Talk:Politics of Puerto Rico

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Puerto Rico
Puerto Rico Portal
Politics of Puerto Rico is part of WikiProject Puerto Rico, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the people, history, language, and culture of Puerto Rico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help with the tasks listed below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. Please do not substitute this template.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Puerto Rico To-do:

Contents

[edit] Removed broken link

I removed the link [1], which doesn't actually resolve to the intended document, the December 2005 report from the 'President's Task Force'. Sadly, I couldn't find this document online to replace the link! It would be great to replace this. --ScottMorrison 03:26, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unsourced Statements, Assertions and Political Bias

Most of the statements in this entire article are unsourced and could be seen as having a certain political bias. Though the article is not overtly inflammatory, the lack of factual citation could permit a certain political viewpoint to be presented as fact even if it is not supported by references, to the detriment of opposing political viewpoints. Though am I not Puerto Rican and have no political dogs in any fights concering PR, as a neutral reader, I am left sceptical of many points raised in what appears to be a very well written article. Given the (alleged?) terrorist activities of certain elements of Puerto Rican policital groups, I tend to be critical of unsourced statements when I do not see any citations or references. This weakness throws the entirety of an otherwise seemingly well written article into doubt as a useful reference tool for a critical thinker. Veriss 04:16, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Article shows a bias for statehood, and is incomplete, political history before 1898 is ignored. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raimon2K6 (talk • contribs) 19:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Removed this statement

In reference to the Spanish word country being used for Puerto Rico.

This is a very common and accepted international status given to all dependent territories, also called dependent "states" by the United Nations although on many occasions it has been thought of as a possibility that Puerto Rico would become the 51st State of the United States of America.

Roadrunner 06:01, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Remove statement vis-a-vis Philiphines

The Philiphines become independent as a result of a congressional law and not through a unilateral right of independence. It is clear that a US State *could* become independent if Congress were to approve.

Roadrunner 06:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed unsourced statements about alleged tax obligations and social services

This statement is potentially inflamatory and possibly supports a specific local political point of view but is unsourced so should be removed until proper references are provided to support acceptance as a 'factual' statement. Veriss 23:59, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

"Residents of the island do not pay federal income tax, but all commerce is controlled and highly taxed by the U.S. before importation or exportation. Puerto Ricans also pay federal payroll taxes to the U.S., which have a particularly heavy impact on Puerto Rico's relatively low-income workers. Island residents pay social security taxes and federal taxes other than income but they have limited or no access to several key federal programs. Puerto Rico is excluded from Supplemental Security Income (SSI). For Medicaid, Puerto Rico receives less than 15% of the funding it would be allotted as a state. For Medicare, Puerto Rico pays fully but only receives partial benefits. As statutory U.S. citizens, Puerto Ricans are subject to military service and most federal laws."

While there are weasel words and POV in the above paragraph, most of the information is factual. A simple rewrite, rather than a deletion would have been better. I am not sure this information belongs in this article, however due to the tone and content of the entire article, it would be helpful to provide information on the political and economic relationship with the USA.
Therefore I am rewriting and re-inserting the information.--Cerejota 01:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


Though I prefer your wording to what was there previously, it still lacks citations and references. If you wish the section to remain, please source your information. Veriss 03:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adding Template

Puerto Rican topics--Cerejota 01:47, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citizenship revocation

The issue of whether statutorily-granted United States citizenship can be revoked is not yet definitively settled. Thus, non-revocability should no be stated as a hard fact. The United States has never disposed of a territory whose inhabitants have been granted wholesale US citizenship by statute. In the case of several Pacific territories and the Phillippines, inhabitants may have been considered "US nationals", but not necessarily US "citizens". Therefore, the disposition of the Phillippines in 1946 required no revocation of that which had never been granted. Once again, there are diverse POV's on this subject.Pr4ever 13:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tax autonomy

The powers that Puerto Rico has to tax are no greater and no less than those of a state, so PR does not enjoy "greater tax autonomy". Whatever federal taxes not applicable to Puerto Rico do not derive from its political status (all existing exemptions pre-date the constitutional events of 1950-52). Congress could impose the federal income tax simply by approving a law to that effect, as it reimposed taxes on manufacturing between 1996-2005 (phase-out and elimination of IRC Sec. 936) without seeking or obtaining Puerto Rico's "consent". Puerto Rico, in fact, has less influence on federal taxation than a state because it does not have a voting congressional delegation that could influence Congressional decision-making.Pr4ever (talk) 23:11, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Major clean-up

The following tags have been present in this article for some time:

As such, I am taking an axe to this article, and will try to form it into somthing more encyclopedic. I will remove ALL items in an unsourced section or with unsourced inline tags older than February 2008. I will alos be removing obvious POV issues, tagged or not, sourced or not. THe sourced item in the Lead on PR being one of the world's last "colonies" is obviously POV, andcertainly too controversial for the Lead. If I can fit it somewhere esle, I will. I will also be removing the section of Government, as there already is a Government of Puerto Rico article, and hence this section is redundant. I will try to keep anything from this section that is relevant to understanding the rest of the article. I will definitely be making other POV changes throughout the article, such as to the heading "Political territorial occupation by the United States".

I am also splitting out the lengthy section on "The status question" to the new article I'm creating, Political status of Puerto Rico, which will also merge in the Puerto Rican status referendums page and portions of the Puerto Rican independence movement page.

The Puerto Rico#Political history section is fairly lengthy, and actually much better written than much of this article. Where possible, I will be adding that text in place of the sections here that need it, and merging in the rest. I'll try to leave a short summary in the Puerto Rico article, but my prose may need rewriting or tightening up.

I don't expect everyone to be happy about thse changes, but no one else has taken inititive to improve these article in any way to address the POV and referencing issues. Therefore, I am being bold and giving it a shot. - BillCJ (talk) 19:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

History is incomplete and needs to be expanded

There are two problems with the article. The first is that it totally ignores politics before 1898. Some of the issues and trends from the era still prevail today. People like Luis Muñoz Rivera and even Dr. Jose Celso Barbosa's work before 1898 are not even mentioned. Second problem is an obvious pro-statehood bias. Major edits are needed. If I can find the time, I do some work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raimon2K6 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)