Honestly how much does that mean when they lack representatives / are unable to vote, and do not get full protection of US constitution (as per Wikipedia)? Sounds like citizens in name only…
It is. But enough of them still think that going full statehood brings other evils and they’re content with the sublevel of protection they have. And that is their right, we shouldn’t force it on anyone who doesn’t want it.
Some of the votes were problematic because of boycotts, turnouts, and how the ballots were phrased or what they offered to vote on. I don’t know what would be best for them, but that’s also why I only think the offer should always be on the table and let them decide.
A big part of the issue that is also affecting other states is mentioned in that article, the capping of the House numbers. We do not have proper representation in numbers that can handle the population (and that doesn’t even get into gerrymandering).
Some of the votes were problematic because of boycotts, turnouts, and how the ballots were phrased or what they offered to vote on. I don’t know what would be best for them, but that’s also why I only think the offer should always be on the table and let them decide.
meh, you can use the same excuses every time they have an election to avoid doing anything.
They are a state. They are not one of the states in the union. Americans forget state is just a government of a territory. The united states is just a special group of them that decided to work together.
That’s a colony owned by the US but arguably not a part of the united states proper since PR isn’t a state
They’re all still american citizens (for now) so I’d say it counts.
Honestly how much does that mean when they lack representatives / are unable to vote, and do not get full protection of US constitution (as per Wikipedia)? Sounds like citizens in name only…
Doesn’t your logic also throw out anyone living in Washington, D.C.?
Yes, and that’s also a significant problem and should be illegal.
Taxation without representation is a very american thing.
I mean, is it though? Seems like there are a whole lot of such countries… at the very least, every country which isn’t some sort of democracy.
It is. But enough of them still think that going full statehood brings other evils and they’re content with the sublevel of protection they have. And that is their right, we shouldn’t force it on anyone who doesn’t want it.
Didn’t their last vote on it get 57% for statehood? I think it just wasn’t approved by Congress
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puerto_Rico_statehood_movement
Some of the votes were problematic because of boycotts, turnouts, and how the ballots were phrased or what they offered to vote on. I don’t know what would be best for them, but that’s also why I only think the offer should always be on the table and let them decide.
A big part of the issue that is also affecting other states is mentioned in that article, the capping of the House numbers. We do not have proper representation in numbers that can handle the population (and that doesn’t even get into gerrymandering).
meh, you can use the same excuses every time they have an election to avoid doing anything.
Words cannot express how much I hate the cap on House reps XD
Are you also prepared to argue the same about Native American reservations or other territories? I feel like that kind of othering is dangerous.
You think a pizza cutter like that even thought through what they were saying?
I think in this situation it’s probably a good thing to not be counted as part of the US, so yeah, I’d
absolveother them too.They are a state. They are not one of the states in the union. Americans forget state is just a government of a territory. The united states is just a special group of them that decided to work together.