Journal of Political Inquiry at New York University, Spring 2014 Issue

THE QUESTION OF STATUS IN PUERTO RICO REVISITED: Rational-Choice, Spatial Analysis, and Heresthetics

Rashid C.J. Marcano-Rivera

translated as “Commonwealth”) was Introduction and background established. Scholarly and political discussion remains divided on the One of the most discussed and significance of this event with regards to the analyzed issues in Puerto Rican is status question1. While some indicate that the question of the political status of the the Commonwealth signifies a different archipelago. For almost two centuries, this status to previously held ones, others claim topic has characterized the entire debate, that no such change occurred. They maintain first with Spain, and presently with the that status has been the same since 1917, United States. This ‘debate’ included several when Congress statutorily made all Puerto failed revolts for independence, movements Ricans US citizens. for annexation, and movements for Previous research has delved into the increased autonomy within the Spanish issue2 extensively. In particular, approaches crown. Autonomists achieved their goal on with rational choice models have tried to November of 1897: Puerto Rico was granted elucidate and predict behavior in this regard. an Autonomic Charter, which conceded For instance, in The Question of Status in political and administrative autonomy to the Puerto Rico (Garriga-Picó, 1979), the island. This new status did not last for long, analysis assumed a plebiscitarian however: the United States invaded the interpretation of general in Puerto country in July 25, 1898, and Spain ceded 1 Puerto Rico along with Cuba, the The United States indicates that Puerto Rico is a territory subject to Congress through the Constitution’s Philippines, and Guam in December of that Territorial Clause (U.S. Const., Art. IV, Sec. 3, cl. 2). This year. position is held by independentistas and estadistas, and it’s also used by soberanistas, but it’s denied by others like The overarching themes of political estadolibristas who describe the 1952 constitution as a pact between Puerto Rico and the United States that solved struggle, exclusion, and repression unequivocally this issue. This will be further discussed in experienced under Spanish rule replicated future sections of this paper. 2 This paper revisits some of the discussion and findings of themselves under American rule. This was José Enrique Garriga Picó’s doctoral thesis, The Question particularly the case under the military and of Status in Puerto Rico: A Rational Choice Analysis (NYU 1979). The literature involved , however, is not solely civil but undemocratic of academic, but also political and institutional, with 1898-1900 and 1900-1948. The situation presidential taskforces and congressional commissions intervening in the discussion from time to time. Some of changed somewhat in 1952, when the these reports are also used to elucidate the interpretation of Constitution of the Estado Libre Asociado the U.S. Congress to the post-2012 referendum situation. (lit. “Free Associated State”, usually

1 Journal of Political Inquiry at New York University, Spring 2014 Issue

Rico, and stated that the Commonwealth posturing is basically tied with status alternative was unambiguously the preferences: the Partido Independentista Condorcet candidate. That is, the alternative Puertorriqueño (PIP, Puerto Rican that given pair-wise contest against its Independence Party) advocates for full competitors, -- here Statehood (annexation independence; the Partido Popular as the 51st state of the United States) and Democrático (PPD, Popular Democratic Independence -- could muster a majority in Party) traditionally advocates for the status its support, even though in reality its real quo (the Commonwealth) yet is currently supporters were less than a majority. As split on this issue; finally the Partido Nuevo foreshadowed by Garriga Picó, this was not Progresista (PNP, New Progressive Party) a perennial situation. Because of a small advocates for statehood. This special change in the manner in which the political condition allowed for a alternative was presented to the electorate in plebiscitarian analysis of elections, as 2012, Commonwealth was finally defeated conducted by Garriga Picó. However, the with the combined votes of the pro- arrival of new parties, with policy-based independence and pro-statehood electorate, instead of status-based platforms, may leading to the current state of affairs, which present obstacles to this approach. Of these will be discussed thoroughly in this paper. parties, only one has a clearly identified In section 2, I begin with a discussion of status preference in their platform (and party party rankings of the status alternatives. In name), the Movimiento Unión Soberanista section 3, I analyze variations in the (MUS, Sovereigntist Union Movement). As electorate’s preferences between the 1998 a consequence, the arrival of MUS and 2012 status referenda, and proceed to necessitates a departure from this method. model and explain the reasoning behind Moreover, the presence of a status plebiscite, these changes. In section 4, I evaluate the which provoked most parties to announce alternative presented by the Puerto Rican their preferences explicit or implicitly, government to tackle the status conundrum. facilitates this analysis. From the established data and assumptions, I indicate how such an alternative would lead PPD – a party with split preferences to a solution to the issue at hand. I conclude that the status issue has now moved to a The PPD is currently the governing different situation, given the defeat of the party after receiving a plurality victory in status quo alternative. the 2012 general elections. When confronted with the PNP-proposed plebiscite, which divided the status question into two3, the Electoral organizations and their preferred status alternatives 3 The first question of the plebiscite was “Do you agree that Puerto Rico should continue to have its present form of In Puerto Rican politics, three major territorial status? Yes __ No __” The second question said parties have shared nearly 100 percent of the “Regardless of your selection in the first question, please mark which of the following non-territorial options would vote in elections since 1968. The three you prefer: Statehood _ Independence _ Sovereign Free parties are not symmetrically sized, and their Associated State _”. (Source: Sample November 2012 plebiscite ballot, Comisión Estatal de Elecciones [CEE]

