D.C. and Puerto Rico Statehood
The debate to grant Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico statehood pops up periodically in the news or the halls of U.S. Congress. Versions of these debates have been popular since the early 1800s for D.C., and since the 1950s for Puerto Rico, though debate over the latter’s autonomy or independence dates to when the island was under Spanish colonial rule.
The United States has not granted statehood to a jurisdiction since 1959, when Alaska was admitted on Jan. 3 and Hawaii on Aug. 21. [1][2]
(This article first appeared on ProCon.org and was last updated on July 17, 2024.)
How Would D.C. or Puerto Rico Become a State?
The Admissions Clause (Article IV, Section 3) of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to create a new state: “New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.” [3]
According to the National Constitution Center, the basic process most often used for a state to join the Union, and the foundational process used every time since West Virginia joined in 1863, has been for Congress to first make the jurisdiction a U.S. territory and ask for a local constitution that conforms to the U.S. Constitution. Then Congress grants statehood, often requiring the president’s final approval. For many states, Congress has made those steps “a more complicated process” and required the passage of additional acts or resolutions. [2][4]
Thirty-seven states have been added to the United States via Congress and the Admissions Clause since the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, beginning with Vermont in 1791 and ending with Hawaii in 1959. According to Matt Glassman, senior fellow at the Government Affairs Institute at Georgetown University, “Nineteen [additions] were the admission of an entire territory, already bounded and recognized as a political community. Ten were the partial admission of a territory. Some territories became a state, and the residual portion of the territory was reorganized as a new community. One state (California) was created out of unorganized federal land. One state was formed from a bounded nation (Texas). And four states (Vermont, Kentucky, Maine, and West Virginia) were created from land legally held by existing states.” [4][5]
Washington, D.C.
The debate over whether to give D.C. representation in Congress has been raging since 1801, when the district lost voting representation and became the seat of the U.S. federal government with the passage of the District of Columbia Organic Act. When the 23rd Amendment was ratified in 1963, D.C. was allowed to vote in presidential elections, and it was granted Electoral College votes proportional to the population but not more than the least populous state (which, since 1964, has meant three votes). [37][38][39]
In 1973 Congress passed the Home Rule Act, which allowed D.C. to elect a mayor and council to self-govern to some degree, though all legislation and the D.C. budget must still be approved (and can be denied) by Congress. [38]
In 1978 a constitutional amendment was proposed that would repeal the 23rd Amendment and would grant D.C. representation in Congress “as though it were a state,” giving it two senators and a representative. Thirty-eight states were needed to ratify the amendment, but only 16 had done so by the expiration date in 1985. [25]
The statehood debate did not pick up steam until 1979 when J. Edward Guinan, a former priest, authored the first statehood initiative. Passed by a majority of D.C. residents in 1980, the initiative called for a constitutional convention to create a constitution for a “State of New Columbia” that would then be sent to Congress and President Ronald Reagan for approval in 1982 to grant D.C. statehood. The New Columbia Statehood commission later found no evidence that the request was ever considered by the federal government. [40][41]
Campaigns, referendums, and bills in both the House and Senate to grant D.C. statehood have been plentiful since the 1980s, but none have been passed by both houses of Congress. [42]
On June 26, 2020, the House passed HR 51 to grant D.C. statehood, though the Senate and the Trump administration opposed the bill. The bill was passed by the House a second time on Apr. 22, 2021, with a vote of 216–208. Both bills were sponsored by D.C.’s nonvoting delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, who has introduced 22 bills to grant D.C. statehood as of Jan. 20, 2022 in her “Free and Equal D.C. Series.” The Biden administration signaled support of the bill on Apr. 20, 2021, but the bill faced hard odds in the Senate, where it needed 60 votes to overcome the filibuster. Nevertheless, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee held a hearing on June 22, 2021. The bill would have shrunk Washington, D.C., to include the White House, National Mall, monuments, and other federal buildings, leaving the rest of the city to become the 51st state, called “Washington, Douglass Commonwealth” (a nod to Frederick Douglass). Norton continues to introduce D.C. statehood bills. [42][43][44][45][46][60][61]
An Apr. 21, 2021, Morning Consult/Ipsos poll found 40% of citizens supported D.C. statehood, 32% were opposed, and 28% didn’t know or had no opinion. Support was mostly found among Democrats (62%), liberals (65%), Black people (60%), and those who live in urban areas (57%). Opposition was mostly found among Republicans (59%), conservatives (61%), white people (36%), and those who live in rural areas (41%). [47]
