29 thoughts on “Should Puerto Rico be allowed to vote for the U.S. President?”
It presupposes statehood as our destiny
If Puerto Rico were to become part of the presidential electorate we would have taken a great leap forward towards statehood. Whether Puerto Ricans want to become a state or not should first be decided before the infrastructure for statehood is slowly and surreptitiously implemented. The bill before Congress is a very clever ploy to push the issue of Puerto Rico’s future forward. In this sense, I believe, it should be supported. The danger of course for those who want independence or continued colonial status is that its approval would be a major move by Congress towards statehood. It’s an interesting Constitutional question. I’ve often wonder how American citizens can be disenfranchised as a way of life–although American history provides us with many examples.
I would think that theoretically Puerto Ricans should be allowed to vote because they are American citizens. However, because Puerto Rico as an unincorporated territory has no electoral provisions, everyone on the island, I guess, would be voting as an American citizen living abroad or on foreign soil. Ergo, a mailed in paper ballot for however millions of Puerto Ricans are registered to vote on the island.
In Hawaii and in Alaska, Americans who lived in those territories before they became states did not vote for presidents. And these were natural born, not statutory citizens as Puerto Ricans are.
It’s really a great legal and historical question. However, I think it is also a great political move by our people (albeit estadistas) to push the Americans into action–and perhaps to galvanized us both in Puerto Rico and stateside.
I think the political fallout and danger–in terms of the undeterminable reaction that will come from the people on the island–makes it too risky for the U.S. So that, I believe, the bill will never really reach the floor for debate.
RE: It presupposes statehood as our destiny
Interested readers should check out a Washington Post article, dated 10/10/00, “For Puerto Rico, an Election of Ifs” Interesting stat from the article: “With 2.4 million registered voters, P.R. has more voters than 29 states.” Damn! Note also that in August a Federal judge ruled that PRs have the right to vote. That’s being appealed, and arguments were heard in Boston last week. Does anyone know the decision?
Boston revoca voto y al PIP no sorprende
Boston anula la decisión de Pieras
sábado, 14 de octubre de 2000
Por José A. Delgado
Agencia EFE
BOSTON – Un tribunal de apelaciones de Boston rechazó ayer el fallo del juez
de distrito Jaime Pieras que otorgaba a los puertorriqueños el derecho a votar en las elecciones presidenciales de Estados Unidos.
En agosto pasado el Tribunal Federal del distrito de Puerto Rico dictaminó que los residentes de Puerto Rico tenían derecho a sufragar en los comicios presidenciales de Estados Unidos, aunque la isla no es un estado.
Los residentes de Puerto Rico son ciudadanos de Estados Unidos, y si están
domiciliados en alguno de los 50 estados o en el Distrito de Columbia pueden votar en los comicios presidenciales. Si están domiciliados en la isla no pueden participar en esa elección.
En un dictamen de 10 páginas, el Tribunal de Apelaciones decidió que “el fallo y la orden del Tribunal Federal (de San Juan) quede revocado y anulado, y que el caso se devuelva con instrucciones de que la acción sea desestimada con perjuicio”.
En su presentación a comienzos de octubre el Departamento de Justicia federal
argumentó que el juez Pieras había cometido un error con su interpretación de que la definición que la Constitución hace de los estados podía aplicarse a
arreglos políticos como el que existe con Puerto Rico.
“El Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico no es un estado”, sostuvo el abogado
de Justicia federal, Matthew Collette, ante el panel de tres jueces, que
presidió el juez puertorriqueño Juan R. Torruella, quien además emitió una
opinión concurrente.
EN UNA audiencia oral el pasado 5 de octubre, el Departamento de Justicia
reafirmó que la Constitución de Estados Unidos establece que sólo los estados
y la capital estadounidense, Washington, D.C., esta última por una enmienda de 1961, tienen representación en el “colegio electoral” de este país.
Mientras esperaba el fallo del Tribunal de Apelaciones, el gobernador de Puerto Rico, Pedro Rosselló, convirtió en ley un proyecto que permite que los puertorriqueños voten el 7 de noviembre por el demócrata Albert Gore o el
republicano George W. Bush.
Rosselló, tras la audiencia efectuada en la ciudad de Boston, aseguró que su
gobierno acudirá al Tribunal Supremo si el Tribunal de Apelaciones revocaba
la deter minación del juez federal de San Juan.
“Este es un asunto que tiene que ver con los ciudadanos de Estados Unidos que
residen en Puerto Rico”, dijo Rosselló, cuyo gobierno estuvo representado en
la audiencia judicial por el procurador general, Gustavo Gelpí.
El representante del Departamento de Justicia federal indicó que entiende la
“frustración” de los puertorriqueños, pero advirtió de que los territorios
como Puerto Rico no forman parte del colegio electoral de Estados Unidos, que
está compuesto por 538 votos.
LOS VOTOS del colegio electoral de Estados Unidos se dividen de acuerdo con
los 535 escaños del Congreso y tres adicionales que se le adjudicaron a la
capital estadounidense.
El Departamento de Justicia argumentó ante el Tribunal de Apelaciones que si
los puertorriqueños quieren votar por el presidente de Estados Unidos tienen
dos opciones: conseguir la anexión como estado o enmendar la Constitución
estadounidense.
El caso judicial sobre el voto de los puertorriqueños en las elecciones
presidenciales fue presentado por el abogado boricua Gregorio Igartúa, quien
sostuvo en la audiencia que, en América, sólo en Puerto Rico y Cuba “no se
permite a sus ciudadanos votar libremente” por sus máximos dirigentes
gubernamentales.
Veredicto del voto presidencial sin sorpresa para el PIP
sábado, 14 de octubre de 2000
Puerto Ricans can’t vote for president
Puerto Ricans can’t vote for president -U.S. court By Christopher Noble
BOSTON, Oct 13 (Reuters) – A federal appeals court on Friday refused to allow
Puerto Rico’s 2.4 million registered voters to cast ballots in U.S. presidential elections, saying the Constitution gave them no such right
without statehood.
The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston overturned an Aug. 29 decision in Puerto Rico by a U.S. District Court judge who had found that residents of Puerto Rico, a U.S. territory, had the right to vote for president in a general election even though Puerto Rico is not a state.
But the appeals court, siding with the Justice Department, found that the U.S. Constitution did not allow for that, adding that only a constitutional
amendment or official statehood would provide voting rights.
The decision denied all residents of Puerto Rico, including U.S. citizens
born in the 50 states who have moved to the territory, the right to vote in
U.S. general elections.
Residents of the self-governing commonwealth are U.S. citizens but do not pay U.S. income taxes. They can vote in presidential primaries, but not in
general elections.
The appeals court backed the position of the Justice Department, which had argued that U.S. District Judge Jaime Pieras erred in finding that the Constitution’s definition of states could be applied to political arrangements such as the U.S.-Puerto Rico commonwealth relationship.
The appeals court ruled that since Puerto Rico is not a state, it cannot choose electors to the electoral college, the mechanism set up by the Constitution for electing the president under which each state appoints electors equaling the number of its members in the Senate and House of Representatives. Lacking statehood, Puerto Rico has no voting members of Congress.
CASE WAS A SEQUEL
The ruling came in the case Gregorio Igartua de la Rosa et al vs. the United
States of America, brought by a Puerto Rican lawyer seeking voting rights for
residents of the territory. The appeals court ruled six years ago in a similar case brought by Igartua and cited that 1994 decision as precedent for the current case.
“We concluded that Puerto Rico, which is not a state, may not designate electors to the electoral college, and therefore that the residents of Puerto Rico have no constitutional right to participate in the national election of the president and vice president,” the court’s decision said, in a reference to its earlier opinion.
“The judgment and order of the district court is reversed and vacated, and the case is remanded with instructions that the action be dismissed with prejudice,” the appeals court said in its 10-page opinion.
