and that the last at least somewhat conclusive result dates back to 1998, I'd consider it fine to accept that result - or at least use it as basis for a binding referendum a la Brexit.

(03-10-2021, 03:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I think a very good argument could be made that voting for your own government is not a replacement for that right, it is the right itself.

Well, summarizing all I've said to that, I don't think so.
I don't believe any other mainland US citizen would be fine with just voting for their local government either, even if the powers of said government were enhanced to Puerto Rico levels (and from what I understand, a normal US states' authority is not that far less that Puerto Rico's). AS US citizen, you want your representation in Washington and you want a say in presidential elections. I deem that basic.