Puerto Rico
Puerto Rico’s official name is the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico in Spanish, and is home to about three million people. The island is described as a “freely associated state” by its Spanish name. However, Puerto Rico is officially an unincorporated territory or commonwealth of the United States per the Puerto Rico Commonwealth Bill signed by President Harry Truman in 1950. [12][29]
Puerto Rico was acquired by the United States—along with Cuba, the Philippines, and other territories—from Spain after the 1898 Spanish-American War. Prior to the war, Puerto Rico had been planning to implement an autonomous government under Spain. The U.S. wanted Puerto Rico specifically to build a strong naval military presence in the Caribbean (which continues to this day) and to ease access to the then in-progress Panama Canal (which would be completed in 1914). [28][29]
Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens by birth. They cannot, however, vote in U.S. presidential elections and may only elect a resident commissioner to the U.S. House of Representatives (who may vote in committees only). While Puerto Ricans who reside full-time on the island and are employed only by an employer in Puerto Rico do not have to pay federal income taxes, those who live only part-time on the island and/or work for American off-island or international employers (including the U.S. military) do have to pay federal income taxes. Residents also pay other federal taxes such as for Social Security and Medicare. The Puerto Rican government is structured like that of the U.S. with an executive branch consisting of a democratically elected governor, a legislative branch, and a judicial branch. Puerto Ricans may change their constitution as long as there are no conflicts with the U.S. Constitution. The judicial branch is overseen by a U.S. district court, and cases may be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. [29][48]
Though Puerto Ricans have striven for autonomy since they were under Spanish colonial rule, the statehood debate took shape when Alaska and Hawaii were admitted as states in 1959. A commission appointed by the Congress concluded that three options were available for Puerto Rico: commonwealth, statehood, or independence. The entire island population voted on the options in July 1967. The Popular Democratic Party (Partido Popular Democrático) supported the vote, but the vote was boycotted by both the statehood and independence parties, skewing the results: 60.4% supported commonwealth status; 38.9% statehood; and 0.6% independence. [29]
Five other island-wide votes were held between 1993 and 2020. Most Puerto Ricans participated in the Nov. 1993 vote: 48.6% supported commonwealth status, 46.3% statehood, and 4% independence. A third vote in Dec. 1998 added a “none of the above” option and resulted in 50.3% selecting “none of the above,” 46.6% statehood, and 2.5% independence. [29][49]
A Nov. 2012 vote found that about 54% of Puerto Ricans were not satisfied with territorial status. In that vote, 61% indicated statehood was their preferred option. However, the wording of the question did not offer a non-statehood option, resulting in the question being left blank by many voters. In June 2017, only 23% of Puerto Rican voters cast ballots, with 97% favoring statehood. Puerto Ricans voted a sixth time in Nov. 2020 but only for or against statehood (commonwealth and/or independence options were not provided). 52% favored statehood, while 47% were against it. A Mar. 2024 poll found 47.2% of Puerto Ricans support statehood, 23.3% support free association, and 11.4% support independence. [49][50][64]
66% of Americans favored Puerto Rican statehood in July 2019, support that has been consistent since the 1960s. 27% opposed statehood and 7% had no opinion. [35]
Other Inhabited Unincorporated U.S. Territories
The United States has four other inhabited unincorporated territories: American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Like Puerto Rico, residents of the islands cannot vote in presidential elections (with a few small exceptions), and do not have a voting representative in Congress, but instead each has a delegate who can only vote in committees. U.S. federal taxation also works like the system in Puerto Rico, with island-only residents and employees not paying U.S. federal income taxes. American Samoa is the only one of the five territories in which residents are not U.S. citizens by birth but are instead classified as U.S. nationals. [51][52][53]
The populations of these island territories are arguably so small that the statehood debate is difficult to apply. The CIA World Factbook estimates the population of American Samoa to be 43,895. About 169,532 people live on Guam, 51,118 on the Northern Mariana Islands, and 104,377 on the U.S. Virgin Islands. Collectively, the island populations are slightly smaller than that of Cleveland, Ohio. [54][55][56][57][58][59]
When considering the statehood debate for D.C. and Puerto Rico, also thinking about the roughly 368,922 people living in other U.S. territories in similar situations might be fruitful.
