![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
An interesting, if under reported result of last night's elections.
Puerto Rico just voted for statehood.
In a 2 part referendum, they voted for a change of status over the status quo (54% to 46%) and Statehood over 'Sovereign Free Association', or Independence (61%, over 33% and 5% respectively.)
Do you think this is likely to come to pass in the next few years? Critics say the referendum's split nature made it "confusing" to the point that it will be unconvincing to congress, but it makes perfect sense to me.
Currently people in Puerto Rico are considered citizens, but they can't vote for presidents, and they have no real voice in Congress. If they were made a state, being between Connecticut and Oklahoma in population, we'd expect them to have 5 seats in the House of Representatives, and 7 electoral votes. If they become a state, what does THAT do to your demographic calculations?
My own thought is that short term self interest will lead the Republicans in congress to hem, haw, delay, and oppose this, because of the obvious political implications. House Democrats ought to support it... both for short term political gain, and because it is in-line with both party, and, I feel, generally American, principles.
But mostly, this is just one more little pebble on the large scale that says "Republican Party, DIVERSIFY OR DIE!"
*** Edit *** 15:13
EST For those interested in the mechanics, and example of the plebiscite is on page 7 of this PDF. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42765.pdf
Puerto Rico just voted for statehood.
In a 2 part referendum, they voted for a change of status over the status quo (54% to 46%) and Statehood over 'Sovereign Free Association', or Independence (61%, over 33% and 5% respectively.)
Do you think this is likely to come to pass in the next few years? Critics say the referendum's split nature made it "confusing" to the point that it will be unconvincing to congress, but it makes perfect sense to me.
Currently people in Puerto Rico are considered citizens, but they can't vote for presidents, and they have no real voice in Congress. If they were made a state, being between Connecticut and Oklahoma in population, we'd expect them to have 5 seats in the House of Representatives, and 7 electoral votes. If they become a state, what does THAT do to your demographic calculations?
My own thought is that short term self interest will lead the Republicans in congress to hem, haw, delay, and oppose this, because of the obvious political implications. House Democrats ought to support it... both for short term political gain, and because it is in-line with both party, and, I feel, generally American, principles.
But mostly, this is just one more little pebble on the large scale that says "Republican Party, DIVERSIFY OR DIE!"
*** Edit *** 15:13
EST For those interested in the mechanics, and example of the plebiscite is on page 7 of this PDF. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42765.pdf
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 18:44 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 18:51 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/11/12 17:04 (UTC)Throw in Guam and we can play 52 pick-up.
(no subject)
Date: 8/11/12 17:09 (UTC)Nah. He's referencing a gaff that Obama made some time ago, accidentally saying he had visited 57 states.
some people made a huge deal about it, claiming that he was secretly referring to the 57 Islamic states, whatever the heck that is.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 18:52 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 18:54 (UTC)If you voted for status quo, you might have a preference on what change happens if change must come.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 18:55 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 18:53 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 19:00 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 19:01 (UTC)Move to Texas, and it will leave the Union, and we won't have to worry as there will still be 50 states in America.
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 19:09 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 19:12 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 19:14 (UTC)Besides, the map looks beautiful.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 19:01 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/11/12 17:06 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/11/12 19:49 (UTC)And that prototype is one possibility but not the only one. The president gets to approve a new flag design, I believe.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 19:08 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 20:37 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 20:55 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 8/11/12 17:09 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 21:21 (UTC)I've said it before and I'll say it again, the GOP's failure to capitalise on, or even acknowledge, this is one of the reasons they're the "Stupid Party".
(no subject)
Date: 7/11/12 21:43 (UTC)Romney was the "establishment candidate" and even with all the freebies Obama threw him them the establisment couldn't close the deal. The establishment Republicans have lost face so I expect the Tea-party faction to redouble its efforts to tear down the current "old-boys network".
Likewise the Evangelical/Moral guardian wing of the GOP is starting to split along geographic lines with the Mormons and Catholics in the west taking on the white Southern Baptists in the east.
The next generation of of the GOP, (or the party that replaces it) will not look like the current GOP. In some ways this will be in a good thing in others...
Well lets just say that the progressives who classify the current GOP as extreme aint seen anything yet.
(no subject)
Date: 8/11/12 00:48 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 8/11/12 17:11 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/11/12 20:40 (UTC)(no subject)
From: