Talk:Political status of Puerto Rico/Archives/2011/October

Elective Governors Act

Application of the U.S. Constitution by the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Courts is an intrinsic part of the Political Status of Puerto Rico. E.g. This has the same importance of the insular cases. The insular cases are related about the application of the constitution to the territories. This act is related to the current power of the Puerto Ricans to elect their Governor and the application of a constitutional clause to Puerto Rico.

"On August 5th, 1947, United States Congress passed the Elective Governors Act, allowing Puerto Ricans to elect their own governor; President Harry Truman signed the act. This act also expressly extends the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the U.S. Constitution to Puerto Rico. The act indicates that the rights, privileges, and immunities of citizens of the United States shall be respected in Puerto Rico to the same extent as though Puerto Rico were a State of the Union and subject to the provisions of paragraph 1 of section 2 of article IV of the Constitution of the United States. This federal law is currently codified on the U.S. Code as 48 U.S.C. § 737."

What is the rational to indicate that the Elective Governors Act of 1947, that is the law that currently allow Puerto Ricans to elect their governors, has nothing to do with the subject of this article?

--Seablade (talk) 02:20, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

The scope and structure of this article strike me as a little confused at the moment, which make it difficult to decide exactly what is relevant or not.

Obviously, the fact that Puerto Rico elects its own governor since the 1940s is relevant to the politics and government of Puerto Rico, and if the article comprises that broad a subject-matter, then the Elective Governor Act is significant.

However, if "political status" is being used here in the sense of the legalistic definitions of "incorporated territory," "Commonwealth"/ELA, and the like, then the Elective Governor Act is not directly relevant (though it still might have a place somewhere in the narrative). There is no direct correlation between having an elective governor and political status. After all, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa have had elective governors for several decades as well, yet they remain unincorporated territories. Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:21, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

In addition to give the power to Puerto Ricans to elect their governors, this act by congress extends the privilege and immunity clause of the U.S. Constitution to Puerto Rico.

In the context of the Insular Cases section of this article to emphasize that the U.S. Constitution applies partially to Puerto Rico; It is not relevant to the reader of an encyclopedia understand that the Congress expressly extend a constitutional clause regarding the rights, privileges, and immunities of citizens of the United States to Puerto Rico? At the same way that the insular cases are part of the current political status of Puerto Rico, this constitutional extension is not part of it? In special, if the Congress has not expressly extend any constitutional clause to the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa. --Seablade (talk) 02:06, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

The fact that the privileges and immunities clause was extended to Puerto Rico is significant, although it doesn't directly relate to the election of the governors, even if they were both included in the same statute. I'd like to check a couple of references on the statute, at the law library, and will return to this in a day or two. Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:12, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Please confirm this:

Congress Public Law Num. 362 of 1947 (Eightieth United States Congress, first section, August 5th, 1947) for Puerto Rico and which states in one of its sections

Pub. L. No. 80-362, 61 Stat. 770 (1947): "Sec. 7. Section 2 of said Organic Act (48 U. S. C., sec. 737) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraph: The rights, privileges, and immunities of citizens of the United States shall be respected in Puerto Rico to the same extent as though Puerto Rico were a State of the Union and subject to the provisions of paragraph 1 of section 2 of article IV of the Constitution of the United States."

Thanks in advance, --Seablade (talk) 02:58, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

If you wish for, you could check one additional thing: Public Law 89-571, 80 Stat. 764, of 1966. (September 12, 1966) See Senate Report 1504 1966 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2786-90 Thanks, --Seablade (talk) 03:40, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Mercy11, The fact that the privileges and immunities clause was extended to Puerto Rico is significant and is directly related to this article. Could you provide the rational to eliminate the sourced information? --Seablade (talk) 03:53, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Seablade,

The long answer is that when a user wants to read about privileges and immunities, he wont look foir that in teh Political Statsu article. For virtually everyone, political status means the sort of stuff that is currently covered in the PS article. If a user was looking for privileges and immunities clause information he will look for it in the Privileges and Immunities, not in a political status article.

The short answer, however, is WP:Due. One way around this, however, is to include a wikilink to P&IC in the PS article under "See Also" section, and I have already done that for you.

Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 13:17, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Recent developments

As part of the recent developments about the Political status of Puerto Rico this information could be included on this article:

Gov. Luis Fortuño set Aug. 12, 2012 to hold the first part of a two-step status plebiscite as well as a referendum through which voters can either approve or reject a proposed legislative reform that will cut down significantly on the number of lawmakers. If a second status vote is required, it will take place on the same day as the general election in November 2012, he added.

The governor said the measure would follow the outlines of the decision by the New Progressive Part--Seablade (talk) 02:49, 7 October 2011 (UTC)y Governing Board, which signed off on a two-stage plebiscite process. The first referendum will ask voters whether they want to maintain the current commonwealth status under the territorial clause of the U.S. Constitution or whether they prefer a nonterritorial option.

If more voters check that nonterritorial option, a second vote would be held giving people three status options: statehood, independence or free association.

Reference: Fortuño calls for status, legislative reform votes on August 12, 2012

Seablade (talk) 07:13, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree that should be there. However, I consider the issue of reducing the number of lawmakers to be irrelevant to this article and shouldn't be added. Also, why is it important to mention any party ("New Progressive Party Governing Board") in this whole thing when the status plebiscites transcends political parties? My name is Mercy11 (talk) 23:08, 6 October 2011 (UTC), and I approve this message.

I just quoted the paragraph directly for the reference article. The recommendation is just include the decolonization process plebiscite of August 2012 that is directly related to this article as part of the recent developments. --Seablade (talk) 02:49, 7 October 2011 (UTC)