| PROS | CONS |
|---|---|
| Pro 1: D.C. residents are American citizens who are treated like second-class citizens. Read More. | Con 1: D.C. was never intended to be a U.S. state. Read More. |
| Pro 2: Puerto Rico residents are American citizens who are treated like second-class citizens. Read More. | Con 2: Puerto Rico was never intended to be a U.S. state. Read More. |
| Pro 3: Denying D.C. and Puerto Rico statehood is a racist and hypocritical partisan ploy by conservatives to deny voting rights to about 3.8 million voters. Read More. | Con 3: Granting D.C. or Puerto Rico statehood is a partisan ploy by liberals to unfairly gain more voters for the passage of legislation that the majority of Americans reject and which couldn’t win approval under existing laws. Read More. |
Pro Arguments
(Go to Con Arguments)Pro 1: D.C. residents are American citizens who are treated like second-class citizens.
“Since its creation, the District has sometimes been treated like a State. The District is deemed to be a State for the purpose of levying and collecting federal and local taxes, for service in the armed forces, for diversity jurisdiction, and for regulating commerce. But it still remains that, at present, the District is not considered a State for purposes of congressional representation,” explained John S. Baker, Jr., and Aderson B. Francois, both law professors at Georgetown University. [6]
Moreover, D.C. has 712,000 residents who are subject to federal taxes, selective service (draft) laws and military service, and the whims of Congressional control over the district’s courts, laws, and budgets. But residents have only nonvoting representation in the U.S. House and no representation in the Senate, which means residents have no say in Senate committees, leadership of government agencies, ambassadors, or federal judges. [7]
D.C. residents pay the highest per capita federal taxes in the United States and more total federal income tax than residents of 22 other states. Per the “no taxation without representation” standard set by the U.S. Constitution, D.C. residents should have the Congressional representation they are denied by not being a state. [7]
Further, Congress holds power over D.C. via the Home Rule Act of 1973, which means Congress can deny any law D.C. residents pass. Thus, D.C. is functionally a state until Congress wants to meddle in laws, such as the congressional blockage of D.C.’s adult-use marijuana sales law that was passed with overwhelming citizen support (70%) in 2014 but no regulatory framework has been put in place due to congressional opposition. [8][9][10]
Pro 2: Puerto Rico residents are American citizens who are treated like second-class citizens.
While some say that D.C. residents are treated like “second-class citizens,” frequently Puerto Ricans are treated like foreigners. Only 54% of Americans polled in 2017 knew that Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens. 22% said Puerto Ricans were not citizens and 24% did not know. [11]
Puerto Ricans were granted citizenship in Mar. 1917 when President Woodrow Wilson signed the Jones-Shafroth Act. However, the 3.1 million residents of the island are often subject to discrimination that stateside citizens are not. As recently as 2017, to obtain a driver’s license Puerto Ricans were asked difficult questions including, “What is the name of the frog [the “coqui”] native only to Puerto Rico?” Additionally, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Apr. 21, 2022, that Puerto Ricans do not have a constitutional right to some federal benefits, including Supplemental Security Income. The ruling could be applied by Congress to other benefits such as Medicare and Social Security, even though Puerto Ricans pay federal taxes. [12][13][14][62]
Like D.C., Puerto Rico is also subject to the whims of Congress. As Charles Venator-Santiago, political science professor at the University of Connecticut, summarizes, “Congress has this wide berth to do what it wants to help the island. They’ve chosen to discriminate downward, historically.” [15]
Pro 3: Denying D.C. and Puerto Rico statehood is a racist and hypocritical partisan ploy by conservatives to deny voting rights to about 3.8 million voters.
