One obstacle to a permanent political status for Puerto Rico is the myth of “commonwealth.” The story that “commonwealth” is a political status separate from territorial status, and that it can be “developed” or “enhanced” or “perfected,” has confused Congress and voters alike. In recent years, a focus on decolonization of Puerto Rico with a choice between the viable non-territorial options of statehood and nationhood quieted down the “commonwealth” confusion, but it has never entirely gone away. Each time Puerto Rico considers holding a status vote, the question pops up again: should the ballot choices include “commonwealth”?
Recent reporting in Puerto Rico’s El Nuevo Dia has stirred up the discussion in Congress once again. It began with an interview with Congressman Darren Soto (D-FL), who responded to a question from the interviewer by saying that if he reintroduces status legislation for Puerto Rico, he will consult leaders from the Island, including the resident commissioner and the governor. While Soto’s point was that he would make sure to listen to Puerto Rico’s leaders in planning any such legislation, the news source seized the opportunity to headline their article “Darren Soto is considering including the territorial ELA in a potential new federal plebiscite project.”
Soto immediately posted on X to clarify his position, emphasizing that he plans “to support a bill that protects the right to vote for statehood.” He also stated that his remarks to El Nuevo Dia had been about negotiations on the bill which he anticipated.
Responses
Resident Commissioner Pablo José Hernández told El Vocero that he appreciated Soto’s remarks, saying, “If someone brings up the issue of status, I will advocate for an option to maintain and improve the Commonwealth status.”
Again in El Nuevo Dia, Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY) responded to Soto’s comments as reported. She said that it was “nonsensical” to include the territorial option in a bill intended to decolonize Puerto Rico. She said that the Puerto Rico Status Act, the most recent Puerto Rico status bill, “is a historic piece of legislation, the first in more than three decades, created to offer Puerto Ricans a clear, democratic and binding process to define their political future.”
“This project was born with the purpose of correcting a generational impasse and ending the island’s colonial status. The central objective of this measure is to decolonize the island… For these reasons, we must remain firm in ensuring that the Puerto Rico Status Act moves forward as a real vehicle for decolonization and respect for the democratic will of the people of Puerto Rico ,” she told El Nuevo Dia.
Velazquez cited territory status as a systemic problem for Puerto Rico’s economy. She described territory status as incompatible with full political equality and long‑term development, saying that it should be replaced rather than “improved.”
Velazquez, who was one of the framers of the original Puerto Rico Status Bill, confirmed her commitment to the choices it provided: statehood, independence, or free association. She expressed a willingness to talk with colleagues, but emphasized that she sees defending an anti‑colonial framework in Congress as part of her core responsibility to Puerto Rico.
Velazquez is from Puerto Rico and has been, like Soto, a consistent supporter of the Island in Congress. Soto favors statehood and Velazquez has not publicly supported any status option in recent years, opting instead to focus on decolonization. Both have been involved in recent status bills.
