aepps20
Supporter
- 40,694
- 86,034
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2004
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
What she say?
Just had to be my city, smfh
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
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.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.
Watch yourself famb
Whatever begging you did to Meth for a second chance, don't throw it away
If he had clipped you, you should have just made a new SN called @WrNewNT to beat da system b.
I said:
"Methaburger gimme my page back big dawg!!!!"
Caitlyn Jenner outchea making a damn fool of herself...
If he had clipped you, you should have just made a new SN called @WrNewNT to beat da system b.
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