D.C. has about 712,000 citizens and Puerto Rico about 3.1 million citizens, none of whom have full voting rights because of a lack of representation in Congress. [7][12]
Most of those voters are Black and/or Latino/Hispanic. D.C.’s population is 46% Black and 19.4% other people of color. Admission of D.C. would make it the second majority nonwhite state after Hawaii. Puerto Rico is 98.7% Latino or Hispanic and 34.8% other people of color. While a majority of Puerto Ricans identify as white, the island’s predominantly Spanish culture makes them easily racialized by those opposing statehood. [16][17][18][19]
Though writing specifically about D.C., the following statement by senior Obama speechwriter David Litt applies equally to Puerto Rico: “Withholding statehood…is part of a far more sinister nationwide effort to disenfranchise nonwhite Americans at disproportionate rates. Today, nonwhite Americans are more likely to be purged from voter rolls; more likely to live in gerrymandered ‘vote sinks’ where elections are effectively decided by maps and not voters; more likely to endure horrifically long lines to vote, when they can at all. These efforts to minimize the impact of nonwhite votes, whether motivated by cynical partisanship or explicit white supremacy, are a legacy of the most shameful part of American history. This is the context in which D.C. statehood has been denied for more than a century.” [18]
The Republican argument that adding D.C. or Puerto Rico is a ploy to unfairly gain more liberal voters is hypocritical and belies how Republicans brought in a number of states. George Derek Musgrove, Ph.D., history professor at the University of Maryland Baltimore County, explained: “Western states that were brought in in the late 19th century—Colorado, the Dakotas—were not only brought in on a party-line vote, but they were brought in specifically with the purpose to pad Republican majorities.” [20]
Republicans sped up Nevada’s admission in 1864 to give President Lincoln an election boost and lobbied to have the Dakota territory split in two—North and South Dakota—during the 1889 statehood process in order to gain four Republican senators instead of two. Hawaii was granted statehood in order to gain Republican representation after Alaska provided Democrats a boost. [20]
Finally, the 2020 GOP platform (which was a renewal of the 2016 platform) plainly states the Republican party’s support for Puerto Rico statehood. [21]
Con Arguments
(Go to Pro Arguments)Con 1: D.C. was never intended to be a U.S. state.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the U.S. Constitution states: “To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings” [22]
In the Federalist Papers, James Madison wrote of the “indispensable necessity” of the federal government having “complete authority” over the seat of the government, stating the “power [is one] exercised by every legislature of the Union, I might say of the world.” [23][24]
Though writing before D.C. became the capital, Madison feared that if the capital were in a state, the residents of that state would have undue power over the federal government. [23][24]
Making D.C. a state would require not just a simple act of Congress, but a constitutional amendment (one of which has already failed to be ratified), and the revocation of Amendment 23, which gave D.C. voting rights in presidential elections and electoral college votes. [25][26]
Further, the Founding Fathers did not intend for D.C. to suffer “taxation without representation.” Instead, as explained by Jonathan Turley, J.D., professor of public interest law at George Washington University, the Founders “repeatedly stated that the District would be represented by the entire Congress and that members (as residents or commuters to that District) would bear a special interest in its operations.” [27]
Con 2: Puerto Rico was never intended to be a U.S. state.
The United States occupied Puerto Rico in 1898, taking the island from the Spanish to ensure a strong military presence in the Caribbean and access to a canal through Panama, not to add a state to the Union. [28][29]
After the U.S. ended military occupation of the island, the Foraker Act, signed on Apr. 12, 1900, by President McKinley, established Puerto Rico as an “unorganized territory.” Though the act did not confer citizenship, several senators, including John C. Spooner (R-WI), believed the legislation gave false promises. Spooner stated, “I am not yet ready, nor are we called upon now, to give that quasi pledge of statehood, or to imply that they will ever reach a condition where it shall be either for their interests, or certainly for ours, to let them be one of the members of this Union.” [30]
In Downes v. Bidwell (1901), the U.S. Supreme Court designated Puerto Rico as a nonincorporated territory, one that does not enjoy the protections of the U.S. Constitution and whose people are not U.S. citizens. [30]
While Puerto Ricans have since been granted citizenship and constitutional protections, the island was never meant to be a U.S. state.
