• hydroptic
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    8 months ago

    That honestly seems a bit fucked up. What on earth do they get out of the arrangement if they’re not even able to have the slightest bit of influence in the system?

    • Bassman1805@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      8 months ago

      They have access to US markets and are defended by the US military, without some of the requirements of being a full state.

      It seems to be that it’d be better for PR to join as a full state, but thus far they’ve not gotten the votes together to do it.

      • Pika@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        from what I understand about it, which I am in no way a scholar on the area I am just going off what I remember from my grandfather who was a history teacher. In order for them to get statehood they essentially have to vote on it twice in favor in a row, because they need to vote on it to elect faux representatives to act on their behalf in washington, then on top of that they need to vote yes on it again a few years later during the actual status of the statehood. Currently they have done the first two steps, and are (unless it’s blocked) currently set up to vote on the status of their state this August.

    • Drusas@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      8 months ago

      It’s not as though they’re not given the opportunity to become a state. They have voted in the past for things to stay as-is. If I recall, it was a pretty close vote, however.

      • hydroptic
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        8 months ago

        Ohhh ok, I see. Interesting that they voted against it; are there downsides to statehood vs. their current status?