The court said the only way to change the situation was to amend the Constitution to give Puerto Ricans the vote or to make the territory a state.
“Absent such a change in the status of Puerto Rico or an amendment to the
Constitution of the United States, our decision in Igartua 1 (the 1994 ruling) controls this case, unless there has been an intervening controlling or compelling authority,” the court said.
The Justice Department appeal came in response to the August ruling by Pieras
and followed Puerto Rico Gov. Pedro Rossello’s approval of a law establishing
a process by which Puerto Ricans would vote for president on Nov. 7.
Pieras had ruled that as U.S. citizens, Puerto Ricans had a constitutional
right to vote that outweighed the power of Congress over territories. His
decision stemmed from the lawsuit filed in April by Igartua and a group of
residents in northwestern Puerto Rico. The commonwealth government had joined
the plaintiffs.
(Additional reporting by Tim McLaughlin)
US appeals court rules against Puerto Rico voters
BOSTON, Oct 13 (Reuters) – The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston on
Friday overturned a lower-court decision that said residents of Puerto Rico should be allowed to vote in U.S. presidential elections.
In August, the U.S. District Court in Puerto Rico ruled that residents of
Puerto Rico, a U.S. territory, had the right to vote for president in a general election even though Puerto Rico is not a state.
“The judgment and order of the district court is reversed and vacated, and the case is remanded with instructions that the action be dismissed with prejudice,” the appeals court said in its 10-page opinion.
The U.S. Justice Department had argued that U.S. District Judge Jaime Pieras
erred in finding that the Constitution’s definition of states could be applied to political arrangements such as the U.S.-Puerto Rico commonwealth relationship.
Voto presidencial
Boston pide a Pieras reconsidere tres casos
martes, 17 de octubre de 2000
Por Juanita Colombani
El Nuevo Día
EL PRIMER Circuito de Apelaciones de Boston le recomendó ayer al juez federal
Jaime Pieras que reconsidere su decisión de mantener bajo su jurisdicción los
tres casos que impugnan la validez de la ley estatal que permite el voto por el presidente y vicepresidente de Estados Unidos.
En una orden de una página emitida ayer, el juez presidente del Circuito, el
puertorriqueño Juan R. Torruella, y los jueces Sandra Lynch y Kermit Lipez,
denegaron el recurso de mandamus que presentó el Partido Independentista
Puertorriqueño, pero lo hicieron sin perjuicio, dejando la puerta abierta
para que el PIP acuda ante ellos si Pieras no sigue su recomendación.
“En vista de la decisión reciente de este tribunal en el caso Igartúa vs. Estados Unidos, esperamos que el Tribunal de Distrito reconsidere su orden del 2 de octubre denegando la solicitud de los demandantes para que devuelva el caso”, dijo Boston. ESTE PANEL de tres jueces fue el que revocó el viernes a Pieras y reiteró que los puertorriqueños no tienen derecho a participar en las elecciones presidenciales porque la isla no es un estado ni se ha enmendado la Constitución federal a esos efectos. Boston ya había emitido una decisión similar en 1994 en otro caso incoado por el mismo reclamante, el abogado aguadillano Gregorio Igartúa.
La decisión fue catalogada por Rubén Berríos, presidente del PIP y candidato
a la gobernación, “como un acontecimiento de gran importancia”.
“Hemos obtenido un logro extraordinario y esperamos que pronto se declare
inconstitucional la ley aprobada por la legislatura”, agregó Berríos en
conferencia de prensa.
POR SU parte, el licenciado Carlos Gorrín, quien lleva el caso por el PIP,
explicó que el Primer Circuito ha tenido la “elegancia y deferencia legal” hacia el Tribunal de Distrito de recomendar a Pieras que devuelva los casos al tribunal local. Explicó que de Pieras no responder devolviendo los casos, el PIP puede recurrir nuevamente al Circuito para que se emita un mandamus ordenando la devolución de los casos. Dijo que ayer al mediodía el PIP fue ante Pieras para radicar la solicitud de devolver los casos amparado en la decisión. Si Pieras no actúa, el PIP acudirá a Boston.
Pieras había decidido que los puertorriqueños, por ser ciudadanos de Estados Unidos, tienen el derecho inherente de elegir delegados para votar por el presidente y vicepresidente estadounidense, en una acción que encontró su mejor aliado en la administración del gobernador Pedro Rosselló.
Como resultado de la sentencia de Pieras, la administración Rosselló creó una
ley para hacer viable la participación de los puertorriqueños en las elecciones presidenciales del próximo mes, la cual fue impugnada en el Tribunal estatal de Primera Instancia, por el PIP, la organización autonomista ProELA y el presidente del Partido Demócrata en Puerto Rico, Eudaldo Báez Galib.
EL DEPARTAMENTO de Justicia de Puerto Rico, en representación del Gobernador,
trasladó los tres casos al Tribunal Federal argumentando que Pieras debía
asumir la jurisdicción de los mismos, a lo que el juez accedió.
we’re statutory citizens with circumscribed rights
the decision of judge pieras in Puerto Rico has been overturned in boston by the
president of the circuit court torruella, a pro-statehood puerto rican. it just doesn’t fly constitutionally. this decision clearly establishes that Puerto Ricans are statutory citizens of the u.s. with circumscribed rights when on foreign soil–in this case their native land Puerto Rico.
ALERTA: “PAZ PARA VIEQUES”
MENSAJE DEL COMITE PRO RESCATE Y DESARROLLO DE VIEQUES
19 de octubre del 2000
Las papeletas para las elecciones generales del 7 de noviembre en Puerto
Rico ya se comenzaron a distribuir entre aquellos electores elegibles para
el voto ausente (estudiantes en Estados Unidos y en otros paises,
militares, marinos mercantes, etc.).
Como sabran, a pesar de que se ha declarado inconstitucional, la
Legislatura de Puerto Rico ha incluido una cuarta papeleta para el voto
presidencial y tiene la intencion de continuar con esa farsa
inconstitucional a pesar de los decretos judiciales. YA LOS QUE VOTAN
AUSENTES ESTAN RECIBIENDO ESA PAPELETA Y PUEDEN VOTAR EN CUALQUIER MOMENTO.
La consigna de los que repudian el ejercicio inconstitucional y absurdo de
la farsa de un “voto presidencial” para los residentes de Puerto Rico, y
de los que claman por la paz para Vieques, es escribir “PAZ PARA VIEQUES”
en la papeleta del “voto presidencial” de Puerto Rico. Las instrucciones
para ello son las siguientes:
En la papeleta del “voto presidencial” enviada por la Comision Estatal de
Elecciones de Puerto Rico, aparece una columna para votar por los
Republicanos George W. Bush y Dick Cheney y otra para votar por los
Democratas Al Gore y Joe Lieberman. A diferencia de las otras tres
papeletas para Gobernador/Comisionado Residente, para
Senadores/Representantes, y para Alcaldes, en la del voto presidencial no
se incluyo espacio alguno para voto anadido (o “write-in”). Por tanto,
para que cuente el voto de “Paz para Vieques” como “voto protestado, no
adjudicado”, se recomienda que en la papeleta del “voto presidencial” SE
ESCRIBA LA FRASE “PAZ PARA VIEQUES” HORIZONTALMENTE DE IZQUIERDA A
DERECHA, ABARCANDO AMBAS COLUMNAS. O SEA, EN VEZ DE ESCRIBIR “PAZ PARA
VIEQUES” BAJO LA COLUMNA DE BUSH O LA DE GORE, SE DEBE ESCRIBIR “PAZ PARA
VIEQUES” UNA SOLA VEZ A LO LARGO DE AMBAS COLUMNAS.
Es importante que le transmitan esta informacion inmediatamente a todos
sus familiares, amistades y conocidos que votan ausente, ya que ya deben
haber recibido las papeletas.