Con 3: Granting D.C. or Puerto Rico statehood is a partisan ploy by liberals to unfairly gain more voters for the passage of legislation that the majority of Americans reject and which couldn’t win approval under existing laws.
78% of Republican voters opposed making D.C. a state in a 2019 Gallup poll. A percentage explained by Erin Doherty of FiveThirtyEight: “Adding a state could change the makeup of Congress. Washington, D.C., is a heavily Democratic city—for example, just 4 percent of its residents voted for President Trump in 2016—so D.C. statehood would almost certainly give Democrats two more senators and one more seat in the House, all of which could make Republicans less likely to support it.” [31][32]
Keith Naughton, Ph.D., cofounder of Silent Majority Strategies, argued that granting D.C. statehood is “bad policy and uses the legitimate grievance of lack of representation by D.C. residents for temporary partisan gain.” [33]
As Naugton explained, D.C. statehood is the “cause celebre of the moment for the activist Left. Stung by their lack of appeal in rural America (exacerbated by their utter unwillingness to try), adding D.C. as a state is their solution. In other words, if the rules don’t work for us, change the rules.” [33]
U.S. Representative James Comer (R-KY) was even more direct about Democrats’ objectives, calling the statehood push a “power grab”: “D.C. statehood is all about Speaker Pelosi and liberal Democrats consolidating their power to enact radical policies nationwide like the Green New Deal, packing the Supreme Court, and eliminating the filibuster. The Democrats’ bill is unconstitutional and no amount of testimony can change that basic fact…H.R. 51 doesn’t rest in sound policy and is a dangerous political power grab that will ensure more government intrusion into Americans’ daily lives.” [34]
Many of the same arguments apply to Puerto Rico, though fewer Republicans (48%) are opposed to its statehood. [35]
Senator Mitch McConnell, who summarized both statehood campaigns as “full-bore socialism,” explained that the House Democrats want to pass laws “that would turn us into a country we would never be…They’re on the way to doing some additional things…the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, and by the way…they plan to make the District of Columbia a state that gives two new Democratic senators. [Make] Puerto Rico a state [and] get two more new Democratic senators. And…you’ve surely noticed [their] plan to expand the Supreme Court.” [36]
Liberals can’t be allowed to add states just to gain support for policies that are unsupported by residents of existing U.S. states.
Discussion Questions
- Should Washington, D.C., be granted statehood? Should Puerto Rico be granted statehood? Why or why not?
- What other policies could mitigate the problems seen by proponents of statehood? Explain your answer(s).
- Should any or all of the other U.S. territories be granted statehood? Why or why not? What other measures might be considered, if any, to resolve the lack of representation in Congress, citizenship, and other concerns?
Take Action
- Consider the D.C. government’s page promoting statehood.
- Explore the PR51st campaign arguments for Puerto Rico statehood.
- Analyze the Senate Republican Policy Committee’s arguments against D.C. statehood.
- Consider Diego Panzardi Serra’s arguments against Puerto Rico statehood.
- Explore arguments about granting statehood to the other U.S. territories at Northern Virginia Daily, Foreign Policy, Open Democracy, and The Hill.
- Consider how you felt about the issue before reading this article. After reading the pros and cons on this topic, has your thinking changed? If so, how? List two to three ways. If your thoughts have not changed, list two to three ways your better understanding of the “other side of the issue” now helps you better argue your position.
- Push for the position and policies you support by writing U.S. senators and representatives.
