The people of Puerto Rico have been victims of colonization and under-representation since 1493. In its pre-Columbian years, Puerto Rico, then called Borikén, was inhabited by TaÃnos, indigenous Amerindian inhabitants, relatives of the Arawakan people. Once it was colonized by the Spanish, the TaÃnos were subjected to slavery and died in large numbers. Borikén was dubbed "Puerto Rico," which means "Rich Port" in Spanish. Ever since Borikén became Puerto Rico, it has been consistently abused by imperialistic governments.
Last Monday, the Supreme Court denied certiorari to attorney Gregorio Igartua, who hoped to open U.S. presidential elections to voters in Puerto Rico. Igartua said, "For 107 years and 22 presidential elections since Puerto Rico became part of the United States, the American citizens of Puerto Rico have been unfairly treated." The U.S. government seems to disagrees with Igartua, as the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals argued in its decision, "The United States must amend the Constitution, or Puerto Rico must become a state before its residents can vote for president." Solicitor General Paul Clement argued during the hearings, "The appeals court decision is amply supported by constitutional text, unbroken tradition and uniform precedent. No territory has ever participated in any of the 54 presidential elections conducted over more than two centuries of American history."
Despite Clement's implication, fundamental differences between territories and states are superficial. The only real difference between living in Puerto Rico and living in the states is that citizens of territories are not required to pay income taxes, unlike American citizens who live in the fifty states. Such a minute difference does not justify depriving Puerto Rico of a voice, especially when Puerto Rico would prove a significant voice in the American political process. According to Igartua, "Puerto Rico has unique standing, because it is the only U.S. territory that has a population large enough to qualify for Electoral College votes; each state gets one electoral vote for every 500,000 residents. If allowed to vote, Puerto Rico would have eight electoral votes, enough to sway a close election." U.S. citizens from the 50 states can cast absentee ballots from foreign countries, yet cannot vote if they move to Puerto Rico.
It is obvious that the United States is concerned with the material benefits that stem from "owning" Puerto Rico, at the expense of the rights and happiness of Puerto Rican citizens. Congress made Puerto Ricans official U.S. citizens under the Jones Act of 1917. Similar to the many U.S. state-dwellers, the U.S. citizens of Puerto Rico are subject to military drafts. Many are voluntarily fighting overseas in Iraq, but they are denied full rights of citizenship. Puerto Rico has sent a greater percentage of their men to fight and die for the United States than any state. Puerto Ricans should have a voice in electing the person who sends them to war.
The higher courts of the United States defend their position on Puerto Rico with legalistic jargon, but their ultimate conclusions are inconsistent with core American values. The American government continues to promote democratic ideals around the world, but somehow fails to allow some of its own citizens the right to vote. Obviously, it is a complicated legal process to grant Puerto Ricans suffrage, but it is obvious based on local sentiment that Puerto Ricans want and deserve such a right. We should either amend the Constitution (we gave the District of Columbia representation with the 23rd Amendment), or we should consider changing Puerto Rico's status as a territory. As a country that supposedly values freedom and equality, we are obligated to give Puerto Rican U.S. citizens the right to vote.
Michael Ramos-Lynch '09 thinks that Igartua should roundhouse kick imperialistic governments in the face.
