Will Congress vote to allow Puerto Rico statehood?

[yurbud]

Given the referendum that just passed there, it would be hard to justify denying it since doing so could be seen as giving up a little piece of empire by starting to push them out of our control.

Republicans would have to buck their xenophobic base, but they do need to court Latinos too.

So how will it go down?

7 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Puerto Rico will be voted into the union sometime in the next few years.
	3 (43%)
	It will come to a vote but fail.
	0 (0%)
	It will never come to a vote.
	4 (57%)
	OTHER (please explain)
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[barbtries]

1. i'm thinking never get to a vote

but the entire issue is so far off my radar i cannot form a considered opinion. what do you think? do they have a chance? would it be good or bad, for PR, for the USA? i just don't know.

[yurbud]

3. It's got to be better for PR since they would get to vote in national elections

send reps & senators to Congress and all that.

[BumRushDaShow]

2. They have already let loose their pandora's box of lunatic racists

The only way they can court the Hispanic vote is to suppress a large portion of their racist "base" and then quit with the "English only" stuff, and then do like their gawd Raygun did and offer a path to citizenship, and THEN give it some time....

[yurbud]

4. ...and circle back to the bashing.

[TreasonousBastard]

5. Probably not. Apparently, a third...

didn't bother to answer the question and the Obama suggestions for alternatives to statehood weren't mentioned at all, so we don't really know what they think.

Years ago I did some business in Puerto Rico and on the occasions when such questions came up, it seemed the primary interests with statehood were the better off ones worried about paying taxes and more regulation while others were hoping they would get money or jobs. (Sound familiar? It cames down to money, not politics or pride.)

Voting for President and having two Senators would be kind neat for a lot of them, but that competes with losing their own flag, a fair amount of independence, and very likely jobs if companies that moved down there to avoid some regulations moved out. Being a nation with a special relationship with the US or one of 51? A small one... Tough question.

Oh, and there's that language thing. Many speak English already, but if demanding it was part of the package demanding it would be a very big deal.

[FreeJoe]

6. It won't happen

I don't see any way that it would get through without bipartisan support. Given that it would almost certainly be a solid blue state, the Republicans will never agree to it. The only way to make it happen is to pair it with another state to even out the political consequences. I can't think of any pro-Repbulican territories considering statehood. Guam? The Virgin Islands? Afghanistan? Maybe split Texas into West Texas and East Texas (or Right Wing Texas and Far Right Wing Texas).

[ApocalypseChic]

10. Never?

It was included in the GOP platform this year that any referendum from the PR people would be honored and respected and voted on accordingly. Since that platform is part of the public record, it would seem unwise politically to so egregiously go against it.

[TheMightyFavog]

13. Upper Michigan, maybe?

:Shrug:

[Warren DeMontague]

15. How about "The State of Creationist Flat Earth Science Denial."

Make the official mental state of the base of the Republican Party an actual state. Maybe with a sort of imaginary capital, like FoxNewsistanton.

[BanTheGOP]

7. Republicans cannot vote against it unless they want to commit absolute suicide

As it stands, it only needs a simple majority vote in Congress in both chambers. Of course, the Tea Party wingnuts will oppose statehood, but with the demise of the Tea Party as a whole, too many republicans may be reticent to buck the tide. Therefore they should vote, and IN MY OPINION, this should be done AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, preferably before April. If they do that, then Puerto Rico can be admitted on July 4, 2013.

NOW...what will it mean?

It means SEVEN NEW PROGRESSIVE CONGRESS MEMBERS! 2 senators, and five congresspersons.

New US flag in a couple of years (the 51-state flag)

Because of the changes in the House, five representatives will have to be reapportioned out of existing states. As it stands now, those five states are California, Florida, Minnesota, Texas, and Washington.

Of those five states, it is certain that Texas will have to reapportion out a conservative district, as they cannot carve out any more liberals after the DeLay fiasco. This also has the added benefit of throwing other districts into a flux, which may even allow us to pick up an extra Democrat or two!

In addition, California just went supermajority in their legislature, which means they don't need apportionment judges and can create the districts on their own. They will most probably reapportion out a conservative district, eliminating another conservative. Finally, in Minnesota, reapportioning means they can get rid of Michele Bachmann once and for all, because while her district barely reelected her, adjoining districts are solidly in the blue column; hence reapportioning will undoubtedly make whatever district she is blue.

THIS SHOULD BE A HIGH PRIORITY FOR THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION. We must make a deal with Washington, and if necessary, Florida, for the loss of their democratic district, as well as reward California if they redistrict the conservative out. Nothing to Texas, however.

Viva Puerto Rico!! This is what our new flag will look like:

[NYC Liberal]

8. It's possible Republicans may vote for it if they are smart enough to see

the writing on the wall about the changing demographics of the country. They may not be, but I wouldn't count it out. I don't see Republican attitudes changing, but I can see them trying to do something to court a larger base.

[ApocalypseChic]

11. I dount the Republicans will fight it vigorously

A few Congressmen will oppose it, but not enough to get a House majority. Especially since endorsement of PR's choice was one of the plank's of the GOP platform this year. It is politically risky to so egregiously turn their back on one of their own planks, and that would likely alienate the Latino vote they are trying to court even further. I have to disagree with those of you that think the GOP would just ignore their own published platform that is so clearly a part of the public record. )It was item #16 in this year's GOP platform for those of you who are Google challenged.)

[Kennah]

12. 2 Senators and 5 Congressional Reps, most or all leaning Blue, is reason for the GOP to fight it

In the platform or not, the GOP has entered a phase where they need to fight to remain relevant in the 21st Century. Personally, I hope they oppose statehood and play the obstructionist game until 2014. The House will go Blue, the Senate will get Bluer, and Obama's last 2 years will be a GLORIOUS frenzy of progress setting the stage in 2016 for Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, Alan Grayson, Russ Feingold, or whoever the hell wins the Primary.

Welcome to DU. Enjoy your time here. You do seem a little defensive of the GOP. Just a little helpful advice.

[TheMightyFavog]

14. And I'm sure the GOPers have a lot of buddies in the flag business...

If this does go through, anybody in the business of making or selling American Flags is going to practically have their own mint.

And don't say they're all made in China. IIRC, don't all the flags in the Military and Government have to be made in the USA?

[yurbud]

16. Anyone see the 51 star flag?

[TheMightyFavog]

17. Wikipedia says it might look something like this;

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/US_flag_51_stars.svg