“Es importante que se enmiende para que el mismo vaya directo a solicitar un Acta de Admisión”

Cuando el Congreso decide concederle la estadidad a un territorio, oficializa ese proceso mediante un Acta de Admisión. En la misma, se establecen las condiciones bajo las cuales ese territorio se convertiría en estado. Una vez aprobada el Acta por el Congreso, se les pide a los ciudadanos del territorio que confirmen su deseo de ser admitidos como estado bajo las condiciones estipuladas.

La historia ha demostrado que el tibio apoyo que pudiera haber recibido la estadidad en votaciones anteriores, una vez aprobada el Acta de Admisión, se transforma en un sólido respaldo a la misma.  Tan es así, que en todos los casos en los que a los ciudadanos de territorios se les ha ofrecido un Acta de Admisión con condiciones favorables siempre la han aprobado.

Todo esto sugiere que, a base del triunfo de la estadidad en el plebiscito celebrado el 6 de noviembre de 2012, se debió haber sometido un proyecto dirigido a aprobar un Acta de Admisión para la Isla. El Acta contendría, entre otras, algunas de las condiciones que ya estipula el proyecto (H.R. 2000) radicado por el comisionado residente, Pedro Pierluisi, como, por ejemplo, un período de transición previo al pago completo de impuestos federales, la ciudadanía americana protegida por la Constitución y preservar la jurisdicción local sobre los asuntos que la Constitución no le delega al Gobierno federal. Estos últimos incluyen el idioma, la cultura, los deportes y demás asuntos sobre los cuales se eliminaría la incertidumbre que le da base a los opositores de la estadidad a mentir sobre la misma.

Lamentablemente, el comisionado residente Pierluisi, en lugar de solicitar un Acta de Admisión para Puerto Rico, solicitó la celebración de otro plebiscito para ratificar el deseo de la mayoría de los puertorriqueños de solicitar la estadidad. Solamente si el Pueblo ratifica ese deseo, entonces se ordena al presidente de Estados Unidos a someter un Acta de Admisión para la Isla.

Esa acción del comisionado residente Pierluisi es un error por dos razones principales: (1)  porque indirectamente invalida los resultados de la segunda pregunta del pasado plebiscito; y (2) porque pone a competir la estadidad por sí sola manteniendo inalteradas las bases sobre las cuales se escudan sus detractores para mentir.

Ante esa realidad, es importante que el proyecto se enmiende para que el mismo vaya directo a solicitar un Acta de Admisión. Sin embargo, aun si eso no ocurriera y el proyecto se aprobara tal como fue radicado, el Pueblo debe de estar listo para votar a favor de la estadidad. Tenemos que ser conscientes de que, con el triunfo del ‘No’ en el plebiscito de noviembre, el Pueblo descartó la condición colonial, incluyendo cualquier opción del mal llamado ‘ELA mejorado’ dentro de la cláusula territorial. Por lo tanto, si se rechaza la estadidad, la única alternativa que nos quedaría sería la independencia.

*************************

Statehood is the full implementation of the Constitution of the United States of America, guaranteeing full rights of American citizens, residents of Puerto Rico. For critics of statehood, this is a mechanism to keep creating more for the country, where 30% of our GDP comes from federal grants and social security. They are totally wrong, this is about claiming our rights as American citizens and values, not federal aid. Under the current system-colonial territorial denied Puerto Ricans the two major powers in sovereignty: (1) the power to choose their leaders, and not under this system we can choose our representatives in Congress, only Resident Commissioner to a voice but no vote in Congress, and (2) our statutory power, is sheltered by a Congress that sympathize most with the needs of Puerto Rico. We can not vote for president and vice-president of the nation, which send many Puerto Ricans to war and there is the abundant pride in Borinqueneers or 65 infantry, for example. Moreover, our country is not respected one of the basic foundations of sovereignty, our territory, and we are subject to the territorial clause of the U.S. Constitution, which provides Congress the power to determine which parts of the Constitution of the United States are valid in the territories under the Treaty of Paris, as we are on this status, a territory, a colony.

Statehood, like free association and independence, are non-territorial options, very decent too. But put a true end to the permanent union with the United States or leave in limbo and it would not be fair to the 3.5 million American citizens in Puerto Rico, that by supporting the permanent union with the United States in a non-territorial true. Under the law 600 of the Congress in 1950, to Puerto Rico was given the power to write their own constitution (by the way, Congress amended it many times) and it was to be established or developed in Puerto Rico in the status issue, only to Puerto Rico gave him the power to create a constitution, the ELA is just the name given to a constitution. Moreover, the organic laws still apply, hence we maintain our citizenship

American currently under the Jones Act and again the territorial clause remains in place, which also dictates that, «We are, but we are not part of the United States», as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States in the Insular cases, Balzac vs. Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico vs. Downes enter others. These are few reasons why Puerto Rico is a colony and could remain so, so for statesmen, statehood is the most reasonable mechanism, uniform and equitable for the 3.7 million American citizens on the island. Under statehood, would have to elect our mayors, our governor of any of the two major parties in the nation, and / or other minority party than exist in the United States. But because of the opponents of statehood, are barely mentioned. And under the sovereign state that we would, we would have a camera, a senate and would continue under a republican system of three branches, judicial, legislative and executive, which would eradicate the contradictions of the Foraker Act, Jones and 600, and would give the state the power whole of its territory, without congressional intervention. But what would change and it would be more equitable, not only for the economic welfare, if not for the rights of American citizens devoted to fellow brothers, would be $ 20 billion would receive federal treasury every January. All this for the delivery of brothers patriots who have given their lives for the American flag. And finally, we have to choose five representatives to the federal chamber and 2 senators federal senate, as dictated by the constitution of America. And so says the constitution in Article 14, Section 1, that no state is more powerful than another and that the number of representatives in the chamber is chosen depending on the population density of the state. However, the reality is that if Puerto Rico enters the union, the states of California and Texas lost 5 seats in the chamber between federal and detractors that say statehood statehood never give us.

This is the reality, it now remains that the United States be made a question, Do you want to Become a multinational states?, That is the question. But if you started with Alaska and Hawaii for over 50 years, strengthening the American dream overseas and basing on the legal spirit of the Northwest Ordinance, do not come with the story that we dream and fight for statehood because only we need to take another step as Puerto Ricans to join the national vanguard. So the desired state will be 51 and weequal rights with fellow brothers living on the continent of North America. This is simple, that Congress endorses a plebiscite, to run in the country and this life is going to determine the future of Puerto Rico. And in case Congress does not endorse the decision of the people, the people have the power to amend the constitution, and awarded the same rights as a state and choose their congressmen, this is known as the Tennessee Plan, which is a mechanism pressure used by the citizens of that state in 1796 to force the authorities to include them as a state. After six additional territories followed the same strategy in the absence of congressional action: Michigan, Iowa, Kansas, California, Oregon and Alaska. These were territories, tired of seeing that Congress did not act, they chose to act themselves. It is a strategy that leads to 7-7. But for this there should be a mandate from the people and this should be clear. This is the view from statesmen clear arguments and opinions are legitimate