Talk:Luis Fortuño/Archives/2010/June

Commonwealth info in opening paragraph

I feel as though all of the info explaining PR's status as a commonwealth isn't particularly relevant to the article, and if it is, it doesn't belong in the opening paragraph. Thoughts? --Kevin W. 02:51, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

It very much does belong in the opening paragraph, because PR has a unique status within the federal Union, and the Governor's role is also unique. More to the point, saying that PR is an "unincorporated territory" is simply completely, totally inaccurate and minimizes the importance and status of the role of the PR governor, the PR government and its unique status within the Federal Union and its place under the US Federal Constitution. PR is a self governing, incorporated and constitutional Commonwealth territory. It is by no reasonable political definition an "unincorporated" anything. As an example, American Samoa is an unincorporated, federally administered territory and even they have a governor. However, PR has a complete, autonomous, constitutional government with separated powers and branches of government that possesses the same essential (but not identical) structure as any constitutionally established federal state in the Union of the United States. It is more incorporated than the District of Columbia, which, although it finally got some semblance of home rule in the 1970's, is still subject to the whims of the US Congress, which can overrule anything that the DC Mayor and City Government does. Congress does not have that authority over the government of PR. PR has Commonwealth status in the US. Citizens of PR do not pay federal income tax, for instance, but they are full citizens of the United States, just as any citizen of any of the 50 states or the DC (with the possible exception of being eligible to run for US President - I need to look that one up). PR is a unique and completely formed self governing commonwealth territory within and under the Federal Constitution of the United States. It has different rules and status than any other entity in the Federal Union. Another good example is that the Resident Commissioner of PR (their non-voting member of Congress) is the only member of the House of Representatives who serves a four-year term instead of a two year term. This is another example of how the PR government is a unique entity. Among the US Territories, including the CNMI (which politically speaking is the closest territory to PR), only PR has these unique exceptions. To say PR is "unincorporated" means that all 50 states and DC are also equally "unincorporated". What makes PR politically unique is its status within the Federal Union. It is essentially neither fish (a state) nor fowl (an independent nation). Not coincidentally, one of PR's main domestic political issues is its status. As a Commonwealth they essentially get all the benefits of being in the US Federal System without many of the obligations (federal income taxes, excise taxes, etc.). There have been two main groups in the debate - those who believe that PR should be a full state, and those who believe that PR is a US colonial possession and is being oppressed by the US and think PR should be an independent nation (this second group were behind the terrorist attacks, and the attempted assassination of President Truman, in the 1950's). PR is a Commonwealth Territory of the United States. It is not an unincorporated territory - it is a fully incorporated, fully politically vested self governing Commonwealth Territory and a part of the United States under the US Federal Constitution. It is not "unincorporated" by any reasonable definition of the word. Themoodyblue (talk) 20:43, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

When none other than the committee of jurisdiction the United States House of Representatives assumes a position contrary to yours, see: [1], your position clearly cannot be considered a "consensus" position.

Whether you like it or not, Puerto Rico is consided an unincorporated territory of the United States, has been for 111 years, and its political status has remained the same since 1898. A majority of Puerto Ricans want to change that, but until that happens, we are what we are.

This issue has been discussed ad nauseaum in several different wikipedia pages relating to Puerto Rico and, trust me, the consensus reached throughout does not support the language you had inserted in this article.

Puerto Rico has no autonomy that a state doesn't have. The alleged "fiscal autonomy" is turned on and off by Congress at its whim, for example, when it blew Sec. 936 out of the water in 1995, or when it takes its time to renew the rum tax carry over, now scheduled to expire in December. Pr4ever (talk) 03:16, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, well since you clearly know more than every one else on this site combined, then go ahead. It is arrogant jackasses such as yourself that make wikipedia get slammed as the domain of no nothing idiots, which is far from true. The 1/10th of 1 percent of the people on this site are like you, and your arrogance and complete insecurity in even possibly being wrong is what makes the other 99.9% of the people on wikipedia, who are trying to provide accurate information, look like you to outside observers. You are a complete waste of time and effort and I am not wasting anymore time dealing with you and your complete ignorance of your subject nor your arrogance of personality. Go away. Themoodyblue (talk) 03:46, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Watch it Themoodyblue. The issue has been abundantly addressed, and it doesn't belong on this page. Make yourself comfortable with Wikipedia:No personal attacks before posting on Wikipedia again. --Jmundo (talk) 04:42, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Commonwealth definition: The definition of Estado Libre Asociado deserves more explanation. Many people believe in this political status and the unincorporated territory definition only reflects the point of view of the people that believe in the statehood. Pr4ever believes in the statehood , I respect his ideas but when Luis Munoz Marin created the commonwealth or ELA , the goal was a alternative political status and the president Truman had aproved this new political status. This political status will be developed in the future but he began this alternative political status. This article can't reflect only the point of view of the people that believe in the statehood. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rtorre222 (talk • contribs) 19:13, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

First paragraph cleanup

I have simplified the first paragraph, removing superfluous POV content, as well as the clearly incorrect statement that the NPP is closely aligned to the GOP.

