New York – George Laws García, a pro-statehood lobbyist in Washington DC, said that the plebiscite called by Puerto Rico Governor Pedro Pierluisi for the same day as the November 5 general elections is an important tool for Puerto Ricans to express themselves on the need to resolve the territorial status.
According to Laws García, also executive president of the Puerto Rico Statehood Council (PRSC), even though the referendum is not binding or has no force of law at the federal level, it sends a message to Congress that it must address the issue, in addition to reflecting the inclination of Puerto Rican voters regarding status alternatives.
“I believe that the most important reason for holding this plebiscite is that we need to continue providing opportunities for voters in Puerto Rico to express their perspective in terms of the need to resolve the issue of the territory, as well as what their preferences are among the viable options under the U.S. Constitution that are non-territorial. That is the main purpose. It is another opportunity for citizens to exercise their sovereignty and their will through the ballot box, and to take that message to Congress that we do not want to continue in the territory, and that, among the non-territorial options, we can choose which one we favor by majority…”, the activist said in response to questions from El Diario about the scope of the election.
Regarding the controversy over the lack of funds in the State Election Commission (CEE) to hold the event, an issue about which the interim president Jessika Padilla Rivera herself has warned, she said that it is not a valid excuse.
“The lack of equality and structural inequality within the territory is the main factor that limits economic development, as well as the budgetary situation on the island; so if we are going to use the lack of budget as a reason for not addressing the status issue, we will never address it. There will always be a situation that limits or presents an excuse for not addressing this issue. I believe that the governor is having the will to exercise his authority under the law to put this to a vote… In that way, what the governor is doing is empowering the voters to express themselves,” he said.
According to Laws García, the PROMESA Act (Puerto Rico Oversight, Management and Economic Stability Act) itself, which was approved by Congress and establishes guidelines for Puerto Rico to emerge from bankruptcy and comply with payments to bondholders, contains provisions for Puerto Ricans to facilitate such a consultation.
“There is a provision within PROMESA that limits the ability of that law or any entity created within the law, meaning the Fiscal Control Board, to limit the ability of the people of Puerto Rico to express their will regarding self-determination. What is appropriate is for the government of Puerto Rico to work with the Board to find the necessary resources to allocate them, to allow that will that Congress protected when it created that statute to be exercised,” he said.
With the plebiscite called by Pierluisi on July 1, through Law 165 of 2020, there would be seven such consultations held on the island. As a US territory, at the end of the day, it is the federal Congress that must call for a self-determination process that leads to the solution of the issue of Puerto Rico’s status.
Puerto Rico is subject to the plenary powers of the United States Congress under Clause 2 or the Territorial Clause of the federal Constitution.
The impact at the federal level of Creole plebiscites in Puerto Rico
However, the statesman questioned the criticisms of the parties opposed to the New Progressive Party (PNP) who argue that holding a local plebiscite or one without congressional approval is a waste of effort and money.
“Those people who think it has no impact are probably looking at it from the perspective of their local political institution and the impact on political franchises on the island. A broader perspective takes into account the media impact that this has at a national level where each of these plebiscites, when the results come out, a media impact at a national level where the public is made aware in the states, as well as at a global level, first of all that there is a desire for change; and second, at least in the last plebiscites, that the highest level for a non-territorial option is in favor of statehood,” he explained.
Laws García argued that, from 2012 to the present, the plebiscitary events carried out on the island have had an influence on the legislature in Washington DC.
“What we have seen is that, in response to each of the last plebiscites, 2012, 2017 and 2020, we have seen the introduction of legislative projects to address this issue; some with greater success, others that have had their difficulties or have not advanced in the same way; hearings have been held on this matter. The entire process of the Puerto Rico Status Act began in 2021 as a response to the plebiscite that occurred in 2020,” he said.
At the end of 2022, the Democratic majority and some Republicans in the House of Representatives approved HR 8393 or the Puerto Rico Status Act, which provided for the holding of a plebiscite endorsed by Congress between the non-territorial options of statehood, independence, and free association.
However, the measure was not introduced in the Senate during that session.
Last year, a second version of the legislation was filed in the House, named H.R. 2757 by Raul Grijalva, Democrat of Arizona. A sister version was also filed in the Senate (S. 3231), by New Mexico Democrat Martin Heinrich. The Senate bill has 26 cosponsors, but none are Republicans. While 2757 has 96, both Democrats and Republicans.
In the Senate, another version of the Puerto Rico Status Act is also circulating, S.2944, presented by Roger Wicker, Republican of Mississippi. Unlike the previous measures, Wicker’s includes the territorial Commonwealth (ELA) among the options.
For a bill like this to be considered by the president for his signature, it needs to be approved by both chambers. Before being evaluated by the full House of Representatives, the measure must be examined in committees.
