Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ManyMoose who wrote (26048)	2/13/2008 2:54:16 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

One thing is certain, Mrs. Rodham Clinton is educated in the law, so as she has repeatedly broken various laws it was obviously intentional rather than due to ignorance.

To: ManyMoose who wrote (26048)	2/29/2008 11:18:47 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Promises, Promises By CHRISTINA DUFFY BURNETT March 1, 2008 He's not a household name, but Puerto Rico Gov. Anibal Acevedo-Vilá has become an important man in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. Barack Obama recently courted the governor with a letter announcing his support for Puerto Rican "self-determination" -- an indication that the senator from Illinois favors putting the decision of whether Puerto Rico should become the 51st state into the hands of Puerto Rican voters. Hillary Clinton is sounding similar notes. Why would candidates in a fight for their party's presidential nomination weigh in on the status of Puerto Rico? Because the island will send 63 delegates to the Democratic National Convention this summer. That's more delegates than 25 of the 50 states. (The island will also send delegates to the Republican convention.) In a tight race, a planeload of folks from San Juan could determine who the Democrats nominate. And with Puerto Rico's caucus scheduled for June 1, the candidates are trying to lock up support on the island now. But how is it that Puerto Rico -- a U.S. territory home to four million U.S. citizens -- can send delegates to the parties' conventions, but can't participate when it comes time to electing a president in November? It is perverse, but constitutional: The Constitution gives presidential electors to the states (and, via the 23rd Amendment, the District of Columbia), but not to U.S. territories. Yet it does not prohibit political parties from allocating delegates however they choose. The Democratic and Republican parties have long allowed Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and (until it was returned to Panama) the Canal Zone to send delegates to their respective conventions. But in 1974 Democrats revised their party's charter and in the process a savvy group of Puerto Ricans slipped in a provision stating that the island would thereafter be treated "as a state" at the party's conventions. Presto. Puerto Rico's delegation ballooned in size and importance. Ever since, presidential hopefuls have weighed in on whether Puerto Rico should be a state, remain a "commonwealth," or become an independent nation. But as soon as the party's nomination is clinched, Puerto Rico's concerns have receded into the background. That is because no one in Washington (except for a nonvoting "resident commissioner") answers to Puerto Rican voters. This time around, Mr. Acevedo-Vilá, who leads the island's pro-commonwealth Popular Democratic Party, has been won over by Mr. Obama's letter and now supports him. But the governor is not the only Democratic powerhouse on the island. Pedro Rosselló, a former governor who favors statehood, once served as chairman of the Democratic Governors' Association. Word has it that Mrs. Clinton's supporters are now pressuring him to mobilize his troops for her. Neither candidate has held a rally on the island, although both have raised money there. Mr. Obama flew to San Juan last fall for a fundraiser and a brief meeting with the governor. Mrs. Clinton visited the island twice as first lady, but not as a presidential candidate. As the nominating contest drags on, it is becoming increasingly likely that both candidates will make time for a Caribbean tour in the late spring. If they do, they'll find, upon arrival, a bitter debate over Puerto Rico's status. Bitter because a people divided over something as fundamental as political identity and destiny will be divided on nearly everything else as well. To make matters worse, political uncertainty has hobbled economic development on the island. No matter where the candidates go on the island, they'll be confronted by the realities of Puerto Rico's political status. In my view, the best way forward for Puerto Rico lies in statehood and the full voting rights that would bring. Others put their trust in "enhanced" commonwealth status, which would give the island greater autonomy. Still others (though far fewer) would rather see Puerto Rico strike out on its own. But nothing will change as long as mainland politicians offer little more than platitudes about self-determination. Talk is cheap, especially if you're a politician talking to people who, in the end, can't vote against you -- or for you, for that matter. The issue is that "self-determination" means nothing unless the candidates say clearly what they would do to make it a reality once in office. And that must include pushing Congress to allow a vote and spell out the consequence of what a vote would mean. Would independence mean a loss of U.S. citizenship for the island's residents? Would statehood come with a mandate to enact English-only laws? Exactly what powers would Congress be willing to share with a more "autonomous" Puerto Rico? Puerto Rico's suddenly prominent role in the nominating contest offers a unique opportunity for the island. A president who owes his or her nomination to Puerto Rico's delegates is less likely to forget about commitments made during the campaign. So it's up to Puerto Ricans to force the Democratic candidates vying for support to say, boldly and clearly, what steps they intend to take to solve the island's defining political problem. And the question isn't, "Do you support self-determination?" We all know the answer to that question. The question is, "What exactly do you plan to do about it?" A true commitment to the future of Puerto Rico requires action after the election, not just hopeful talk before it. If the next president takes concrete steps to solve Puerto Rico's status, that will be change Puerto Ricans can believe in. Ms. Burnett is an associate professor of law at Columbia University, and co-editor of "Foreign in a Domestic Sense: Puerto Rico, American Expansion, and the Constitution" (Duke University Press, 2001). online.wsj.com