Gracias por su atencion. PAZ PARA VIEQUES YA!
resources misspent
This presidential election dressing, along with the already implemented primaries, draw resources that are better spent elsewhere. How much is the Puerto Rican government spending on these charades–including the plebiscite? Hopefully someday these activities will go down as colonial follies. Right now they have the gravity of a farse.
RE: Puerto Ricans can
Thanks so much.
RE: we
In a sense, we haven’t moved that far from US v. Cherokee nation, eh?
Vamos ganando contra voto presidencial
La corte local decidirá la validez del estatuto
martes, 24 de octubre de 2000
Por Juanita Colombani
El Nuevo Día
EL JUEZ federal Jaime Pieras devolvió al Tribunal de Primera Instancia de San Juan y al Tribunal Supremo de Puerto Rico los tres casos que impugnan la validez de la ley del voto presidencial firmada por el gobernador Pedro Rosselló el 10 de septiembre pasado.
En una orden de seis páginas emitida desde Washington D.C., Pieras concluyó
que a raíz de la opinión del Primer Circuito de Apelaciones de Boston,
revocando su decisión de que los puertorriqueños tienen derecho a votar por el presidente y vicepresidente de Estados Unidos, no existe ya un
cuestionamiento de naturaleza federal, por lo que el Tribunal Federal “debe
declinar seguir reclamando jurisdicción” en estos pleitos. Pieras se encuentra en Washington desde hace varios días.
Los tres casos, que fueron presentados por el Partido Independentista
Puertorriqueño (PIP), el senador popular Eudaldo Báez Galib, como presidente
del Partido Demó-crata en Puerto Rico, y la organización autonomista ProELA, reclaman que la ley del voto presidencial es inconstitucional.
El PIP y ProELA hicieron sus alegatos ante el Tribunal local de Primera
Instancia de San Juan y Báez Galib lo hizo directo en el Supremo. Pieras
había asumido jurisdicción en los casos a solicitud del gobernador Pedro Rosselló, que se convirtió en el mejor aliado de la decisión a favor del voto presidencial desde que se hizo pública en agosto de este año.
Báez Galib y ProELA irán hoy al Supremo
Báez Galib se expresó satisfecho con la decisión de Pieras y dijo que hoy a
primera hora acudirá al Supremo con una moción urgente para que el máximo foro tome conocimiento de la devolución de su caso y para que resuelva la validez del estatuto.
El abogado Luis Vega Ramos, portavoz de ProELA, también dijo que irá hoy al
Supremo con una moción en auxilio de jurisdicción para que resuelva la
controversia sobre la constitucionalidad de la ley y con una segunda moción para que emita un interdicto preliminar.
Ante la dilación de Pieras para devolver los casos, el PIP acudió el jueves
al Tribunal Supremo de Puerto Rico con una solicitud de mandamus argumentando
que el tiempo apremia, debido a que las elecciones están cada vez más cerca y
la Comisión Estatal de Elecciones (CEE) tiene el mandato de hacer cumplir una
ley que el PIP y sus funcionarios electorales consideran inconstitucional.
El abogado del PIP, Carlos Gorrín Peralta, indicó que el partido todavía no
ha decidido si mantendrán vivos los dos pleitos o si solicitarán su consolidación ante el Tribunal Supremo.
De todas formas, el abogado destacó que lo importante es que ya está en manos
exclusivas de los tribunales de Puerto Rico decidir la constitucionalidad de
la ley.
El viernes, el Supremo acogió la solicitud de mandamus del PIP y le dio a las partes hasta mañana a las 5:00 p.m. para presentar alegatos. También le pidió
a la CEE un informe detallado sobre la implantación de la ley del voto
presidencial, para la cual se asignaron $900,000 de fondos públicos.
Espera el PIP que detengan la votación
El vicepresidente del PIP, Fernando Martín García, dijo que la decisión de
Pieras “constituye un triunfo importantísimo, no solamente para el PIP, que se tomó la iniciativa de llevar este caso a Boston, sino para todo el pueblo
de Puerto Rico que se opone a la asimilación y al voto presidencial”.
“Esto constituye una derrota para el Gobierno de Puerto Rico y el PNP y para
aquellos como el alto liderato del Partido Popular Democrático que se negó a
ir a Boston y se negó a ir al tribunal a defender la propia constitución de Puerto Rico”, dijo Martín García a la vez que expresó la esperanza de que “tengamos una decisión prontamente que nosotros esperamos que sea ordenando la paralización permanente de todo intento de llevar a votación las candidaturas presidenciales el día 7 de noviembre”.
Rosselló aprobó la ley de voto presidencial a raíz de la sentencia de Pieras resolviendo que los puertorriqueños tienen el derecho inherente de participar en las elecciones presidenciales de Estados Unidos por ser ciudadanos americanos. Boston revocó dicha conclusión, pero el Gobierno ha continuado con el evento electoral, que está previsto para hacerse conjuntamente con las elecciones generales del 7 de noviembre.
RE: resources misspent
The biggest farse of all is being a citizen of a country and not having the right to choose the men and women who run that country.
RE: resources misspent
The biggest farse of all is being a citizen of a country and not having the right to choose the men and women who run that country.
RE: RE: resources misspent
Yes. If Puerto Ricans are expected to fight and die in US wars, we sure are entitled to the basic right of choosing the men and women who decide when we go to war.
RE: RE: resources misspent
Yes. If Puerto Ricans are expected to fight and die in US wars, we sure are entitled to the basic right of choosing the men and women who decide when we go to war.
VOTE
WHY SHOULD PUERTO RICANS BE ABLE TO VOTE FOR PRESIDENT WHEN I (A GRINGO TRANSPLANT) CAN’T VOTE IN PUERTO RICO BE CAUSE I’M NOT PUERTO RICAN?
Interesting question
Well, it’s because you are a gringo, as you characterized yourself, and not a Puerto Rican that you cannot vote in Puerto Rico. The Puerto Rican government did not impose Puerto Rican citizenship on you as the United States government did to Puerto Ricans when it imposed U.S. citizenship on them in 1917 through the Jones Act. The Puerto Rican government doesn’t draft you into its army and it doesn’t control your country’s international relations–political and economic.
Puerto Rico, whatever, one may think, is still an occupied country. The proof is in this local colonial government that is a mockery of democracy and that resembles the Vichy government of France in many ways. You have local autonomy and foreign control with a foreign standing army in your country. That is really what Puerto Rico is living through. The country’s resources are placed at the disposal of the foreign power that regulates its trade and foreign relations.
You ask a very important question, however, and it is necessarily a corollary to the original. To wit: If Puerto Ricans are allowed to vote in the Presidential elections, then Americans should be allowed to vote in Puerto Rican gubernatorial elections.
The question, luckily, has no legal, constitutional, political or historical foundation to rest on. I say luckily because it again would bring Puerto Rico that much closer to statehood which means the death of our nation and our people.
the reality is Puerto Rico is a colony
You can, but you have to be a resident of a state and register as a voter in that state. You can’t in Puerto Rico because Puerto Rico is a foreign country. It is not a state, it has no real representation in the U.S. Congress and even less so with current Romero as a non-voting delegate there. It also has no electoral representation in the Electoral College.
The reality is Puerto Rico is a colony.
please elaborate
How, specifically, does this comparison stand?
RE: the reality is Puerto Rico is a colony
We agree. Puerto Rico is a colony.
We agree. Puerto Rico is not a state.
But Puerto Rico is not a “foreign country” to the US – at least, not now, while Puerto Ricans remain US citizens.
Anyway, I guess the near two million Puerto Ricans who believe in statehood will have to move up north and establish the Cuchifrito State somewhere around the Mississippi river.
RE: “Gringo” can’t vote in PR.
I’m perplexed by your declaration that the question “has no legal, constitutional, political, or historical foundation to rest on”. Taxation without representation certainly does have an historical foundation. And immigrant residents to Puerto Rico do pay Puerto Rican taxes. I think this is a very valid question. If the principle is applied in one direction it should be aknowledged conversely as well.
Additionally, the term “gringo” is at the very least slightly derrogatory and unsuitable for an objective discussion of this issue. Is a Spanish-speaking person raised on the island, deeply involved in Puerto Rican society and culture, but who’s parents may be more in the “gringo transplant” category, somehow less Puerto Rican than a child of Puerto Rican parents, born and raised in the US, who doesn’t speak Spanish and doesn’t participate in Puerto Rican society?
If we argue that Puerto Rico is a nation with a right to be sovriegn and independent, doesn’t this imply that Puerto Rico should behave as other independent states do, and allow immigrant residents to qualify to be citizens of the nation? I don’t see this aspect of the voting question as bringing “Puerto Rico that much closer to statehood”. Puerto Ricans can vote for the President when they reside in the US, and this is the true corallary. If Puerto Rico becomes independent would you still advocate denying voting rights to immigrants on the island, or just to “gringo transplants”, or what?
RE: RE: “Gringo” can not
What are the conditions under which people vote in Puerto Rico? This probably will explain why you can or can’t vote. Should you wish to appeal or amend whatever rules or conditions exist that may exclude you and other non-Puerto Ricans, then that’s your prerogative–seeing that Puerto Rico is under the governance of the United States. I believe, however, that if one is willing or if an American is willing to become a Puerto Rican citizen, then he or she should be allowed to vote after taking an oath of allegiance to Puerto Rico and renouncing his or her American citizenship. Being an American citizen by itself should definitely not entitle anyone to participate in the Puerto Rican electorate.
RE: RE: RE: “Gringo” can not
As a resident/homeowner, and taxpaying citizen of Puerto Rico, I should be able to vote for those who represent me.
RE: RE: RE: RE: “Gringo” can not
i agree with k smit that we need to review the codes, laws and regulations involved in this. you are free to express any sentiment, the reality is that you are a foreigner living in a foreign country however much you want to think that you or your country (u.s.a) owns Puerto Rico. if you owned property in france or germany, would that entitle you to vote there? i wonder —
again, we need to know the codes involved in voting to determine what is going on. but this isn’t really the discussion. unless you would like a topic like this. if the administrator doesn’t mind, i would like to ask that a new topic be posted: should americans and other foreigners or non-Puerto Ricans living on island be allowed to vote in Puerto Rican elections?
RE: RE: “Gringo” can
Firstly, I did not mean to offend by recycling the word “gringo.” Freedom, the name of the person who posted the statement I responded to, used it in refering to himself or herself.
Secondly, taxation without representation may have a foundation but its application must be defined and circumscribed. The large foreign corporations operating in the U.S. do not vote in our elections although they arguably have representation through their campaign donations and lobbying efforts. This, I may add, already exists in Puerto Rico–not perhaps as evidently for the small home or hacienda owner but certainly for American businesses and military.
Thirdly, I stated in my prior posting to which you responded, and therefore I agree with you, that the question is valid. I didn’t use the same words but I did think it was worth addressing and looking into.
Lastly, you hit the nail right on the head when you state that if Puerto Rico were independent, then this island nation could establish its codes of naturalization that would allow those not of Puerto Rican heritage to become citizens and, thereby, become eligible to vote. I emphasize the word “if” because, as we well know, Puerto Rico is not an independent nation. It is a colony of the United States and, therefore, elections by virtue of this condition–even among Puerto Ricans on the island and in the U.S.–becomes problematical.
My intention was not to “exclude” anyone who has Puerto Rico in his or her heart and who honestly wishes the best for the country and the culture–which for me means independence. Then, we could speak of Puerto Rico entering the family of nations and participating fully as a member. Then we would be able to speak of voting rights and Puerto Rican citizenship. To speak of this before hand is ludicrous, and actually can not appear and be anything short of once more manipulating the Puerto Rican electorate with non-Puerto Rican votes.
Are you a Puerto Rican or American citizen first?
Are you a Puerto Rican citizen or an American citizen? Where do you place your allegiance? If Puerto Rico went to war against the United States, which army would you or your sons fight in? This is at the crux of the voting issue–not how much property you have or how much tax you pay.
RE: RE: RE: “Gringo” can not
I am been quitely reading the forum for a coule of weeks, putting my thoughts togehter for a response to you, and those opposed to statehood, the right to vote in presidnetial elections, the placiebo, etc.
I am a Nuyorican, born and raised in New York City of first generation Puerto Rican parents. I have lived here all my life, and until two years ago, could care less about Puerto Rico, and thought of the Island only as a place to visit distant family.
In 1997 I was given the opportunity, through my company to work and live in Puerto Rico for year. How excited I was! I did not expect to learn and become so passionate about the issues that have surrounded “the freedom” of Puerto Rico.
I agree 100% with all of you brothers and sisters out there that would like to see freedom as I have known as an American, be transffred to the Island. However, I as an Amercian first, cannot make that decsions. It should not be assumed thta because you are of Puerto Rican, you are a “nationalist” for Puerto Rico.
The question of statehood vs. independence must be answered by residnets who are from the Island. They all must be touched deeply that do not want to live in virtual slavery as they have for the last 100 years. How do you send your child off to shed blood in the name of freedom for the United Stated, but have no say in the choice of Commander in Chief? Having had that privlige all my adult life, I cannot phathom it! How can the military continue to test in viques, yet Puerto Rican residents have not say in the US Congress, NO VOTE?
My thoughts continued..
First, I am typing to fast.. so please excuse the mistakes..LOL..
Anyway, I am really tired of Nuyoricans advocating for something that they cannot change. If I lived in Puerto Rico, I would fight for independence, statehood whatever, but would not stay in limbo. This is clearly what the Puerto Rican people want. They have choices. They choose to continue this commonwealth crap. Why? They want the best of both worlds, and quite frankly who wouldn’t. Lets be real. They pay no federal income tax, and large companies recieve tax breaks in Puerto Rico. If independence were to be pursued, what would happen to the Puerto Rican economy with a US pullout. Miserable poverty, and civil war. Why? Puerto Rico and Puerto Ricans, though capable of independence, are not ready. Simple. They are not ready economically or socially for such a change. It’s like a co-dependent, needy relationship on both sides. Please, instead of bad mouthing the United States, the past, etc, make a choice. BE brave. We are a brave, exciting people, but we are scared of the consequences if we relequish ties with the United States.
Having lived in PR, I talked to many natives, who are simply torn. They don’t want to loose the social gains they have by being part of the United States, such as welfare and tax breaks. However, they want to have their own identiy, their own political parties, their own nation. But you can’t have the best of both worlds. As the 13 colonies did in 1776, there is a time to buck colonalism, take a stand and fight, by any means necessary. Is Puerto Rico ready for that? Will they ever ratify a decleration of independence and send it to the White House? If you want total freedom, with no interference, that’s what it’s going to take. You all know that! are you ready?
“Gringo” Transplants
The question is not whether Puerto Rican’s should allow “gringo” transplants to vote or not. The question is whether Puerto Rico, like every independent nation, should be allowed to control their own borders (which under the colonial status they do not). There are many sovereign nations (a lot of them wealthy “first world” European as well as the US) who are currently grappling with the question of immigration. Puerto Rico, which is, yes, still a colony, and is, yes, still quite poor, doesn’t even have the liberty of controlling its borders or its economy, nor the “liberty” or control to deal with the question of being over run by “transplants” who through wealth and privilege are now choosing to dictate the future of the captive nation.
It’s really not a question of whether Puerto Rican’s should be able to vote for a US president, it’s a question of whether or not one day Puerto Rican’s will be “allowed” to vote for a Puerto Rican president.