2 Journal of Political Inquiry at New York University, Spring 2014 Issue

PPD leaders reached a joint conclusion, Autonomistas or conservadores – Status advocating for a Constituent Assembly Quo or ‘Enhanced (usually a soberanista proposal) instead of a Commonwealth’ plebiscite as a means to decide the status issue. However, the party’s factions faced Governor Alejandro García Padilla, the plebiscite split, a sector advocating for a as well as other party strongmen like former “Yes & Blank” vote and another governor Rafael Hernández Colón, currently championing either a “Yes & ” lead the (slightly) majoritarian faction of the or a “No & Sovereignty” vote. party. This faction either favors status quo or calls for the development of the Soberanistas – The Associated Commonwealth within the Territorial Clause. or ‘Sovereign Free Associated For the plebiscite, this faction called for a State’ ‘Yes’ vote on the first question (validating the current territorial status) and a blank The soberanista (pro-sovereignty vote on the second question as a means of faction) leaders like Carmen Yulín Cruz protest against the design of the Plebiscite. Soto, now mayor of San Juan, advocated for Recently, however, during status hearings in a vote for the ELA Soberano alternative Congress to discuss the results of the 2012 (Sovereign Free Associated State), while Plebiscite, it advocated for a vague political denouncing the plebiscite as political alternative, the ‘Enhanced Commonwealth’, trickery, claimed that their proposed which would make Puerto Rico able to Constituent Status Assembly presented a choose (critics would rather say cherry-pick) better alternative to settle in a more which federal laws and regulations apply to consensual manner the century old affair. 4 the territory. Although the 2011 and 2007 Based on documents and many public President’s Task Force reports dismissed speeches, I determined that their scale of this option on the grounds of it being preferences is 1) ‘Sovereign Free Associated unconstitutional, I include it in the options State’ (which is basically free association or list because the analysis is focused on what an associated republic); 2) Independence parties prefer and actively discuss. From (due to the proximity to preference 1); 3) their definition of ‘enhanced commonwealth’ ‘Enhanced Commonwealth’ (due to its and based on the discussion that took place vague proximity); 4) Status quo; and 5) in the congressional hearings of August Statehood as their next worst and worst 2013, I identify this group’s preferential alternatives. order as: 1) Status Quo; 2) ‘Enhanced Commonwealth’; 3) Sovereign Free Associated State; 4) Independence; and as http://ceepur.org/es- the worst alternative for this group 5) pr/Documents/PapeletaModeloPlebiscito12.pdf). Statehood (which, according to governor 4 Among others, the proposed Pacto de Asociación prepared by PPD senators Antonio Faz Alzamora and García Padilla, would be an economic Ramón Luis Nieves. Available in English: disaster and would convert the island into a (http://www.pactodeasociacion.com/images/pdf/compactof associationamended.pdf)

3 Journal of Political Inquiry at New York University, Spring 2014 Issue

‘Latin American ghetto’5). which made the Commonwealth alternative

st the Condorcet candidate: a desire to avoid PNP – The 51 State of the American annexation. Based on this, their preference Union order would be 1) Independence; 2) Sovereign Free Associated State; 3) The PNP is the pro-statehood party Enhanced Commonwealth; 4) Status Quo; and at the time of the plebiscite held power and 5) Statehood. in all three branches of government. This party designed the 2012 Plebiscite in a two- MUS – Sovereignty (Associated step manner that was criticized by the PPD Republic/Sovereign Free because it ‘created’ a majority against the Associated State) status quo and could manufacture an ‘artificial’ majority for statehood. This The MUS is a recently formed group’s preference order is fairly easy to political group, with a leadership consisting establish based on Garriga Picó’s analysis of old PIP leaders that disagree with some (1979) and confirmed by their leaders’ postures of that party, as well as some comments and attitudes in everyday debate. soberanistas that recognize in this party an Their preference order is 1) Statehood; 2); alternative to force change for sovereignty. Status quo (for fear or indifference of the In general, it would seem they have the subsequent alternatives, which increases same order of preference as PPD based on how far away they get from the soberanistas, and in their most preferred United States); 3) ‘Enhanced outcomes this is the case. However, their Commonwealth’; 4) Sovereign Free worst and next worst outcomes are inverted, Associated State; 5) Independence. for these voters would rather eliminate the territorial condition of Puerto Rico. This PIP – Advocates for the Republic of leads to the following preference order 1) Puerto Rico Sovereign Free Associated State; 2) Independence; 3) ‘Enhanced The PIP is one of the most Commonwealth’; 4) Statehood; and 5) straightforward parties in terms of their Status Quo. expressed preferences. While they would support every alternative that moves the Voter preferences country towards independence, their worst alternative lies in statehood, because it The preceding discussion leads to the forbids any future possibilities of following table of preferences, with symbols independence. Such a position has often I for independence, A for sovereignty provoked their alliance with populares, (associated republic), E for ‘enhanced commonwealth’, Sq for Status Quo, and St

5 Caribbean Business García Padilla: Statehood would turn for Statehood. This scale of preferences will PR into a ‘Latin American ghetto’, June 17, 2013. again be discussed when dealing with the http://www.caribbeanbusinesspr.com/news/garcia-padilla- statehood-would-turn-pr-into-a-latin-american-ghetto- Constituent Assembly. Finally, each player’s 85655.html

4 Journal of Political Inquiry at New York University, Spring 2014 Issue preference scale is assumed to be transitive. an apt case to apply the model established in That is, if a voter prefers I to A, A to E and Forming Stable Coalitions (Brams, Jones, E to Sq, then it will always prefer I to Sq or and Kilgour 2005). With this model, it is I to E. possible to anticipate some of the dynamics From this stated scale of preference, that may arise within the proposed I will derive possible coalition-building Constituent Assembly that would take place processes in the Status Assembly discussed starting in 2014. in section 4, a situation that lends itself to be

Table 1. Voter preferences over status alternatives in Puerto Rico. Party/Preference Best Next Best Indifferent Next worst Worst (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Independentistas I A E Sq St Soberanistas (P) A I E Sq St Soberanistas A I E St Sq (M) Conservadores Sq E A I St Estadistas St Sq E A I Source: Author’s calculations based on explicit and implicit preferences of the leadership of political organizations in Puerto Rico (2012-2013).

The Status Question Revisited most recent plebiscites, which will lead the argument on the following sections of this The 1998 and 2012 plebiscites paper.

Below I present the data of the two

Table 2. The 1998 plebiscite6 Choice Percentage obtained Statehood 46.60% Independence 2.60% Free Association 0.30% Territorial 0.01% Commonwealth None of the Above 50.5%

6 It must be noted that in 1998 the ‘None of the above’ option was favoured by the PPD, for they were not satisfied with the definition of commonwealth there involved, so it should be read as a victory for the status quo alternative.

5 Journal of Political Inquiry at New York University, Spring 2014 Issue

Table 3. The 2012 plebiscite results. First Percentage Percentage Second Percentage Percentage Question (without (Total) question (without (Total) blanks) blanks) Yes 46.00% 44.04% Statehood 61.11% 44.60% No 54.00% 51.70% Sovereignty 33.34% 24.33% Independence 5.55% 4.05% Blanks - 3.55% Blanks - 26.02% Null - 0.71% Null - 0.99% Source: CEE, 2013.