Sources
- U.S. Capitol Visitor Center, “Territorial Hawaii,” visitthecapital.gov (accessed June 10, 2021)
- National Constitution Center, “The Last Time Congress Created a New State,” constitutioncenter.org, March 12, 2021
- Legal Information Institute of Cornell University, “Section 3. Admission of New States; Property of United States,” law.cornell.edu (accessed June 10, 2021)
- Eric Biber and Thomas B. Colby, “Common Interpretation: The Admissions Clause,” constitutioncenter.org (accessed June 10, 2021)
- Matt Glassman, “The Procedures for Adding States to the Union,” legislativeprocedure.com, Oct. 23, 2020
- John S. Baker, Jr., and Aderson B. Francois, “Common Interpretation: The Twenty-Third Amendment,” constitutioncenter.org (accessed June 16, 2021)
- DC Statehood, “Why Statehood for DC,” statehood.dc.gov (accessed June 16, 2021)
- Ballotpedia, “Washington D.C. Marijuana Legalization, Initiative 71 (November 2014),” ballotpedia.org (accessed June 16, 2021)
- Martin Austermuhle, “In Latest Spending Bill, Congress Still Won’t Let D.C. Legalize Sales Of Marijuana,” wamu.org, Dec.17, 2019
- Kim Lyons, “Biden’s Proposed Budget Keeps a Block on Recreational Weed Sales in Washington, DC,” theverge.com, June 4, 2021
- Morning Consult, “Morning Consult National Tracking Poll #170916 September 22-24, 2017,” morningconsult.com, Sep. 22–24, 2017
- CIA World Factbook, “Puerto Rico,” cia.gov, July 8, 2024
- Library of Congress, “Jones Act,” loc.gov (accessed June 17, 2021)
- Christina Maxouris and Artemis Moshtaghian, “A Puerto Rican Man sued Georgia for Discriminatory Driver’s License Policies. Now the State Is Making Changes,” cnn.com, Feb. 11, 2020
- Susan Milligan, “A Territory in Limbo,” usnews.com, June 8, 2018
- U.S. Census Bureau, “QuickFacts District of Columbia,” census.gov (accessed June 16, 2021)
- U.S. Census Bureau, “QuickFacts Puerto Rico,” census.gov (accessed June 16, 2021)
- David Litt, “The D.C. Statehood Fight Is Part of an Ugly Effort to Disenfranchise Black and Brown People,” nbcnews.com, June 26, 2020
- Ileana I. Diaz, “Malignant Citizenship: Race, Imperialism, and Puerto Rico-United States Entanglements,” Jan. 28, 2021
- Robert McCartney, “Even the GOP’s Three Best Arguments against D.C. Statehood Don’t Stand up to Scrutiny,” washingtonpost.com, Mar. 29, 2021
- Republican National Convention, “Republican Platform 2016,” gop.com, 2020
- U.S. Congress Constitution Annotated, “Article I, Section 8, Clause 1,” constitution.congress.gov (accessed June 16, 2021)
- The Avalon Project of the Yale Law School Lillian Goldman Law Library, “The Federalist Papers : No. 43,” avalon.law.yale.edu (accessed June 16, 2021)
- Tessa Berenson, “Here’s Why Washington D.C. Isn’t a State,” time.com, Apr. 15, 2016
- Joseph L. Rauh, Jr., “D.C. Voting Rights: What Went Wrong? The Amendment Died Last Week. Now, Says a Longtime Advocate, Statehood Is the Only Game in Town.,” washingtonpost.com, Aug. 25, 1985
- Roger Pilon, “Making D.C. the 51st State,” cato.org, Mar. 22, 2021
- “Ending Taxation without Representation: The Constitutionality of S. 1257,” books.google.com, May 23, 2007
- Wayne D. Bray et al., “Panama Canal,” britannica.com, Feb. 26, 2021
- Olga D. Wagenheim et al., “Puerto Rico,” britannica.com, June 5, 2021
- U.S. House of Representatives: History, Art, and Archives, “Puerto Rico,” history.house.gov (accessed June 16, 2021)
- Erin Doherty, “Why Don’t Americans Want D.C. to Be a State?,” fivethirtyeight.com, July 19, 2019
- Jeffrey M. Jones, “Americans Reject D.C. Statehood,” gallup.com, July 15, 2019
- Keith Naughton, “DC statehood is bad policy and worse politics,” thhill.com, Apr. 24, 2021
