Deroy Murdock’s piece on the free-market reforms of Puerto Rico’s governor Luis Fortuno is certainly encouraging. As NRO’s resident independentista, I hope that a prosperous Puerto Rico makes statehood less appealing; the cry of “La estadidad es para los pobres!” (“statehood for the poor,” i.e., continued access to U.S. welfare payments) becomes less salient if the economy is doing well there.
But Murdock refers to Fortuno as a Republican, and that’s an interesting point. It’s correct in that he’s a member of the Republican National Committee, but he’s also president of the Partido Nuevo Progresista de Puerto Rico (PNP), the pro-statehood party. Fair enough — apparently that’s what the GOP is called in Puerto Rico, like the DFL in Minnesota, right? Wrong. Two of Fortuno’s three predecessors as governor from that same party called themselves Democrats. Okay, well maybe the alignment changed, and the PNP switched its allegiance to the Republicans. Wrong again. Puerto Rico’s current pseudo-congressman, Pedro Pierluisi, who was Fortuno’s running mate in 2008 and successor as pseudo-congressman in Washington, belongs to the Democratic caucus in the House of Representatives, serving as a minority-party member on the Judiciary, Ethics, and Natural Resources committees. He can only vote in committee, but his voting record there has earned him a 100 percent rating from Defenders of Wildlife, the Teamsters, and the National Latino Congreso (joining in that last distinction with John Kerry and Dennis Kucinich), an 80 percent from the pro-homosexual Human Rights Campaign, and an F from Liberty Central (most other conservative groups don’t seem to rank the pseudo-congressmen). Remember, this is “Republican” Fortuno’s running mate.
When Fortuno was the pseudo-congressman, he actually had a reasonably conservative voting record, but that just underlines the cynical nature of such political ambidexterity. Puerto Ricans are right to love their country and take pride in it, but the U.S. Congress is the legislature of a foreign country and participation there by representatives of a different people is bound to be an exercise in opportunism, rather than part of the deliberation of We the (American) People.
This game of “you be the Democrat and I’ll be the Republican” reminds me of the Fanjul brothers, Cuban-born sugar magnates in Florida; Alfonso was state co-chairman for Bill Clinton’s campaign while brother Jose was a member of Bob Dole’s campaign finance committee. Similarly, I always thought that the Manhattan Institute benefited from having both immigration expansionist Tamar Jacoby and immigration skeptic Heather Mac Donald on staff; Tamar and Heather are sincere in their beliefs, but while they were both there (Tamar has since left and started her own lobbying group), their fundraising people could direct potential donors concerned about immigration to whichever writer was suitable to their views.
"pro-homosexual"? is it your understand that the republican party is "anti-homosexual"?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseForeign legislature? They're all citizens. And more ethnic Puerto Ricans live in the US mainland than in Puerto Rico.
I don't get what the problem is with having people of a different cultural background be US citizens. How is it different from the Cajuns, or the Amish, or all the Italian and Irish immigrants? Or the mass of German-speakers who basically invaded the Midwest?
Aside from predominantly speaking Spanish, is their culture all that substantively different from the culture of, say, Chinese-descended Americans?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis is a clear example of people who have no idea of the Puerto Rican relationship with the US and insist on commenting on a simple, unsupported article about our politics. Parties in PR are not aligned with either the Democratic nor the Republican. We, also the American people, are protected by the First Amendment, and freedom of speech allows us to choose which collectivity represents our interests best within the US. However, political parties in PR are mainly driven by the territorial status they represent: statehood, independence or the status quo.
Before attacking our voices in Congress, and insinuating we don't have a right to speak at a "foreign" legislature, remember (better yet, learn) that Puerto Ricans are also US Citizens. There's a reason we have a "pseudo" Congressman in "your" House.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCenter for Puerto Rico Equality & Advancement President response to the miss informed claims of Mark Krikorian
Mark Krikorian demonstrated that he doesn't understand Puerto Rico in his Nov. 21 blog post "Playing Both Sides". Its focus was an incorrect presumption that leaders of the territory's statehood party are conspiring to have some members become Republicans and others Democrats to cover both sides in the islands' national government (the U.S. Government).
The simple truth that escaped him is that citizens in the territory who want equally rights and responsibilities in the United States self-identify with the Republican or Democratic Parties out of conviction, just as citizens in the States and the District of Columbia do.
His misunderstanding was surprising since he recognized that Governor Luis Fortuño is a Member of the Republican National Committee who had a "conservative voting record" while in Congress and has pushed through "free market reforms" as governor.
In addition, Fortuño is just one of the Puerto Rico statehood party leaders who have been active Republicans in national politics. Other prominent Puerto Rico Republicans include House Speaker Jenniffer Gonzalez, Senate President Thomas Rivera Schatz, San Juan Mayor Jorge Santini, and many other territorial legislators and mayors.
An admitted advocate of independence for Puerto Rico, Krikorian views (really, misunderstands) Puerto Ricans as "foreign." But, in fact, Puerto Ricans have been U.S. citizens since 1917 with an outstanding record of service in the U.S. military since then and live in islands that have been U.S. territory since 1898. They are just as American as other U.S. citizens -- and more people of Puerto Rican origin now are citizens of States than of the territory. Further, very few people in Puerto Rico want the independence Krikorian wants for the islands.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePuerto Rican statehooders "love their country and take pride in it," as Krikorian wrote, but their country is the United States. Their affection for the islands does not detract from their national loyalty any more than the devotion of a Texan to Texas does.
Center for Puerto Rico Equality & Advancement President response to the misinformed claims of Mark Krikorian
Mark Krikorian demonstrated that he doesn't understand Puerto Rico in his Nov. 21 blog post "Playing Both Sides". Its focus was an incorrect presumption that leaders of the territory's statehood party are conspiring to have some members become Republicans and others Democrats to cover both sides in the islands' national government (the U.S. Government).
The simple truth that escaped him is that citizens in the territory who want equally rights and responsibilities in the United States self-identify with the Republican or Democratic Parties out of conviction, just as citizens in the States and the District of Columbia do.
His misunderstanding was surprising since he recognized that Governor Luis Fortuño is a Member of the Republican National Committee who had a "conservative voting record" while in Congress and has pushed through "free market reforms" as governor.
In addition, Fortuño is just one of the Puerto Rico statehood party leaders who have been active Republicans in national politics. Other prominent Puerto Rico Republicans include House Speaker Jenniffer Gonzalez, Senate President Thomas Rivera Schatz, San Juan Mayor Jorge Santini, and many other territorial legislators and mayors.
An admitted advocate of independence for Puerto Rico, Krikorian views (really, misunderstands) Puerto Ricans as "foreign." But, in fact, Puerto Ricans have been U.S. citizens since 1917 with an outstanding record of service in the U.S. military since then and live in islands that have been U.S. territory since 1898. They are just as American as other U.S. citizens -- and more people of Puerto Rican origin now are citizens of States than of the territory. Further, very few people in Puerto Rico want the independence Krikorian wants for the islands.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePuerto Rican statehooders "love their country and take pride in it," as Krikorian wrote, but their country is the United States. Their affection for the islands does not detract from their national loyalty any more than the devotion of a Texan to Texas does.
Low self esteemed Fearful colonialists will kiss whichever rear end their masters show them. That is the nature of PR politics.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFurther; unlike Cajuns, or germans, chinese immigrants, even Hawaiians, a 100 years since invasion PR still enjoys a separate culture and language. We are, by large, a brown skinned people, practically indistinguishable from those who cross the southern border. Thus, our presence in this country is abhorred as much as any other latino of a certain pigmentation.
Live within the entrails of the beast, and you shall see the truth...