I’m Puerto Rico’s new representative in Congress; we should put statehood aside

For the first time since 2000, the people of Puerto Rico have elected a resident commissioner (non-voting delegate) to Congress who opposes statehood for Puerto Rico and thinks we should focus on different priorities.

That would be me.

Puerto Ricans are simply tired of the sterile status debate. In my campaign, I pledged that instead of wasting time dealing with Puerto Rico’s political status, I would focus more on promoting new tools for the island’s economic development, securing equal treatment in federal programs, and accelerating the disbursement of federal funds for the electric grid’s reconstruction. 

The people listened and agreed. In the race for resident commissioner, the pro-commonwealth Popular Democratic Party won by the largest margin since 1964. My mandate, therefore, is to put statehood aside and prioritize economic development.

My predecessor, now Gov.-elect Jenniffer González Colón, of the pro-statehood New Progressive Party and a Republican, agrees with me on the urgent need for economic development, but we are at odds in the status issue. Her position is that statehood “won” a recent nonbinding status referendum, and, accordingly, she will demand that Congress respect the people’s “mandate.”

Let’s clarify this “mandate” with straightforward facts.

Four years ago, 52 percent of Puerto Ricans voted for statehood in a simple yes-or-no vote. This year, that number dropped to 47 percent, when you count the blank or void ballots that thousands cast, either in protest of the exclusion of the island’s current commonwealth status or of the referendum’s nonbinding nature. Support for statehood thus dropped below 50 percent. 

The lack of a clear mandate, declining support and Republican opposition to statehood in Washington should suffice to pause all discussions regarding the topic. Instead, we should focus on a more productive agenda that addresses the island’s real priorities and problems, and how the island can support, rather than lean on, the mainland.

The near-shoring and reshoring debate offers an opportunity. Bipartisan projects such as the Supply Chain Security and Growth Act, which would provide an investment tax credit for U.S. companies that choose to invest in Puerto Rico versus foreign jurisdictions, would help both Puerto Rico and the United States accomplish its strategic national security goals. Other bills, like the Medical Manufacturing, Economic Development, and Sustainability Act or the U.S. Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Review Act, would greatly benefit the island and the mainland as well.

Parity in antipoverty programs would be good policy and good politics. Including Puerto Rico in the SNAP program would promote work in ways the current NAP program does not, combat food insecurity and grow our agricultural trade with the mainland. Fixing the island’s Medicaid disparities would reduce the exodus of Puerto Ricans to the mainland, strengthen the local health industry and eventually reduce dependence on federal assistance. And with Puerto Ricans exercising decisive political influence in such key swing states as Pennsylvania and Georgia, bipartisan support for these initiatives makes political sense.

Our energy grid’s reconstruction also offers opportunities for bipartisanship. I support the transition to renewable energy. But if we have to tolerate less desirable alternatives to stabilize the grid and reduce costs more quickly, especially in light of Republican control of the White House and Congress, so be it.

Once we are back on the right track, we can talk about status. And when we do, we must be inclusive and democratic, and respect the people’s right to vote for statehood, independence, free association or to keep and improve their current commonwealth status.

Pablo Hernández Rivera is a member of the Popular Democratic Party and resident commissioner-elect of Puerto Rico.