On Jan. 2, 2017 the recently elected governor for Puerto Rico, Dr. Ricardo Rosselló, was sworn in. Within a few days his administration has already drawn a clear contrast with the past administration of Alejandro García Padilla. The multiple recent executive orders controlling government spending, the presentation of new labor legislation, the continuous meetings with bondholders and the Oversight Board created by Congress this past summer, all together show a concerted effort to systematically address the fiscal and moral crisis of Puerto Rico’s government and the general collapse of our economy.

Among these measures and actions, the presentation by our Resident Commissioner Jenniffer Gonzalez of H.R. 51, a statehood admission bill for Puerto Rico, and the urgency of celebrating a “statehood or independence” plebiscite under the auspices of Public Law 113-76, and the local bill presented on the Puerto Rico Legislature for it to be held on May 28, 2017, are a step in the right direction.

ADVERTISEMENT

Already some voices within the Popular Democratic Party (PPD) – the pro-Commonwealth party – have begun to raise their voices in opposition, arguing that the November 2016 election did not grant an electoral mandate to the entering administration to attend the perennial Puerto Rico status issue. It is worth noting how some minority voices in the PPD do recognize that in fact there is such electoral mandate.

It is worth recalling that in their 2016 party platform the PPD committed itself to pursuing a new political relationship with the United States beyond the Territorial Clause, Article IV, Section 3, of the United States Constitution, with sovereignty residing in the People of Puerto Rico, but with American Citizenship. Any opposition by the PPD to a “statehood or independence” status plebiscite must be understood in this context.

The PPD’s recent electoral defeat makes evident its political and legal mortality. Insofar the recent Supreme Court opinion Commonwealth of Puerto Rico v. Sánchez Valle and Congress’s legislation of PROMESA leave no room for doubt that our political relationship with the United States is under the Territorial Clause, the PPD has been left exposed as the emperor without any clothes. The Dec. 29, 2016 Report by R. Sam Garret for the Congressional Research Service on the Political Status of Puerto Rico: Brief Background and Recent Developments for Congress concisely and correctly summarizes our current situation. We encourage all congressmen and senators to read this report. Among the noteworthy statements made in the Report is the recognition that a so called “enhanced Commonwealth” is universally unacceptable.

Given that the PPD can no longer defend the Commonwealth as some sort special arrangement, its political space here in Puerto Rico has been reduced to two alternatives: (i) or defend the Territory – as attorney-consultant Mr. Christopher Landau did on Dec. 13, 2016 in a forum organized in Washington, D.C. by the outgoing Gov. García Padilla, or (ii) defend independence under the Free Association – as set forth in its latest political platform. Either alternatives does not bode well for the PPD as an electoral institution, reason for which they seem to have opted (again) for a delay strategy, obfuscating and putting obstacles at every turn in an attempt to derail a status plebiscite.

On the other hand, the pro-independence minority party PIP, announced its reintroduction of a local bill for purposes creating a Status Convention to attend the status question. This proposal, which surely is dead on arrival given current political alignments in the territorial legislature, aims to create a deliberative body not beholden to the United States or the Puerto Rico Constitution, the Federal Relations Act (1950). As an example, the bill presented by the PIP in 2013, which will probably be the same they reintroduce, claims that the sovereignty of the People of Puerto Rico will be deposited in this Status Convention and would not be subject to the laws of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Even the defenders of a Status Convention recognize the need of appearing afterwards before Congress to achieve any change in our political status. That is, the Status Convention does not move the status problem forward.

Our current political and economic dead end can only be seriously addressed with a plebiscite “statehood or independence” under the auspices of Federal Public Law 113-76.

Andrés L. Córdova is a law professor at Inter American University of Puerto Rico

The views expressed by authors are their own and not the views of The Hill.