The new voter distribution with a fall in output as measured by Gross National Product of 12.74 percent between As can be seen, the voter distribution 2006 and 2013. We can find decreases in the drastically changed in the left side of the participation and employment rates (from left-right/independence-statehood 48.9 percent to 41.7 percent and from 43.75 continuum in the 2012 plebiscite in relation percent to 35.45 percent, respectively, to the 1998 and other previous referendums. between the same years), and increases on This can be explained by several factors, one unemployment, which currently stands at being the new manner in which the 14.7 percent 7 . The negative economic referendum was conducted. However, the situation has spilled over to other spheres of aftermath and political realignment observed society in combination with other structural would suggest that this new equilibrium problems in Puerto Rico; such as high responds to a change in the distribution. inequality levels, government inefficiency There are several ways to explain this and short-sightedness, budget reliance in political realignment of forces, the defeat of cyclical income and debts, as well as the the status quo, and the increase of support to loss of competitiveness. The situation has the sovereignty and independence also generated higher levels of criminality, alternatives when comparing the results of massive emigration levels that rival the 1998 and 2012 referenda. These range migration patterns of the last six decades, from demographic, cultural, social, and and a general loss of confidence in the political phenomena and changes that have economic and political model of the occurred in the fourteen years between both Commonwealth, as evidenced by a recent referendums. However, these phenomena poll conducted by Puerto Rico’s main have one common link: the economic newspaper, El Nuevo Día. However, the decline that started around 2005 and continues to this day. 7 Data has been drawn from the following sources: GNP The economic contraction (Junta de Planificación), Participation Rate (Departamento del Trabajo y Recursos Humanos), Employment Rate (idem, experienced in Puerto Rico has been severe author’s calculation of provided data), Unemployment Rate (Bureau of Labor Statistics).

6 Journal of Political Inquiry at New York University, Spring 2014 Issue manner in which people react politically variable which embodies non economic with respect to the status issue varies factors, �. This weighting function increases depending on the voters’ previous either the effects of benefits or costs preferences. I formalize in the following depending on the value of the function per section the factors that lead to the se and who the individual voter evaluating electorate’s status preference changes, the function might be through the values of which are based on the economic situation the exponent, �. Voters are also bounded to in Puerto Rico and on the expected utility that each voter ascribes to the relation held limits in the distribution such that vi and va currently with the United States. must never cross to the right of the middle of the distribution (that is, vote for

Modeling the voter distribution statehood), and vice-versa for vs. These constraints 8 hold the preference order To elaborate on the factors that led to expressed earlier, therefore a violation of status preference changes, I define the these restrictions will result in unsatisfactory preferences of the electorate by modeling outcomes. the observed and expected processes in the Due to the negative conditions of the Puerto Rican and American economies with economy and to small, negative or near zero the general function being expectations of utility from the United States ! � = (�)∆�! + (1 − �)�(�!) , – i.e. the perceived benefits from the relation whence the individual voter preferences of have been decreasing for a significant the population (vP) for preferences I, A, Sq portion of the electorate, especially the and St, can be derived. In this model, voters that were to the left of the centrist economic performance of the alternative – the proportion of voters commonwealth through time, et, is satisfied with retaining the status quo combined with the expected utility of the decreased to the point where the territorial relation with the United States for each voter, status quo was defeated. This can be

(ui), with preference weights π and 1- π. The visualized in the spatial distributions for the expected utility function of the relation with electorate, which judging from the results the United States for the Puerto Rican obtained from the CEE, would be electorate could be defined as completely altered, as can be seen here. � � � � It must be observed that both the � = !!! − !!! , �(� ! ! !! original and the new distributions keep the �!" + � �!" + � ! ! median a shade to the left of the statehood � ≥ 0, � < 0 + �) � < 0, � > 0 8 ! where the economic, cultural, legal (rights), The constraints can be expressed as �! : � ∆�! + 1 − � � �! ≤ 0.5 for independence supporters, ! and psychological benefits and costs (real or �! : (�)∆�! + 1 − � � �! ≤ 0.5 for sovereignty ! imagined) of the United States-Puerto Rico supporters �!": � ∆�! + 1 − � � �! ≥ 0.5 for relation are expressed and weighed by the statehood supporters, and no constraints exist for commonwealth-status quo supporters (�! : (�)∆� + (1 − state of the American economy and a !" ! �)�(�!)).