- Beatrice Peterson and Benjamin Siegel, “Why Democrats want to make Washington, DC, the 51st state,” abcnews.go, Mar. 22, 2021
- Justin McCarthy, “Americans Continue to Support Puerto Rico Statehood,” July 18, 2019
- Fox News, “McConnell: I Am the ‘Grim Reaper’ of the Democratic Socialist Agenda,” foxnews.com, June 13, 2019
- American Bar Association, “Statement of the American Bar Association Submitted to the Subcommittee on the Constitution Committee on the Judiciary U.S. House of Representatives on the Subject of H.R. 5388, the District of Columbia Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act,” abanet.org, Sep. 14, 2006
- Council of the District of Columbia, “D.C. Home Rule,” dccouncil.us (accessed June 14, 2021)
- 270toWin, “District of Columbia,” 270towin.com (accessed June 14, 2021)
- Catherine Woodiwiss, “Remembering J. Edward Guinan, Passionate Advocate for D.C.’s Most Vulnerable,” sojo.net, Jan. 7, 2015
- New Columbia Statehood Commission, “Draft Constitution Package Final,” statehood.dc.gov, 2016
- Jenna Portnoy, “D.C. Statehood Approved by U.S. House for First Time in History,” washingtonpost.com, June 26, 2020
- Eleanor Holmes Norton, “House Passes D.C. Statehood Bill in Historic Vote,” norton.house.gov, Apr. 22, 2021
- U.S. Congress, “H.R.51 - Washington, D.C. Admission Act,” congress.gov (accessed June 14, 2021)
- Kevin Breuninger, “Biden Administration Backs D.C. Statehood, Urges ‘Swift’ Action as House Prepares to Vote on Bill,” cnbc.com, Apr. 20, 2021
- Marty Johnson, “Senate to Hold Hearing on DC Statehood Bill,” thehill.com, June 15, 2021
- Eli Yokley, “Support for D.C. Statehood Is Lukewarm, but Many Voters Haven’t Made up Their Minds,” morningconsult.com, Apr. 21, 2021
- Violeta Stauffer-Rodriguez, “Who in Puerto Rico Should File a U.S. Tax Return?,” hrblock.com, Jan. 31, 2019
- Frances Robles, “23% of Puerto Ricans Vote in Referendum, 97% of Them for Statehood,” nytimes.com, June 2017
- Cristina Corujo, “Puerto Rico votes in favor of statehood. But what does it mean for the island?,” abcnews.go, Nov. 8, 2020
- Sean Lowry, “Tax Policy and U.S. Territories: Overview and Issues for Congress,” fas.gov, Oct. 7, 2016
- U.S. Department of the Interior Office of Insular Affairs, “American Samoa,” doi.gov, 2020
- Doug Mack, “The Biggest Issues in the Places Where Americans Can’t Vote for President,” slate.com, Oct. 1, 2020
- John P. Caves, “In the Debate over Statehood for Washington DC, We Also Need to Consider Representation for US Territories,” thehill.com, July 20, 2020
- U.S. Census Bureau, “QuickFacts: Cleveland City, Ohio,” census.gov (accessed June 15, 2021)
- CIA World Factbook, “American Samoa,” cia.gov, July 8, 2024
- CIA World Factbook, “Guam,” cia.gov, July 8, 2024
- CIA World Factbook, “Northern Mariana Islands,” cia.gov, July 8, 2024
- CIA World Factbook, “Virgin Islands,” cia.gov, July 10, 2024
- Meagan Flynn, “At Senate Committee, D.C. Statehood Is Debated Anew,” washingtonpost.com, June 22, 2021
- Eleanor Holmes Norton, “Norton Introduces Bill to Redesignate D.C. Mayor as Governor and D.C. Council as Legislative Assembly,” norton.house.gov, Jan. 20, 2022
- Ariane de Vogue, “Supreme Court Rules Puerto Ricans Don’t Have Constitutional Right to Some Federal Benefits,” cnn.com, Apr. 21, 2022
- The American Presidency Project, “2024 Republican Party Platform,” presidency.ucsb.edu, 2024
- PR51st, “New Status Poll,” pr51st.com, Mar. 4, 2024
- U.S. Census Bureau, “U.S. Population Trends Return to Pre-Pandemic Norms as More States Gain Population,” census.gov, Dec. 19, 2023