H.R. 2499 Puerto Rico to become 51st state

[tombogan03884]

Like cats and dogs!  We have a Puerto Rican guy working our vault and I bust on him every opportunity Ii get, and vice versa. This job is kinda like a fraternity and the good natured insults fly fast and furious.

 My latest was (as he was handing me my route shipments), "How many Mexicans does it take to do the work of one Puerto Rican?" 

"How many?", he asked with a smile.

"When we get a Puerto Rican that works I'll let you know."

Damn, I didn't know a small bag of large bills could hurt so much... 

As to making PR the 51st state, I say we give them their autonomy.  My above mentioned buddy said even he won't go back there.  You are no longer required to wait at red lights after 2200 - you can just stop and go so you are not robbed, carjacked or attacked.  Nat Guard has taken over LE, etc.

In other words, PR is an anarchy. Cut 'em loose.

In other words it's just another Caribean island , like Cuba in the 50's.

[ericire12]

Update: It passed

http://www.examiner.com/x-34929-Manhattan-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d30-HR-2499-passes-moving-Puerto-Rico-one-step-closer-to-statehood

It's only a first step, but for better or worse the wheels have been set in motion. Yesterday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 2499, which puts Puerto Ricans on the fast track to statehood, should that be the decision residents of that island territory make going forward. The vote was 223 to 169, with one vote of "present" by Rep. Louise Slaughter, of New York.

The measure offers Puerto Rico, which has been a U.S. territory for 112 years, a two-step vote. Step one would ask Puerto Ricans, including those living in the United States, whether they want to remain a territorial commonwealth or would prefer to change their status. A vote for change, which is likely, would lead to a second vote with three options: statehood, independence, or an independent "free association" with the U.S. Again, voters given these options would most likely choose statehood.

Supporters say the measure, which is non-binding, gives citizens of the island the right to self-determination.?? Opponents say it is is a thinly veiled maneuver to impose statehood on a population that doesn't want it.?? ??As noted here, Democrats are confident that, should Puerto Rico opt for statehood, the two new senators and Congress members who would be seated as a result would join their caucus.

Here in New York, the vote thrust into vivid relief a schism between Congress members who themselves hail from the island territory. Bronx Rep. Jose Serrano favored passage of the measure, calling it a vital step to ending what he termed "colonial rule."  Brooklyn Rep. Nydia Velazquez, usually an ally of Serrano, called the measure a "disgrace," "shameful" and "appalling." Enlarging on her position, Velazquez is quoted by the New York Daily News as saying, "It is baffling that the statehood option, which lost in 1967, in 1993 and again in 1998, is now allowed to scheme its way to victory."

It is worth emphasizing that if Puerto Ricans were to select statehood, Congress would still have to vote to admit the island to the union as the 51st state.?? ??It is also worth noting that Puerto Rico is currently facing a banking crisis of its own, which has plunged the territory into financial distress that makes the recession here seem like a walk in the park.

[alfack]

It is also worth noting that Puerto Rico is currently facing a banking crisis of its own, which has plunged the territory into financial distress that makes the recession here seem like a walk in the park.

Can't let a good crisis go to waste, eh?

[Swamp Yankee]

I do not know if I am correct on this but from what I understand A US Territory must pettition the US Government to concider thier request for admission to Statehood. I do not believe it can be requested by House or Senate Members from outside entities.
In my own opinion we should have cut the cord from them and all other territories a long time ago.
Mike Mc

[palmbay lou]

Hello Swamp Yankee:

If you had a chance to view the video link posted of Glenn Beck he explains how Congress is going to rig the whole thing by giving a rigged ballot to the Puerto Rican people.  It is something called the Virginia plan, I know it has something to do with Virginia.  The point is this would eliminate the step of Puerto Rico asking for statehood.  They will make the ballot sound like a questionnaire.  This is like during the health care vote when the dems talked about the "Slaughter solution,"  named after the democratic congresswoman from New York.  Congress wants to avoid a very necessary step all for getting more senate seats and two more congressional seats.  They see the storm brewing come November and they know Republicans will be voted in and dems voted out.  They want to increase the amount of Senators and Congressmen so as to possibly offset the new Republicans coming in to government.  They want to hold on to their majority even if it is by one or two seats or at least have enough of a presence to give Republicans a hard time.  It is nothing about Puerto Rico or its people, it is nothing about due process and following the Constitution, it is all about staying in control, staying in power and pushing through as much of their progressive legislation as they can while they can.

There really is no such thing as a fair fight...agreed?   There is also nothing right or good about what this president and his administration and progressive/socialist congress are doing either.  They are all acting like ambulance chasing lawyers trying to get someone to run out in front of the ambulance so they can slap the city with a law suit.  These people are twisting words of decency and truth into trash and it will make the faint-hearted loose faith in our country and its laws.  We must keep informing everyone who will listen that we must hold on to the America that we know and love in our hearts, that is going to be our map for putting it back together.

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

Virginia plan ?
 THIS Virginia Plan ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Plan

The Virginia Plan (also known as the Randolph Plan, after its sponsor, or Large-State Plan)[1]  was a proposal by Virginia delegates, drafted by James Madison while he waited for a quorum to assemble at the Philadelphia Convention of 1787.[2][3]  The Virginia Plan was notable for its role in setting the overall agenda for debate in the convention and, in particular, for setting forth the idea of population-weighted representation  in the proposed National Legislature

he Virginia Plan proposed instead a legislative branch consisting of two chambers (bicameral legislature), with the dual principles of rotation in office and recall applied to the lower house of the national legislature.[5]  Each of the states would be represented in proportion to their “Quotas of contribution, or to the number of free inhabitants.”[6]  States with a large population, like Virginia (which was the most populous state at the time), would thus have more representatives than smaller states. Large states supported this plan, and smaller states, which feared losing substantial power in the national government, generally opposed it, preferring an alternative put forward by the New Jersey delegation on June 15. The New Jersey Plan proposed a single-chamber legislature in which each state, regardless of size, would have one vote, as under the Articles of Confederation. In the end, the convention settled on the Connecticut Compromise, creating a House of Representatives  apportioned by population and a Senate in which each state is equally represented.

In addition to dealing with legislative representation, the Virginia Plan addressed other issues as well, with many provisions that did not make it into the Constitution that emerged. It called for a national government of three branches—legislative, executive, and judicial. Members of one of the two legislative chambers would be elected by the people; members of that chamber would then elect the second chamber from nominations submitted by state legislatures. The executive would be chosen by the legislative branch. Terms of office were unspecified, although the executive and members of the popularly elected legislative chamber were to be limited to one term. The legislative branch would have the power to negate state laws in cases in which they were deemed incompatible with the articles of union. The concept of checks and balances was embodied in a provision that legislative acts could be vetoed by a council composed of the executive and selected members of the judicial branch; their veto could be overridden by an unspecified legislative majority.