It presupposes statehood as our destiny
If Puerto Rico were to become part of the presidential electorate we would have taken a great leap forward towards statehood. Whether Puerto Ricans want to become a state or not should first be decided before the infrastructure for statehood is slowly and surreptitiously implemented. The bill before Congress is a very clever ploy to push the issue of Puerto Rico’s future forward. In this sense, I believe, it should be supported. The danger of course for those who want independence or continued colonial status is that its approval would be a major move by Congress towards statehood. It’s an interesting Constitutional question. I’ve often wonder how American citizens can be disenfranchised as a way of life–although American history provides us with many examples.
I would think that theoretically Puerto Ricans should be allowed to vote because they are American citizens. However, because Puerto Rico as an unincorporated territory has no electoral provisions, everyone on the island, I guess, would be voting as an American citizen living abroad or on foreign soil. Ergo, a mailed in paper ballot for however millions of Puerto Ricans are registered to vote on the island.
In Hawaii and in Alaska, Americans who lived in those territories before they became states did not vote for presidents. And these were natural born, not statutory citizens as Puerto Ricans are.
It’s really a great legal and historical question. However, I think it is also a great political move by our people (albeit estadistas) to push the Americans into action–and perhaps to galvanized us both in Puerto Rico and stateside.
I think the political fallout and danger–in terms of the undeterminable reaction that will come from the people on the island–makes it too risky for the U.S. So that, I believe, the bill will never really reach the floor for debate.
RE: It presupposes statehood as our destiny
Interested readers should check out a Washington Post article, dated 10/10/00, “For Puerto Rico, an Election of Ifs” Interesting stat from the article: “With 2.4 million registered voters, P.R. has more voters than 29 states.” Damn! Note also that in August a Federal judge ruled that PRs have the right to vote. That’s being appealed, and arguments were heard in Boston last week. Does anyone know the decision?
Boston revoca voto y al PIP no sorprende
Boston anula la decisión de Pieras
sábado, 14 de octubre de 2000
Por José A. Delgado
Agencia EFE
BOSTON – Un tribunal de apelaciones de Boston rechazó ayer el fallo del juez
de distrito Jaime Pieras que otorgaba a los puertorriqueños el derecho a votar en las elecciones presidenciales de Estados Unidos.
En agosto pasado el Tribunal Federal del distrito de Puerto Rico dictaminó que los residentes de Puerto Rico tenían derecho a sufragar en los comicios presidenciales de Estados Unidos, aunque la isla no es un estado.
Los residentes de Puerto Rico son ciudadanos de Estados Unidos, y si están
domiciliados en alguno de los 50 estados o en el Distrito de Columbia pueden votar en los comicios presidenciales. Si están domiciliados en la isla no pueden participar en esa elección.
En un dictamen de 10 páginas, el Tribunal de Apelaciones decidió que “el fallo y la orden del Tribunal Federal (de San Juan) quede revocado y anulado, y que el caso se devuelva con instrucciones de que la acción sea desestimada con perjuicio”.
En su presentación a comienzos de octubre el Departamento de Justicia federal
argumentó que el juez Pieras había cometido un error con su interpretación de que la definición que la Constitución hace de los estados podía aplicarse a
arreglos políticos como el que existe con Puerto Rico.
“El Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico no es un estado”, sostuvo el abogado
de Justicia federal, Matthew Collette, ante el panel de tres jueces, que
presidió el juez puertorriqueño Juan R. Torruella, quien además emitió una
opinión concurrente.
EN UNA audiencia oral el pasado 5 de octubre, el Departamento de Justicia
reafirmó que la Constitución de Estados Unidos establece que sólo los estados
y la capital estadounidense, Washington, D.C., esta última por una enmienda de 1961, tienen representación en el “colegio electoral” de este país.
Mientras esperaba el fallo del Tribunal de Apelaciones, el gobernador de Puerto Rico, Pedro Rosselló, convirtió en ley un proyecto que permite que los puertorriqueños voten el 7 de noviembre por el demócrata Albert Gore o el
republicano George W. Bush.
Rosselló, tras la audiencia efectuada en la ciudad de Boston, aseguró que su
gobierno acudirá al Tribunal Supremo si el Tribunal de Apelaciones revocaba
la deter minación del juez federal de San Juan.
“Este es un asunto que tiene que ver con los ciudadanos de Estados Unidos que
residen en Puerto Rico”, dijo Rosselló, cuyo gobierno estuvo representado en
la audiencia judicial por el procurador general, Gustavo Gelpí.
El representante del Departamento de Justicia federal indicó que entiende la
“frustración” de los puertorriqueños, pero advirtió de que los territorios
como Puerto Rico no forman parte del colegio electoral de Estados Unidos, que
está compuesto por 538 votos.
LOS VOTOS del colegio electoral de Estados Unidos se dividen de acuerdo con
los 535 escaños del Congreso y tres adicionales que se le adjudicaron a la
capital estadounidense.
El Departamento de Justicia argumentó ante el Tribunal de Apelaciones que si
los puertorriqueños quieren votar por el presidente de Estados Unidos tienen
dos opciones: conseguir la anexión como estado o enmendar la Constitución
estadounidense.
El caso judicial sobre el voto de los puertorriqueños en las elecciones
presidenciales fue presentado por el abogado boricua Gregorio Igartúa, quien
sostuvo en la audiencia que, en América, sólo en Puerto Rico y Cuba “no se
permite a sus ciudadanos votar libremente” por sus máximos dirigentes
gubernamentales.
Veredicto del voto presidencial sin sorpresa para el PIP
sábado, 14 de octubre de 2000
Puerto Ricans can’t vote for president
Puerto Ricans can’t vote for president -U.S. court By Christopher Noble
BOSTON, Oct 13 (Reuters) – A federal appeals court on Friday refused to allow
Puerto Rico’s 2.4 million registered voters to cast ballots in U.S. presidential elections, saying the Constitution gave them no such right
without statehood.
The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston overturned an Aug. 29 decision in Puerto Rico by a U.S. District Court judge who had found that residents of Puerto Rico, a U.S. territory, had the right to vote for president in a general election even though Puerto Rico is not a state.
But the appeals court, siding with the Justice Department, found that the U.S. Constitution did not allow for that, adding that only a constitutional
amendment or official statehood would provide voting rights.
The decision denied all residents of Puerto Rico, including U.S. citizens
born in the 50 states who have moved to the territory, the right to vote in
U.S. general elections.
Residents of the self-governing commonwealth are U.S. citizens but do not pay U.S. income taxes. They can vote in presidential primaries, but not in
general elections.
The appeals court backed the position of the Justice Department, which had argued that U.S. District Judge Jaime Pieras erred in finding that the Constitution’s definition of states could be applied to political arrangements such as the U.S.-Puerto Rico commonwealth relationship.
The appeals court ruled that since Puerto Rico is not a state, it cannot choose electors to the electoral college, the mechanism set up by the Constitution for electing the president under which each state appoints electors equaling the number of its members in the Senate and House of Representatives. Lacking statehood, Puerto Rico has no voting members of Congress.
CASE WAS A SEQUEL
The ruling came in the case Gregorio Igartua de la Rosa et al vs. the United
States of America, brought by a Puerto Rican lawyer seeking voting rights for
residents of the territory. The appeals court ruled six years ago in a similar case brought by Igartua and cited that 1994 decision as precedent for the current case.
“We concluded that Puerto Rico, which is not a state, may not designate electors to the electoral college, and therefore that the residents of Puerto Rico have no constitutional right to participate in the national election of the president and vice president,” the court’s decision said, in a reference to its earlier opinion.
“The judgment and order of the district court is reversed and vacated, and the case is remanded with instructions that the action be dismissed with prejudice,” the appeals court said in its 10-page opinion.