First of all, the NPP is not aligned to any national party. While two of the Governors it has elected, Ferré and Fortuño, are Republicans, two of the Governors it has elected, Romero and Rosselló, are Democrats. Fortuño's running mate, Pedro Pierluisi, as well as the person he appointed as his first in line of succession, Secretary of State Kenneth McClintock, are Democrats! The excised statement was totally incorrect.

Second, consensus within multiple Puerto Rico-related articles in Wikipedia is that the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico is a territory of the United States. Several of the excised statements are totally incorrect. Unincorporated territories DO have governors (Guam and the USVI, for example), and Puerto Rico is not the only non-state Commonwealth in the US (do not forget the CNMI).

Before trying to reinsert extraneous or superfluous material in the first graph, editors should seek consensus through a discussion in this page! Pr4ever (talk) 03:44, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for answering my concerns. --Kevin W. 05:11, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

- Pr4ever and Kevin, the territories that you name do have governors, but none are autonomous, as PR is, especially the USVI, Guam or Saipan. The structure of the CNMI is similar, but they do not possess the same status as PR does, and cannot independently establish a referendum on their future status, as PR can. That is one reason that PR's status in the union continues to be a controversy between independence and statehood. No other US territory has the autonomy for the statehood v. independence issue to be an issue, nor can any other territory vote, essentially for either full union or seccesion should their fully autonomous government choose to put the issue to a vote. If that were to happen, the Federal Government of the United States would have no say about it what so ever. Only PR has the autonomous authority to have a referendum on the issue that would have any binding credence. That autonomy is what makes PR a unique political entity with the US Union, and the governor's role a unique one.

While I agree that consensus is important, you pronouncing that we do or do not have one is simply not authoritative. Also, there is something else that is just as important as consensus - accuracy. What you are claiming to be the "facts" is simply inaccurate. Please do your political science homework and research and find out what the facts are before you go gutting someone else's contribution. Any consensus must be one that agrees on the accurate facts. With all due respect, your opinion does not constitute a consensus simply because you say so. Themoodyblue (talk) 14:16, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Pr4ever is talking about consensus in the Puerto Rican related articles. Fact: the territorial clause gives the United States Congress the final power over every territory of the United States. Fact: U.S. Congress allowed Puerto Rico to draft its own Constitution which was approved and modified by the US Congress. More facts and external sources can be found at Political status of Puerto Rico or Puerto Rico where this discussion belong. --Jmundo (talk) 05:12, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Nine months after the previous discussion, an anonymous contributor started messing again with this first paragraph. It is not a matter of what statehooders think. While it is a fact that "Commonwealth of PR" is the name of the body politic, "commonwealth" is not the name of the political relationship. KY, VA, PA & MA are also "Commonwealths" but they are states in a legal sense. The Northern Marianas Islands are also called a "Commonwealth" but they, as PR, are an unincorporated territory. That is not a statehooder's opinion, but the opinion of the House Committee on Resources, and the US Justice Department under Bush I, Clinton, Bush II and Obama administrations. Pr4ever (talk) 03:15, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

The chief of state of Canada is the Queen Elizabeth , Canada is a commonwealth and it isn't a territory of United Kingdom. The status of Puerto Rico is object of debate, but Harry Truman , the congress of 1952 , the United Nations in 1952 , and the people of Puerto Rico decided that the Commowealth of Puerto Rico isn't a colony of United States. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.169.147.83 (talk) 21:01, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

While I fully agree that references to Puerto Rico's political status are unnecessary in this paragraph and therefore fully support the most recent, and wise, edit, I would like to clarify the comment that precedes this one. Luis Muñoz Marín stated in Congress that the 1950-52 constitutional drafting/approval process did not constitute a change in the status or relationship. Thus, the Insular Cases, as the Justice Department under every president for almost a quarter century, and the relevant congressional committees have stated unanimously. BTW, I would suggest you register and sign your comments. Pr4ever (talk) 22:03, 5 June 2010 (UTC)