7 Journal of Political Inquiry at New York University, Spring 2014 Issue voters. This is consistent with the results of effort to strengthen it against Statehood and the plebiscites, in which Statehood failed to the blank votes (perhaps as a show of force). attain a majority if one includes the protest This new distribution mostly affects the PPD. blank votes, which conveyed in them a By finally allowing the party and outsiders protest to the way the plebiscite had “loaded to visualize the strengths of both sides, the dice” against their preferred alternative, frictions and tensions have been on the rise status quo. The new distribution however in this centrist party. Although the search for says that the left tail grew in size while the a new equilibrium for their binomial inner peak shrank. This is due to the presence of distribution has proven difficult, it has led to the new alternative, sovereignty, which was the consideration and almost certain future supported officially by the MUS, as well as approval of the Constituent Assembly of the soberanista faction of the PPD Status (CAS). leadership. It obtained nearly 25 percent of the votes, vis-à-vis the 26 percent blank What’s Next: the Constituent Assembly

votes that the rest of the PPD asked for. For the 2012 elections the PPD These voters may also include some proposed to tackle the status issue with an unprecedented mechanism, the CAS. Although Governor García Padilla appeared to be uncertain with regards to this alternative, he eventually reaffirmed that the CAS was a campaign promise, which would be activated in the early days of 2014 if the federal government failed to approve any significant related measure9. Three projects have been proposed, all of which call for a Figure 1. Postulated previous distribution (based from Garriga Picó 1979). similar approach: 1) representatives will be elected proportionally and will negotiate with the Federal Government and themselves the different alternatives for a maximum of five years; 2) every solution must include the derogation of the Puerto Rican Federal Relations Act (which contains all laws pertaining the US-PR relation) and guarantee that it lies outside of the territorial clause of the US Constitution. This would Figure 2 . Postulated new distribution (based on author’s argument). independentistas who decided to give their 9 Caribbean Business PDP cements constituent assembly pledge, August 19, 2013. votes for their second best alternative, in an http://www.caribbeanbusinesspr.com/news/pdp-cements- constituent-assembly-pledge-87835.html.

8 Journal of Political Inquiry at New York University, Spring 2014 Issue rule out entirely the status quo alternative, that a 75 member CAS is approved; (3) that which has been somewhat resisted by some, the alternatives here discussed are the only and provokes changes to the preferences participants; and (4) that the MUS available for the groups (Sq). To see how soberanistas and PPD soberanistas can be this could work, I will use the scale of examined as one force due to their small preferences elaborated in section 2.2, along differences in scale of preferences. This last with the results of section 3.1, to build a assumption is made to simplify the analysis scenario in this CAS. process. This leads to the following setup for inner assembly negotiations derived from Analyzing the Constituent Assembly of Brams (1994). Here, N is an outcome in Status which no option triumphs. Every other outcome will be named with the I will make the following abbreviations used before. assumptions: (1) that the preferences and proportions hold from previous sections; (2)

Table 4. Assumed seating share in the CAS derived from the results of the 2012 referendum. Votes/Seats/Share Party/Preference Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 4 Round 5 4.30% 3 4% Independentistas I A(*) E Sq St 24.58 1 25.3 Soberanistas A(*) I E Sq St % 9 % 26.27 2 26.6 Conservadores Sq E A(*) I St % 0 % 44.85 3 45.3 Estadistas St Sq E A I % 4 % Outcomes Original N N E N St When E is eliminated, and I and S agree to keep N A(*) - N St at A

Projections of a negotiation process cannot hold in reality (anti-statehooders will not vote for statehood, anti-independence Assuming for incomplete voters will not vote for independence). Now information in portions of this game and let us assume that the soberanistas and revelation as we move through successive independentistas know of the conservadores rounds, at first the CAS does not appear to preference scale just before I. If this is the be of much use, finding equilibrium at the E, case, then soberanistas will not budge from which is an unconstitutional alternative. The their initial status (shown as A(*)) and St outcome in round 5 is not attainable and independentistas will try to hold at their next

9 Journal of Political Inquiry at New York University, Spring 2014 Issue best alternative just until the point where the semi-stable coalitions forming depending on conservadores reach the conclusion that A is players’ preference order. In this application, the best outcome they will reach via players have different weights, as identified majority. in table 4. Recall that players’ preferences This strategic vote can only be have been identified in table 1. Again, for replicated satisfactorily on alternatives A simplicity, the soberanistas of the MUS are and E, but E will be ruled out once it is combined with the soberanistas of PPD. For proposed to Congress. St (Statehood) would the initial scenario, we may identify the not be preferred by this process if these preferences in this very same manner: assumptions hold, because every other Initial state I: A E Sq St A: I E Sq player has identified Statehood as its least St Sq: E A I St St: Sq E A I favorable outcome. This may not necessarily where the probable coalitions to be formed be the case in real life: there are voters who are identified in Table 5 following the will probably ‘jump’ in their preference fallback and build-up processes. Assuming scales because they do not necessarily no inner-party or coalition dissensions, it accommodate to the generalized unfolds in the following manner: assumptions made in section 2. Assuming again that these assumptions hold, the third most favored option (sovereignty) would become the successful winner, solving the status problem, although this can only be attained with a grand alliance of every player that does not support the St alternative.