The PPD and the divisions over the definition of the ELA
The Popular Democratic Party (PPD), the second largest party on the island, believes that the fact that the ELA is not included in three of the four projects mentioned excludes Puerto Rican voters who believe in the system of government that currently governs the country.
However, for Laws García, the repeated rejection of status consultations by the Popular Party is due to the fact that they have not been able to articulate a consensual definition of the ELA.
“The Popular Democratic Party is one that had a great level of importance in territorial politics in Puerto Rico during the 20th century, and they have seen a massive decline in the 21st century, and it is mainly due to the lack of a clear vision of where they want to take the people of Puerto Rico. Their existence as a political franchise depends on the continuation of the territorial status, and they have not been able to articulate up to this point a clear and constitutionally viable vision of what they want as an alternative to the current territorial status. That is why they oppose any vote that may occur no matter what the definitions, options or anything are, because anything that brings about a change towards something different, non-territorial, is basically a challenge to the existence of their party,” he argued.
Popular Party asks to leave plebiscite ballot blank
“What effect do you think the boycott that the PPD is calling for (to leave the ballot blank) will have on the ballot boxes?” asked El Diario.
“I believe that the PPD has done a disservice to the people of Puerto Rico and to its own voters; and the reason is that, when one advocates for not participating in a democratic process, what one is doing is suppressing the ability of people to vote among the options that have been presented. In the democratic process, the option of the people who did not vote never wins; the option that was obtained by the majority of voters who did participate always wins,” he responded.
“But leaving it blank is a valid option; it is not illegal either…”, El Diario continued.
“It is not illegal and it can be done, but what I am saying is that the reasons why they justify why it should be left blank are illusory reasons. For example, in the 2012 vote and in 2017, the reason for leaving the ballot blank was the way in which the territorial status had been defined, which was not what they internally, within their party, think is the reality of the current territorial status, because in their vision and political philosophy the current territorial status does not exist. They think that PR is a Free Associated State with a level of self-government different from a territory,” he added.
Another of the arguments of PPD leaders is that the call for a plebiscite is an electoral strategy of the PNP to attract voters to the polls.
The interviewee said that he does not see a problem with that, if it were the case. “Whenever more voters of any ideology are attracted to the polls, it is a good thing. The greater the participation, the greater the democracy. So I think that any effort to try to say whether the plebiscite should be held or not, more people will come and that this is a bad thing, they are basically afraid that with the political proposal they have they will not be able to convince those voters. That is something that makes no sense,” he said.
“But is that really the tactic behind calling for a plebiscite? Is that really what is at the root of this call?” this newspaper insisted.
“I believe that what the governor has seen here in Congress is that there is real momentum to continue moving forward with the legislative process, and that by calling this plebiscite and offering voters in Puerto Rico the chance to once again express their preference with respect to ending the territorial status, that will add additional pressure for Congress to continue acting and moving forward with the legislative process that we have already been advancing since 2021. I believe that is the governor’s fundamental intention,” he replied.
PIP challenges the local plebiscite in court
Precisely this Friday, the Puerto Rican Independence Party (PIP) announced that it filed a motion in the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico to challenge the plebiscite consultation. Part of the arguments of the pipiolos, led by the candidate for governor Juan Dalmau, is that Pierluisi’s action is unconstitutional, since it violates the separation of powers. According to the plaintiffs, the governor, through Law 165 of 2020, attributed to himself powers or functions that correspond to the Legislative Assembly.
Laws García said that he is not surprised by the PIP’s action, because the group does not have the electoral support necessary for the independence alternative they defend to prevail in the consultation.
“I understand that a party that, when its choice is presented at the polls, cannot obtain a number that is even competitive with the most preferred options, is going to be afraid with respect to an electoral process; so that is natural. And, as we have seen on previous occasions, cases have been filed in court to try to oppose and paralyze plebiscitary voting processes… Honestly, that does not surprise me at all,” he said.
“I am not going to go into the merits of a legal dispute, because I have not read the arguments or anything like that, but I understand that whatever happens, in the courts in general, they will most likely rule in favor of Puerto Rico’s right to express itself. In terms of the governor’s authority, I believe that the law Yes, it does empower him with the ability to make the call that he just made through the executive order,” he added regarding the argument of usurpation of powers.
Keep reading:
PIP challenges before the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico the local plebiscite called by Governor Pierluisi
PPD in Puerto Rico asks to leave the local plebiscite ballot blank as a form of protest
Puerto Rico: Fourth ballot to symbolically vote for US president in elections divides political leaders
Democratic Party in Puerto Rico assures that spending for symbolic presidential ballot in November 5 elections will be minimal