The court said the only way to change the situation was to amend the Constitution to give Puerto Ricans the vote or to make the territory a state.
“Absent such a change in the status of Puerto Rico or an amendment to the
Constitution of the United States, our decision in Igartua 1 (the 1994 ruling) controls this case, unless there has been an intervening controlling or compelling authority,” the court said.
The Justice Department appeal came in response to the August ruling by Pieras
and followed Puerto Rico Gov. Pedro Rossello’s approval of a law establishing
a process by which Puerto Ricans would vote for president on Nov. 7.
Pieras had ruled that as U.S. citizens, Puerto Ricans had a constitutional
right to vote that outweighed the power of Congress over territories. His
decision stemmed from the lawsuit filed in April by Igartua and a group of
residents in northwestern Puerto Rico. The commonwealth government had joined
the plaintiffs.
(Additional reporting by Tim McLaughlin)
US appeals court rules against Puerto Rico voters
BOSTON, Oct 13 (Reuters) – The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston on
Friday overturned a lower-court decision that said residents of Puerto Rico should be allowed to vote in U.S. presidential elections.
In August, the U.S. District Court in Puerto Rico ruled that residents of
Puerto Rico, a U.S. territory, had the right to vote for president in a general election even though Puerto Rico is not a state.
“The judgment and order of the district court is reversed and vacated, and the case is remanded with instructions that the action be dismissed with prejudice,” the appeals court said in its 10-page opinion.
The U.S. Justice Department had argued that U.S. District Judge Jaime Pieras
erred in finding that the Constitution’s definition of states could be applied to political arrangements such as the U.S.-Puerto Rico commonwealth relationship.
Voto presidencial
Boston pide a Pieras reconsidere tres casos
martes, 17 de octubre de 2000
Por Juanita Colombani
El Nuevo Día
EL PRIMER Circuito de Apelaciones de Boston le recomendó ayer al juez federal
Jaime Pieras que reconsidere su decisión de mantener bajo su jurisdicción los
tres casos que impugnan la validez de la ley estatal que permite el voto por el presidente y vicepresidente de Estados Unidos.
En una orden de una página emitida ayer, el juez presidente del Circuito, el
puertorriqueño Juan R. Torruella, y los jueces Sandra Lynch y Kermit Lipez,
denegaron el recurso de mandamus que presentó el Partido Independentista
Puertorriqueño, pero lo hicieron sin perjuicio, dejando la puerta abierta
para que el PIP acuda ante ellos si Pieras no sigue su recomendación.
“En vista de la decisión reciente de este tribunal en el caso Igartúa vs. Estados Unidos, esperamos que el Tribunal de Distrito reconsidere su orden del 2 de octubre denegando la solicitud de los demandantes para que devuelva el caso”, dijo Boston. ESTE PANEL de tres jueces fue el que revocó el viernes a Pieras y reiteró que los puertorriqueños no tienen derecho a participar en las elecciones presidenciales porque la isla no es un estado ni se ha enmendado la Constitución federal a esos efectos. Boston ya había emitido una decisión similar en 1994 en otro caso incoado por el mismo reclamante, el abogado aguadillano Gregorio Igartúa.
La decisión fue catalogada por Rubén Berríos, presidente del PIP y candidato
a la gobernación, “como un acontecimiento de gran importancia”.
“Hemos obtenido un logro extraordinario y esperamos que pronto se declare
inconstitucional la ley aprobada por la legislatura”, agregó Berríos en
conferencia de prensa.
POR SU parte, el licenciado Carlos Gorrín, quien lleva el caso por el PIP,
explicó que el Primer Circuito ha tenido la “elegancia y deferencia legal” hacia el Tribunal de Distrito de recomendar a Pieras que devuelva los casos al tribunal local. Explicó que de Pieras no responder devolviendo los casos, el PIP puede recurrir nuevamente al Circuito para que se emita un mandamus ordenando la devolución de los casos. Dijo que ayer al mediodía el PIP fue ante Pieras para radicar la solicitud de devolver los casos amparado en la decisión. Si Pieras no actúa, el PIP acudirá a Boston.
Pieras había decidido que los puertorriqueños, por ser ciudadanos de Estados Unidos, tienen el derecho inherente de elegir delegados para votar por el presidente y vicepresidente estadounidense, en una acción que encontró su mejor aliado en la administración del gobernador Pedro Rosselló.
Como resultado de la sentencia de Pieras, la administración Rosselló creó una
ley para hacer viable la participación de los puertorriqueños en las elecciones presidenciales del próximo mes, la cual fue impugnada en el Tribunal estatal de Primera Instancia, por el PIP, la organización autonomista ProELA y el presidente del Partido Demócrata en Puerto Rico, Eudaldo Báez Galib.
EL DEPARTAMENTO de Justicia de Puerto Rico, en representación del Gobernador,
trasladó los tres casos al Tribunal Federal argumentando que Pieras debía
asumir la jurisdicción de los mismos, a lo que el juez accedió.
we’re statutory citizens with circumscribed rights
the decision of judge pieras in Puerto Rico has been overturned in boston by the
president of the circuit court torruella, a pro-statehood puerto rican. it just doesn’t fly constitutionally. this decision clearly establishes that Puerto Ricans are statutory citizens of the u.s. with circumscribed rights when on foreign soil–in this case their native land Puerto Rico.
ALERTA: “PAZ PARA VIEQUES”
MENSAJE DEL COMITE PRO RESCATE Y DESARROLLO DE VIEQUES
19 de octubre del 2000
Las papeletas para las elecciones generales del 7 de noviembre en Puerto
Rico ya se comenzaron a distribuir entre aquellos electores elegibles para
el voto ausente (estudiantes en Estados Unidos y en otros paises,
militares, marinos mercantes, etc.).
Como sabran, a pesar de que se ha declarado inconstitucional, la
Legislatura de Puerto Rico ha incluido una cuarta papeleta para el voto
presidencial y tiene la intencion de continuar con esa farsa
inconstitucional a pesar de los decretos judiciales. YA LOS QUE VOTAN
AUSENTES ESTAN RECIBIENDO ESA PAPELETA Y PUEDEN VOTAR EN CUALQUIER MOMENTO.
La consigna de los que repudian el ejercicio inconstitucional y absurdo de
la farsa de un “voto presidencial” para los residentes de Puerto Rico, y
de los que claman por la paz para Vieques, es escribir “PAZ PARA VIEQUES”
en la papeleta del “voto presidencial” de Puerto Rico. Las instrucciones
para ello son las siguientes:
En la papeleta del “voto presidencial” enviada por la Comision Estatal de
Elecciones de Puerto Rico, aparece una columna para votar por los
Republicanos George W. Bush y Dick Cheney y otra para votar por los
Democratas Al Gore y Joe Lieberman. A diferencia de las otras tres
papeletas para Gobernador/Comisionado Residente, para
Senadores/Representantes, y para Alcaldes, en la del voto presidencial no
se incluyo espacio alguno para voto anadido (o “write-in”). Por tanto,
para que cuente el voto de “Paz para Vieques” como “voto protestado, no
adjudicado”, se recomienda que en la papeleta del “voto presidencial” SE
ESCRIBA LA FRASE “PAZ PARA VIEQUES” HORIZONTALMENTE DE IZQUIERDA A
DERECHA, ABARCANDO AMBAS COLUMNAS. O SEA, EN VEZ DE ESCRIBIR “PAZ PARA
VIEQUES” BAJO LA COLUMNA DE BUSH O LA DE GORE, SE DEBE ESCRIBIR “PAZ PARA
VIEQUES” UNA SOLA VEZ A LO LARGO DE AMBAS COLUMNAS.
Es importante que le transmitan esta informacion inmediatamente a todos
sus familiares, amistades y conocidos que votan ausente, ya que ya deben
haber recibido las papeletas.
Gracias por su atencion. PAZ PARA VIEQUES YA!
resources misspent
This presidential election dressing, along with the already implemented primaries, draw resources that are better spent elsewhere. How much is the Puerto Rican government spending on these charades–including the plebiscite? Hopefully someday these activities will go down as colonial follies. Right now they have the gravity of a farse.
RE: Puerto Ricans can
Thanks so much.
RE: we
In a sense, we haven’t moved that far from US v. Cherokee nation, eh?
Vamos ganando contra voto presidencial
La corte local decidirá la validez del estatuto
martes, 24 de octubre de 2000
Por Juanita Colombani
El Nuevo Día
EL JUEZ federal Jaime Pieras devolvió al Tribunal de Primera Instancia de San Juan y al Tribunal Supremo de Puerto Rico los tres casos que impugnan la validez de la ley del voto presidencial firmada por el gobernador Pedro Rosselló el 10 de septiembre pasado.
En una orden de seis páginas emitida desde Washington D.C., Pieras concluyó
que a raíz de la opinión del Primer Circuito de Apelaciones de Boston,
revocando su decisión de que los puertorriqueños tienen derecho a votar por el presidente y vicepresidente de Estados Unidos, no existe ya un
cuestionamiento de naturaleza federal, por lo que el Tribunal Federal “debe
declinar seguir reclamando jurisdicción” en estos pleitos. Pieras se encuentra en Washington desde hace varios días.
Los tres casos, que fueron presentados por el Partido Independentista
Puertorriqueño (PIP), el senador popular Eudaldo Báez Galib, como presidente
del Partido Demó-crata en Puerto Rico, y la organización autonomista ProELA, reclaman que la ley del voto presidencial es inconstitucional.
El PIP y ProELA hicieron sus alegatos ante el Tribunal local de Primera
Instancia de San Juan y Báez Galib lo hizo directo en el Supremo. Pieras
había asumido jurisdicción en los casos a solicitud del gobernador Pedro Rosselló, que se convirtió en el mejor aliado de la decisión a favor del voto presidencial desde que se hizo pública en agosto de este año.
Báez Galib y ProELA irán hoy al Supremo
Báez Galib se expresó satisfecho con la decisión de Pieras y dijo que hoy a
primera hora acudirá al Supremo con una moción urgente para que el máximo foro tome conocimiento de la devolución de su caso y para que resuelva la validez del estatuto.
El abogado Luis Vega Ramos, portavoz de ProELA, también dijo que irá hoy al
Supremo con una moción en auxilio de jurisdicción para que resuelva la
controversia sobre la constitucionalidad de la ley y con una segunda moción para que emita un interdicto preliminar.
Ante la dilación de Pieras para devolver los casos, el PIP acudió el jueves
al Tribunal Supremo de Puerto Rico con una solicitud de mandamus argumentando
que el tiempo apremia, debido a que las elecciones están cada vez más cerca y
la Comisión Estatal de Elecciones (CEE) tiene el mandato de hacer cumplir una
ley que el PIP y sus funcionarios electorales consideran inconstitucional.
El abogado del PIP, Carlos Gorrín Peralta, indicó que el partido todavía no
ha decidido si mantendrán vivos los dos pleitos o si solicitarán su consolidación ante el Tribunal Supremo.
De todas formas, el abogado destacó que lo importante es que ya está en manos
exclusivas de los tribunales de Puerto Rico decidir la constitucionalidad de
la ley.
El viernes, el Supremo acogió la solicitud de mandamus del PIP y le dio a las partes hasta mañana a las 5:00 p.m. para presentar alegatos. También le pidió
a la CEE un informe detallado sobre la implantación de la ley del voto
presidencial, para la cual se asignaron $900,000 de fondos públicos.
Espera el PIP que detengan la votación
El vicepresidente del PIP, Fernando Martín García, dijo que la decisión de
Pieras “constituye un triunfo importantísimo, no solamente para el PIP, que se tomó la iniciativa de llevar este caso a Boston, sino para todo el pueblo
de Puerto Rico que se opone a la asimilación y al voto presidencial”.
“Esto constituye una derrota para el Gobierno de Puerto Rico y el PNP y para
aquellos como el alto liderato del Partido Popular Democrático que se negó a
ir a Boston y se negó a ir al tribunal a defender la propia constitución de Puerto Rico”, dijo Martín García a la vez que expresó la esperanza de que “tengamos una decisión prontamente que nosotros esperamos que sea ordenando la paralización permanente de todo intento de llevar a votación las candidaturas presidenciales el día 7 de noviembre”.
Rosselló aprobó la ley de voto presidencial a raíz de la sentencia de Pieras resolviendo que los puertorriqueños tienen el derecho inherente de participar en las elecciones presidenciales de Estados Unidos por ser ciudadanos americanos. Boston revocó dicha conclusión, pero el Gobierno ha continuado con el evento electoral, que está previsto para hacerse conjuntamente con las elecciones generales del 7 de noviembre.
RE: resources misspent
The biggest farse of all is being a citizen of a country and not having the right to choose the men and women who run that country.
RE: resources misspent
The biggest farse of all is being a citizen of a country and not having the right to choose the men and women who run that country.
RE: RE: resources misspent
Yes. If Puerto Ricans are expected to fight and die in US wars, we sure are entitled to the basic right of choosing the men and women who decide when we go to war.
RE: RE: resources misspent
Yes. If Puerto Ricans are expected to fight and die in US wars, we sure are entitled to the basic right of choosing the men and women who decide when we go to war.
VOTE
WHY SHOULD PUERTO RICANS BE ABLE TO VOTE FOR PRESIDENT WHEN I (A GRINGO TRANSPLANT) CAN’T VOTE IN PUERTO RICO BE CAUSE I’M NOT PUERTO RICAN?
Interesting question
Well, it’s because you are a gringo, as you characterized yourself, and not a Puerto Rican that you cannot vote in Puerto Rico. The Puerto Rican government did not impose Puerto Rican citizenship on you as the United States government did to Puerto Ricans when it imposed U.S. citizenship on them in 1917 through the Jones Act. The Puerto Rican government doesn’t draft you into its army and it doesn’t control your country’s international relations–political and economic.
Puerto Rico, whatever, one may think, is still an occupied country. The proof is in this local colonial government that is a mockery of democracy and that resembles the Vichy government of France in many ways. You have local autonomy and foreign control with a foreign standing army in your country. That is really what Puerto Rico is living through. The country’s resources are placed at the disposal of the foreign power that regulates its trade and foreign relations.
You ask a very important question, however, and it is necessarily a corollary to the original. To wit: If Puerto Ricans are allowed to vote in the Presidential elections, then Americans should be allowed to vote in Puerto Rican gubernatorial elections.
The question, luckily, has no legal, constitutional, political or historical foundation to rest on. I say luckily because it again would bring Puerto Rico that much closer to statehood which means the death of our nation and our people.
the reality is Puerto Rico is a colony
You can, but you have to be a resident of a state and register as a voter in that state. You can’t in Puerto Rico because Puerto Rico is a foreign country. It is not a state, it has no real representation in the U.S. Congress and even less so with current Romero as a non-voting delegate there. It also has no electoral representation in the Electoral College.
The reality is Puerto Rico is a colony.
please elaborate
How, specifically, does this comparison stand?
RE: the reality is Puerto Rico is a colony
We agree. Puerto Rico is a colony.
We agree. Puerto Rico is not a state.
But Puerto Rico is not a “foreign country” to the US – at least, not now, while Puerto Ricans remain US citizens.
Anyway, I guess the near two million Puerto Ricans who believe in statehood will have to move up north and establish the Cuchifrito State somewhere around the Mississippi river.
RE: “Gringo” can’t vote in PR.
I’m perplexed by your declaration that the question “has no legal, constitutional, political, or historical foundation to rest on”. Taxation without representation certainly does have an historical foundation. And immigrant residents to Puerto Rico do pay Puerto Rican taxes. I think this is a very valid question. If the principle is applied in one direction it should be aknowledged conversely as well.
Additionally, the term “gringo” is at the very least slightly derrogatory and unsuitable for an objective discussion of this issue. Is a Spanish-speaking person raised on the island, deeply involved in Puerto Rican society and culture, but who’s parents may be more in the “gringo transplant” category, somehow less Puerto Rican than a child of Puerto Rican parents, born and raised in the US, who doesn’t speak Spanish and doesn’t participate in Puerto Rican society?
If we argue that Puerto Rico is a nation with a right to be sovriegn and independent, doesn’t this imply that Puerto Rico should behave as other independent states do, and allow immigrant residents to qualify to be citizens of the nation? I don’t see this aspect of the voting question as bringing “Puerto Rico that much closer to statehood”. Puerto Ricans can vote for the President when they reside in the US, and this is the true corallary. If Puerto Rico becomes independent would you still advocate denying voting rights to immigrants on the island, or just to “gringo transplants”, or what?
RE: RE: “Gringo” can not
What are the conditions under which people vote in Puerto Rico? This probably will explain why you can or can’t vote. Should you wish to appeal or amend whatever rules or conditions exist that may exclude you and other non-Puerto Ricans, then that’s your prerogative–seeing that Puerto Rico is under the governance of the United States. I believe, however, that if one is willing or if an American is willing to become a Puerto Rican citizen, then he or she should be allowed to vote after taking an oath of allegiance to Puerto Rico and renouncing his or her American citizenship. Being an American citizen by itself should definitely not entitle anyone to participate in the Puerto Rican electorate.
RE: RE: RE: “Gringo” can not
As a resident/homeowner, and taxpaying citizen of Puerto Rico, I should be able to vote for those who represent me.
RE: RE: RE: RE: “Gringo” can not
i agree with k smit that we need to review the codes, laws and regulations involved in this. you are free to express any sentiment, the reality is that you are a foreigner living in a foreign country however much you want to think that you or your country (u.s.a) owns Puerto Rico. if you owned property in france or germany, would that entitle you to vote there? i wonder —
again, we need to know the codes involved in voting to determine what is going on. but this isn’t really the discussion. unless you would like a topic like this. if the administrator doesn’t mind, i would like to ask that a new topic be posted: should americans and other foreigners or non-Puerto Ricans living on island be allowed to vote in Puerto Rican elections?
RE: RE: “Gringo” can
Firstly, I did not mean to offend by recycling the word “gringo.” Freedom, the name of the person who posted the statement I responded to, used it in refering to himself or herself.
Secondly, taxation without representation may have a foundation but its application must be defined and circumscribed. The large foreign corporations operating in the U.S. do not vote in our elections although they arguably have representation through their campaign donations and lobbying efforts. This, I may add, already exists in Puerto Rico–not perhaps as evidently for the small home or hacienda owner but certainly for American businesses and military.
Thirdly, I stated in my prior posting to which you responded, and therefore I agree with you, that the question is valid. I didn’t use the same words but I did think it was worth addressing and looking into.
Lastly, you hit the nail right on the head when you state that if Puerto Rico were independent, then this island nation could establish its codes of naturalization that would allow those not of Puerto Rican heritage to become citizens and, thereby, become eligible to vote. I emphasize the word “if” because, as we well know, Puerto Rico is not an independent nation. It is a colony of the United States and, therefore, elections by virtue of this condition–even among Puerto Ricans on the island and in the U.S.–becomes problematical.
My intention was not to “exclude” anyone who has Puerto Rico in his or her heart and who honestly wishes the best for the country and the culture–which for me means independence. Then, we could speak of Puerto Rico entering the family of nations and participating fully as a member. Then we would be able to speak of voting rights and Puerto Rican citizenship. To speak of this before hand is ludicrous, and actually can not appear and be anything short of once more manipulating the Puerto Rican electorate with non-Puerto Rican votes.
Are you a Puerto Rican or American citizen first?
Are you a Puerto Rican citizen or an American citizen? Where do you place your allegiance? If Puerto Rico went to war against the United States, which army would you or your sons fight in? This is at the crux of the voting issue–not how much property you have or how much tax you pay.
RE: RE: RE: “Gringo” can not
I am been quitely reading the forum for a coule of weeks, putting my thoughts togehter for a response to you, and those opposed to statehood, the right to vote in presidnetial elections, the placiebo, etc.
I am a Nuyorican, born and raised in New York City of first generation Puerto Rican parents. I have lived here all my life, and until two years ago, could care less about Puerto Rico, and thought of the Island only as a place to visit distant family.
In 1997 I was given the opportunity, through my company to work and live in Puerto Rico for year. How excited I was! I did not expect to learn and become so passionate about the issues that have surrounded “the freedom” of Puerto Rico.
I agree 100% with all of you brothers and sisters out there that would like to see freedom as I have known as an American, be transffred to the Island. However, I as an Amercian first, cannot make that decsions. It should not be assumed thta because you are of Puerto Rican, you are a “nationalist” for Puerto Rico.
The question of statehood vs. independence must be answered by residnets who are from the Island. They all must be touched deeply that do not want to live in virtual slavery as they have for the last 100 years. How do you send your child off to shed blood in the name of freedom for the United Stated, but have no say in the choice of Commander in Chief? Having had that privlige all my adult life, I cannot phathom it! How can the military continue to test in viques, yet Puerto Rican residents have not say in the US Congress, NO VOTE?
My thoughts continued..
First, I am typing to fast.. so please excuse the mistakes..LOL..
Anyway, I am really tired of Nuyoricans advocating for something that they cannot change. If I lived in Puerto Rico, I would fight for independence, statehood whatever, but would not stay in limbo. This is clearly what the Puerto Rican people want. They have choices. They choose to continue this commonwealth crap. Why? They want the best of both worlds, and quite frankly who wouldn’t. Lets be real. They pay no federal income tax, and large companies recieve tax breaks in Puerto Rico. If independence were to be pursued, what would happen to the Puerto Rican economy with a US pullout. Miserable poverty, and civil war. Why? Puerto Rico and Puerto Ricans, though capable of independence, are not ready. Simple. They are not ready economically or socially for such a change. It’s like a co-dependent, needy relationship on both sides. Please, instead of bad mouthing the United States, the past, etc, make a choice. BE brave. We are a brave, exciting people, but we are scared of the consequences if we relequish ties with the United States.
Having lived in PR, I talked to many natives, who are simply torn. They don’t want to loose the social gains they have by being part of the United States, such as welfare and tax breaks. However, they want to have their own identiy, their own political parties, their own nation. But you can’t have the best of both worlds. As the 13 colonies did in 1776, there is a time to buck colonalism, take a stand and fight, by any means necessary. Is Puerto Rico ready for that? Will they ever ratify a decleration of independence and send it to the White House? If you want total freedom, with no interference, that’s what it’s going to take. You all know that! are you ready?
“Gringo” Transplants
The question is not whether Puerto Rican’s should allow “gringo” transplants to vote or not. The question is whether Puerto Rico, like every independent nation, should be allowed to control their own borders (which under the colonial status they do not). There are many sovereign nations (a lot of them wealthy “first world” European as well as the US) who are currently grappling with the question of immigration. Puerto Rico, which is, yes, still a colony, and is, yes, still quite poor, doesn’t even have the liberty of controlling its borders or its economy, nor the “liberty” or control to deal with the question of being over run by “transplants” who through wealth and privilege are now choosing to dictate the future of the captive nation.
It’s really not a question of whether Puerto Rican’s should be able to vote for a US president, it’s a question of whether or not one day Puerto Rican’s will be “allowed” to vote for a Puerto Rican president.