Projections of coalition building in the Constituent Assembly of Status

Following Brams, Jones, and Kilgour’s (2005) model for coalition building and the discussion of previous sections, I examine how the dynamics of the assembly may be understood in a somewhat different manner than the one established in the preceding section. Using the two methods described in this model, fallback (FB) and build-up (BU) processes10, one may find distinct stable and

10 As discussed in Brams, Jones, and Kilgour (2005), fallback and build-up differ in the satisfaction of members with their fellow coalition members: in FB, players need comprised of members whose members rank each other – only be deemed acceptable which may not prevent a desire and no players outside the coalition – the highest. The latter to belong to another coalition. In BU, coalitions are are more stable than the former.

10 Journal of Political Inquiry at New York University, Spring 2014 Issue

Table 5. Coalitions formed in the CAS with options A, E, I, Sq, Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 St(1). Outco FB coalitions formed IASq (for IASq (for A, mes (*= majority) A)* I, E, and IASqSt* (for IA (29.3%) IASq (for Sq)* all) (100%) E)* (55.9%) (55.9%) BU coalitions formed IASq (for IASq (for A, (*= majority) A)* I, E, and IASqSt* (for IA (29.3%) IASq (for Sq)* all) (100%) E)* (55.9%) (55.9%)

That is, even when both I and A find partner for every other player. This makes it themselves as the others’ most preferred impossible for him to side with Sq at the partner, they cannot reach a majority, falling level 1 fallback, which would have led to the short by 20.8 percent of that outcome. A victory of Sq forces by a supermajority. We fallback to the next level produces two also notice that BU coalitions are identical level-2 majority coalitions with different to those reached by FB, due to the outcomes (Associated Republic and preference ordering that positions player St Enhanced Commonwealth) due to the Sq as the last alternative. player split preference between Status Quo However, alternative E (Enhanced and the Enhanced Commonwealth. The Commonwealth) has been disqualified and process is then supposed to stop and we questioned by federal reports and officials designate these coalitions as FB1, that is, the (such as the Presidential Task Force reports set of FB coalitions formed first. In this case, and the recent Congressional hearings in for illustrative purposes, further levels have August 2013), since it would violate the U.S. been identified with results becoming Constitution, thus being an unviable increasingly ambiguous and, finally, alternative. This leads us to reduce the unfeasible. It is important to notice that preference ordering by eliminating E. The player St stands as the least preferred new ranking unfolds as follows:

Reduced state I: A Sq St A: I Sq St Sq: A I St St: Sq A I where the probable coalitions to be formed are identified as in the previous table:

Table 6. Coalitions formed in the Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 CAS with options A, I, Sq, St (2). Outco FB coalitions formed IASq IASq (for Sq IASqSt (for mes (*= majority) (55.9%)* or I)* all)* BU coalitions formed IASq IASq (for Sq IASqSt (for

11 Journal of Political Inquiry at New York University, Spring 2014 Issue

(*= majority) (55.9%)* or I)* all)*

The result is that in the very first level we Commonwealth alternative was eliminated, obtain for both FB and BU processes a for instance, in the 2012 plebiscite, speaks majority coalition, under all the assumptions of a certain degree of manipulation. By previously espoused (transitivity, party and isolating the former Condorcet candidate in coalition discipline). The result in this case a different question, both tails of the is that FB1 = BU1 unequivocally for electoral distribution could join forces to see associated republic (A). If players fallback it defeated. for a second time (which is not the case A less subtle and less effective here), the coalition building process will manipulative action occurred in that very oscillate between the status quo and the same Plebiscite, when the CEE certified independence alternatives. The result is Statehood as the winner with 61% of the similar to the one shown in Table 5. votes cast. The problem is that blank votes However, the elimination of alternative E as were not counted for that purpose and no an option provokes the consummation of a option such as “none of the previous majoritarian coalition at an earlier stage. alternatives” was available as it was in the Thus, the associate republic alternative 1998 plebiscite. The PPD leadership results victorious in the CAS due to the favoring the status quo instructed their bargaining process among coalition followers to leave that portion blank, in an members. It is worth mentioning that this effort to protest this apparent exclusion of alternative was the second (or third) most their formula. It could be argued that PNP favored option in the 2012 referendum. manipulated the process to make its alternative the clear winner, but failed to do so, as has been evidenced both in the Concluding remarks congressional hearings of August and in the

report made by the Congressional Research Heresthetics is a word that must be Center. Heresthetics is a factor that cannot used to describe several events in recent and be ruled out, and actually will be expected future Puerto Rican electoral processes when working with the future CAS. In related to status. The word, coined by Riker particular, vote-trading in the CAS that does (1986), is related to the art of political not resonate with popular sentiment can manipulation; that is, a strategic make this new process fail in its last stages manipulation of behavior and outcomes by making a winning option lose in a through logical, grammatical, or rhetoric confirmation vote in referendum. tools. The manner, by which the

12 Journal of Political Inquiry at New York University, Spring 2014 Issue

Finally, an alternative that must be preference scale. If his candidate is discussed to arrive at a solution to the status eliminated and no majority is obtained at issue while guaranteeing at all times the first, the vote is transferred to his second electorate’s satisfaction is approval voting. alternative, and so on, until the majority In approval voting, the voter can exercise his condition is satisfied. The end result is that real preferred vote (i.e., he/she need not be the most approved candidate is decidedly the insincere and vote for a next best). This is victor, avoiding misunderstandings and the case because this electoral approach heresthetic or manipulative interpretations. allows for the voter to indicate his

13 Journal of Political Inquiry at New York University, Spring 2014 Issue

Bibliography Brams, Steven J.; Fisburn Peter C., Approval Humanos. Statistics on Employment Voting. Boston: Birkhäuscher, 1983. and Unemployment in Puerto Rico for October. Brams, Steven J., Rational Politics: http://www.trabajo.pr.gov/pdf/Estadisti Decisions, Games, and Strategy. cas/2013/GT/gt10.pdf. Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1985. La Encuesta de El Nuevo Día, “Encuesta Brams, Steven J., Theory of Moves. refleja un país desesperanzado” [Poll Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University reveals a country that has lost hope], El Press, 1994 Nuevo Día, November 4, 2013.

Brams, Steven J.; Jones, Michael A.; Garriga Picó, José E. The Question of Status Kilgour, D. M., “Forming stable in Puerto Rico: A Rational-Choice coalitions”. 125 (2005), Analysis. (Unpublished PhD 67-94. dissertation). New York University, New York, USA, 1979. CB Online Staff, “García Padilla: Statehood would turn PR into a ‘Latin American Junta de Planificación. Economic Appendix ghetto’, Caribbean Business, June 17, of the Economic Report to the Governor 2013. and the Legislative Assembly [in Spanish only]. CB Online Staff, “PDP cements constituent http://www2.pr.gov/presupuestos/Presu assembly pledge”, Caribbean Business, puesto2013- August 19, 2013. 2014/Informacin%20de%20Referencia/ Econom%C3%ADa%20de%20PR.pdf. Comisión Estatal de Elecciones. Elecciones Generales 2012 y Consulta sobre el Riker, William H. The Art of Political Estatus Político de Puerto Rico. Manipulation. New Haven: Yale http://ceepur.org/es- University Press, 1986. pr/Webmaster/Paginas/Eventos- Electorales.aspx. The President’s Task Force on Puerto Rico. Report by the President’s Task Force Congressional Research Center. (2013). on Puerto Rico’s Status, Washington, Puerto Rico’s Political Status and the DC: White House.: 2012 Plebiscite: Background and Key http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/defaul Questions. Washington, DC: Library of t/files/uploads/Puerto_Rico_Task_Forc Congress. e_Report.pdf.

Departamento del Trabajo y Recursos “------”. Report by the President’s Task

14 Journal of Political Inquiry at New York University, Spring 2014 Issue

Force on Puerto Rico’s Status, Washington, DC: White House.: U.S. Deparment of Labor. Bureau of Labor http://www.justice.gov/opa/documents/ Statistics. Economy at a Glance: Puerto 2007-report-by-the-president-task- Rico force-on-puerto-rico-status.pdf. http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.pr.htm.

15