***Official Political Discussion Thread***

RustyShackleford said:


Basically ****ting on direct democracy as being a means for the people of PR to decide if they want statehood

Instead, she prefers convoluted methods that fringe groups can hijack to sabotage the whole thing
Click to expand...


She’s right that Puerto Rico and DC are very different. There is no substantial Interest group within DC that advocates for independent sovereignty. The options for Puerto Rico aren’t simply status quo or statehood as they are for DC. So a simple referendum on statehood creates false dichotomy.

That said, the business of establishing independence isn‘t something the average person is well versed to deal with. Representative, rather than direct, democracy is better equipped to allow elected experts in statecraft to actually formulate what a path forward either Into statehood or independence looks like. Becoming a state is a much bigger decision for the people of Puerto Rico as it forever would close off the third option. Even if they did choose to go that route, I think it’s reasonable for them to negotiate different concessions or terms than DC would have access to. And again that degree of diplomacy requires elected expertise.

The outcome of a convention needn’t be final either. There’s nothing preventing ratification of a specific statehood proposal via direct democracy. But ultimately, she’s right that the issue is more nuanced than yes/no and presenting the choice that way robs Puerto Rico of the ability to create a nuanced solution.

There‘s a reason we don’t put issues of foreign policy or other statecraft up for popular vote. There are limits to the appropriateness of direct democracy, and this is one.
 
TooOlfForThisIsh said:
She’s right that Puerto Rico and DC are very different. There is no substantial Interest group within DC that advocates for independent sovereignty. The options for Puerto Rico aren’t simply status quo or statehood as they are for DC. So a simple referendum on statehood creates false dichotomy.

That said, the business of establishing independence isn‘t something the average person is well versed to deal with. Representative, rather than direct, democracy is better equipped to allow elected experts in statecraft to actually formulate what a path forward either Into statehood or independence looks like. Becoming a state is a much bigger decision for the people of Puerto Rico as it forever would close off the third option. Even if they did choose to go that route, I think it’s reasonable for them to negotiate different concessions or terms than DC would have access to. And again that degree of diplomacy requires elected expertise.

The outcome of a convention needn’t be final either. There’s nothing preventing ratification of a specific statehood proposal via direct democracy. But ultimately, she’s right that the issue is more nuanced than yes/no and presenting the choice that way robs Puerto Rico of the ability to create a nuanced solution.

There‘s a reason we don’t put issues of foreign policy or other statecraft up for popular vote. There are limits to the appropriateness of direct democracy, and this is one.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I think we are at the point where a binding referendum is the best way forward to actually decide this. I think maybe they should make it rank choice or part, but we are at a stalemate right now.

I get the desire for the people of PR to have agency for the future of the island, but this doesn't seem like her plan will lead to that.

Like is the independence of some other attachment to America have comparable levels of support to the status quo and becoming a state?

So the proposed solution is that people elect representatives to negotiate terms of a nuanced deal, which might not even be statehood. A deal that would have to be satisfactory to the PR representative negotiating the deal, pass the US Congress, and then potentially go back to voters on a referendum. I'm supposed to believe that in practice making the process more convoluted, and more prone to poison pills, we lead to better outcomes?

AOC's bill says citizens will elect the representatives that decide on the plan. Pretty sure she wants it that way because the Independence party has little representation in the current government. So we shouldn't put this decision directly to voters, we instead let them elect the people that will make the decision. That seems to me that will just lead to no position getting the majority. And with that, the status quo position that might not even have the plurality wins.

Furthermore, her implicitly ****ting on ballot measures was some top-level nonsense. Yes, they are an imperfect mechanism that I wished were not necessary. Her argument is basically handwaving the fact that Medicaid expansion, increased minimum wage, killing gerrymandering, and restoring voting rights have been passed through a state ballot measure,s and saying "Republicans sabotage ballot measures after the fact so yeah direct voting is inconsequential".

Plus leaving it up to elected representatives doesn't yield better results when the incentives are bad and there is too much veto power spread out. Which would likely be the case in this situation. Plus elected expertise? Not every person elected holds some special expertise that would guarantee PR gets the best deal possible, and one that represents the best way forward for the island. You invite more people from the fringes into the process, you raise the chance of the status quo winning.

In practice, AOC's position is just gonna enforce the status quo. It reads to me like Joe Manchin saying we need a constitutional amendment to let DC become a state.

And just like Manchin, I would respect it more if she just came out and said she was against statehood. Or say she has a position that doesn't have a lot of support on the island. Statehood kills any chance of an independent PR, the status quo doesn't. AOC is smart enough to know this. So her plan is basically killing the chance of at least the plurality position winning, to keep alive the chance of a third option that has comparatively much less support.

I understand that PR is different than DC. And right now PR, like decades before it, things are at a stalemate. So I am not sympathetic to AOC saying let us legally strengthen the stalement
 
Last edited:
gry60 said:
Click to expand...

tenor (2).gif
 
RustyShackleford said:
I disagree. I think we are at the point where a binding referendum is the best way forward to actually decide this. I think maybe they should make it rank choice or part, but we are at a stalemate right now.

I get the desire for the people of PR to have agency for the future of the island, but this doesn't seem like her plan will lead to that.

Like is the independence of some other attachment to America have comparable levels of support to the status quo and becoming a state?

So the proposed solution is that people elect representatives to negotiate terms of a nuanced deal, which might not even be statehood. A deal that would have to be satisfactory to the PR representative negotiating the deal, pass the US Congress, and then potentially go back to voters on a referendum. I'm supposed to believe that in practice making the process more convoluted, and more prone to poison pills, we lead to better outcomes?

AOC's bill says citizens will elect the representatives that decide on the plan. Pretty sure she wants it that way because the Independence party has little representation in the current government. So we shouldn't put this decision directly to voters, we instead let them elect the people that will make the decision. That seems to me that will just lead to no position getting the majority. And with that, the status quo position that might not even have the plurality wins.

Furthermore, her implicitly ****ting on ballot measures was some top-level nonsense. Yes, they are an imperfect mechanism that I wished were not necessary. Her argument is basically handwaving the fact that Medicaid expansion, increased minimum wage, killing gerrymandering, and restoring voting rights have been passed through a state ballot measure,s and saying "Republicans sabotage ballot measures after the fact so yeah direct voting is inconsequential".

Plus leaving it up to elected representatives doesn't yield better results when the incentives are bad and there is too much veto power spread out. Which would likely be the case in this situation. Plus elected expertise? Not every person elected holds some special expertise that would guarantee PR gets the best deal possible, and one that represents the best way forward for the island. You invite more people from the fringes into the process, you raise the chance of the status quo winning.

In practice, AOC's position is just gonna enforce the status quo. It reads to me like Joe Manchin saying we need a constitutional amendment to let DC become a state.

And just like Manchin, I would respect it more if she just came out and said she was against statehood. Or say she has a position that doesn't have a lot of support on the island. Statehood kills any chance of an independent PR, the status quo doesn't. AOC is smart enough to know this. So her plan is basically killing the chance of at least the plurality position winning, to keep alive the chance of a third option that has comparatively much less support.

I understand that PR is different than DC. And right now PR, like decades before it, things are at a stalemate. So I am not sympathetic to AOC saying let us legally strengthen the stalement
Click to expand...

There have been two direct democracy approaches to evaluating the public will in just the last decade. Yet we remain in the status quo because a majority of Puerto Rican’s don’t seem to want to vote for anything in The way it’s phrased.

I mean, what does this referendum look like to you? Is it simple up or down for statehood? Do you interpret the results of 2017 as a clear mandate? When 3/4 of the people don’t show up to vote, I don’t think you capture the will of the island. Or do you want to use 2012 where people came to the booth to leave the question blank. By simply putting the issue on another ballot it starts to look like ramming an idea through and not listening to what the people are saying - even if they’re saying it with inaction.

You say a convention will just result in status quo. That’s a guess. I’m saying direct democracy doesn’t yield actionable results And I have two recent elections to prove it. Puerto Ricans deserve to vote on a tangible plan, not a vague idea. You can’t get at specifics via a direct approach.

And yes, I realize that the representatives people choose aren’t necessarily to be experts in an absolute sense. But they will be people tasked with a specific job, and in executing that job will become far more informed on the nuances and details of the question than any voter has time for. That’s the point of the system - assign the task of making hard decisions to people you trust so that you don’t have to figure everything out yourself.

As far as direct democracy in general goes, I’ll agree that it sometimes produces good results, but I will never agree that it’s appropriate in all situations. I have a bunch of bafoonefy in California that I know you already know about as. evidence. But let’s agree not to trade cherry picked examples to support our view on this specific issue. I don’t really have good examples relevant to issues of sovereignty. The closest I know of is Scotland which yielded... status quo. But maybe you have something better that will change my mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

shaboozy
What's your NT routine?
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
ogbobbyjohnson773
ogbobbyjohnson773
chezzer10
***MLB FEET, EQUIPMENT, AND UNIFORMS 2024***NEW THREAD
2 3
Replies
57
Views
6K
mp23
mp23
datznasty
Official Niketalk Custom Basketball Shorts Thread
Replies
5
Views
1K
MakeNTGreatAgain
MakeNTGreatAgain

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom