Why doesn't Puerto Rico make Teabaggers' heads explode?

I have a question for those people that wear Tea Bags. Why aren't you lobbying to let Puerto Ricans the right to vote in the 2012 Presidential Election?

Puerto Ricans pay U.S. Federal taxes. They pay close to $4 billion to the U.S. Treasury per year. That's in U.S. dollars, the legal tender of PR.

They fight in our military and are subject to the draft.

In fact, they've been U.S. citizens since 1917. They have U.S. passports and everything.

But they aren't allowed a vote in Congress and the taxpayers in Puerto Rico aren't allowed to vote for President of the United States.

What gives Tea Party dudes?!? There's your blatant taxation without representation right there. Why hasn't Sarah Palin tweeted about this or something? (assuming she knows where PR is...)

Are you sure about that Presidential vote thing?

Every few years PR gets to vote for independence and so far they haven't pass the resolution. So why don't you ask someone from PR?

I'm glad you brought up taxation, how about anyone who pays NO FEDERAL tax doesn't get to vote. NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION
Wow think of how that would change elections in this country. We'd never see another democratic-socialist president again.

I see Puerto Rico is making the rounds of the web...with some sort of action line that the U.S. is oppressing them.

My first gunner was born and raised there, (and he sure wasn't conscripted into our army), he gave me some perspective.

There are three camps in Puerto Rico: Status Quo, Independence, or Statehood. They seem to be constantly having referendums, but never come to agreement on which camp will prevail. Before the US can 'let' Puerto Rico do anything, Puerto Rico has to 'ask' for something.

BTW, the federal taxes aren't quite so simple. Where do most Puerto Ricans live? CONUS! (thats right, more here than on the island) You bet they pay taxes on their money, just like everybody else who earns money here. But, the Federal government does not tax Puerto Ricans for income earned 'on the island', unless its coming out of a Fed Gov paycheck. So for example, my gunner - pays taxes. His parents working on the island - don't pay federal taxes. We tax money earned CONUS, but we are not confiscating wealth from the island.

Seems like its a push for full voting rights, without statehood...well that completely defeats our entire federal system (ironically Tea Party'esq btw), so its just not going to happen. Somebody's just stirring the pot a bit. Nothing but white noise.

Every few years PR gets to vote for independence and so far they haven't pass the resolution. So why don't you ask someone from PR?

I'm glad you brought up taxation, how about anyone who pays NO FEDERAL tax doesn't get to vote. NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION
Wow think of how that would change elections in this country. We'd never see another democratic-socialist president again. Originally Posted by john_galt

You're kidding right? Well maybe not as that's they way it was before the constituion was amended. Of course, renters won't be able to vote, nor women, nor non-whites.

Is this what the "tea party" is about to exclude rights?

Would that mean that a rich person that pays no Fed Taxes could not vote?

A rich person would then cancel out a poor one the the Middle Class would rise again.

There are three camps in Puerto Rico: Status Quo, Independence, or Statehood. They seem to be constantly having referendums, but never come to agreement on which camp will prevail. Before the US can 'let' Puerto Rico do anything, Puerto Rico has to 'ask' for something. Originally Posted by lacrew_2000

This is not the first time I've heard this over many decades. The States of the US and the population are in no way preventing Puerto Rico from coming or going; it is the people of PR that seem indecisively falling into the current default setting. PR does have representation in Congress, but not a vote (because it has not officially joined as a State). PR could choose to NOT be a territorial protectorate of the US (the same condition the Louisana Purchase zones were before being established into States) by either announcing its own sovereignty or by joining the US. People not a resident of a State cannot vote for President without changing the Constitution. Its not a racist or politcally-motivated block. If you feel so passionate about it, go yell at the PR's in PR forums to shit or get off the toliet (so to speak).

The point Galt was trying to make is that in the US, there are almost as many voters who receive a net benefit from the government as there are who pay taxes in to the government. When the takers achieve a majority, there will be no restraints on government spending. Already our national debt exceeds our Gross National Product. This cannot be sustained if we are to remain a free country. And yes, our Founders seriously debated whether only allowing property owners the vote. They opted against that in order to win more popular support for the war.

Lacrew pretty much nailed it. If PR wants to vote in elections, they simply need to make a decision to apply for statehood. Our official policy to take no position for or against statehood on PR's behalf. If we pressure PR to apply for statehood you'd be yelling about imperialism and American arrogance, so its six one way, half a dozen the other. The folks of PR know they've got a good thing going and want to maintain the status quo. Overall, there is an overwhelming net inflow of federal dollars to PR versus federal taxes assessed, so they are getting the better end of the deal. Speaking strictly in terms of dollars that is. Much could be said about the state of PR's economy, and in particular about our impact on their environment, but that isn't the discussion you started so we can save that discussion for another day.

But the long and short of it is, why should Palin, or any other political figure lead the charge for statehood for PR when the people of PR have made it abundantly clear that they are not interested?

Why are you asking this of the Tea Party folks? Its not like Puerto Rico was discovered last week. Why didn't you ask this question a year ago of Republicans or Democrats? What is your beef with the Tea Party? Do you even know who they are, how they got started, or what they stand for? I'm thinking the answer is no to all three. Why are you allowing mainstream media to tell you what to think about an issue you know nothing of?

I am tired of people crying about poor people who don't pay fed taxes if your mad don't have them fix your fast food or wash your car. No matter what they pay state taxes asshole. PR is fine the way it is and the teabaggers don't have anybody there thats not bored enough to waste there time

Are you sure about that Presidential vote thing? Originally Posted by catnipdipper

Yes.

Every few years PR gets to vote for independence and so far they haven't pass the resolution. So why don't you ask someone from PR?

I'm glad you brought up taxation, how about anyone who pays NO FEDERAL tax doesn't get to vote. NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION
Wow think of how that would change elections in this country. We'd never see another democratic-socialist president again. Originally Posted by john_galt

The question is about members of the Tea Parties. The original Boston Tea Party was about colonists being taxed without representation. Yet modern Tea Party-ists are largely silent about American citizens that are, in a way colonists themselves, being taxed without representation.

Also, you're misleading people when you boldly state that they pay "NO FEDERAL TAX". Please explain to your audience why this is not true and why you chose to mislead them.

I see Puerto Rico is making the rounds of the web...with some sort of action line that the U.S. is oppressing them. Mississippians are wealthy compared to Puerto Ricans. Puerto Rican US Citizens pay taxes...just not income taxes while they're in PR...yet don't have a vote in Congress. If we did that to you would you call it oppression?

My first gunner was born and raised there, (and he sure wasn't conscripted into our army), he gave me some perspective. During a draft, he could have been.

There are three camps in Puerto Rico: Status Quo, Independence, or Statehood. They seem to be constantly having referendums, but never come to agreement on which camp will prevail. Before the US can 'let' Puerto Rico do anything, Puerto Rico has to 'ask' for something.Yes. Or the US could just do whatever it likes at any time because it is the sovereign nation. For example, we could just kick them out or sell them to China, lol. In reality, we should push to end the hundred year temporary Commonwealth status and make them a state. That way the island can have huge economic growth, start paying income taxes, have a better standard of living, and put and end to their disgraceful 2nd class citizenship.

BTW, the federal taxes aren't quite so simple. Where do most Puerto Ricans live? CONUS! (thats right, more here than on the island) You bet they pay taxes on their money, just like everybody else who earns money here. But, the Federal government does not tax Puerto Ricans for income earned 'on the island', unless its coming out of a Fed Gov paycheck. So for example, my gunner - pays taxes. His parents working on the island - don't pay federal taxes. We tax money earned CONUS, but we are not confiscating wealth from the island.

Seems like its a push for full voting rights, without statehood.Nope. Make PR a state. Make them choose one way or the other. Soon. We don't need to have them as a Commonwealth for another 100 years, as a drain on our economy. ..well that completely defeats our entire federal system (ironically Tea Party'esq btw), so its just not going to happen. Somebody's just stirring the pot a bit. Nothing but white noise. Originally Posted by lacrew_2000

White noise? Is that like white power? Lol

This is not the first time I've heard this over many decades. The States of the US and the population are in no way preventing Puerto Rico from coming or going; it is the people of PR that seem indecisively falling into the current default setting. PR does have representation in Congress, but not a vote (because it has not officially joined as a State). PR could choose to NOT be a territorial protectorate of the US (the same condition the Louisana Purchase zones were before being established into States) by either announcing its own sovereignty or by joining the US. People not a resident of a State cannot vote for President without changing the Constitution. Its not a racist or politcally-motivated block. If you feel so passionate about it, go yell at the PR's in PR forums to shit or get off the toliet (so to speak).How bout if I yell at Tea Party members that just elected a majority to Congress to get off their Congressional asses and put their votes where their mouths are? Pass legislation to put PR on the fast track to statehood. Make them vote to become a state in then next few years or set them adrift so they can be just like Haiti. No more free ride, etc... Originally Posted by KCMasseur

They've had a long time to think about it. Force them to choose.

The point Galt was trying to make is that in the US, there are almost as many voters who receive a net benefit from the government as there are who pay taxes in to the government. When the takers achieve a majority, there will be no restraints on government spending. Already our national debt exceeds our Gross National Product. This cannot be sustained if we are to remain a free country. And yes, our Founders seriously debated whether only allowing property owners the vote. They opted against that in order to win more popular support for the war. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Thanks for ballooning the debt, Ronald Reagan.