The status bill in Congress threatens the compact - Hernandez Colon - Caribbean Business

TRUE OR FALSE:

Ideological blindness makes the NPP leadership, at best, unaware, at worst, perversely destructive, of the legal order created under this compact, which protects the rights of us all.

I have yet to find anything, anywhere the compact that was signed between the island and the national government. There are references to the achievement of the local constitution and PL 600 in the sense of a compact, but to claim there is a compact is misleading and only the PPD believes it. If anyone with a little time on there hands would research they would find that congressional records indicate that many Congressional hearings that Luis Munoz Marin and his Resident Commissioner were reminded that allowing the island to have its own constitution would not change sovereignty or the relationship the national government had over its territory; Puerto Rico. If there was such thing as a "compact" why has the PPD over the years since 1960s tried so hard to enhance the compact? Did they not get what they negotiated when the Estado Libre Asociado was created? It there were a compact why does the PPD have a section of its followers who call themselves "autonomistas" and are willing to have a republica asociada? The PPD wants to have their cake and eat it too. The current political limbo created by the USA and the PPD is slowly dying and it is time to put it out of its misery and with the so-called "compact."

Just a little more for fodder:

Since then, efforts to address the issue of Puerto Rico’s status have been unsuccessful. Even with the enactment of Public Law 600, Congress hasn’t hesitated to continue treating Puerto Rico as a territory with the support of the U.S. Supreme Court.
In cases such as Califano v. Torres (1978) and Harris v. Rosario (1980), the Supreme Court reaffirmed Congress’ plenary powers over Puerto Rico pursuant to the Territorial Clause and also confirmed the island’s status didn’t change with the advent of the Constitution of Puerto Rico. These cases have allowed Congress to treat Puerto Rico differently from the States. The legal precedent established by Balzac v. Porto Rico (1922), which states Puerto Rico is an unincorporated territory of the U.S., remains very much in effect.
Congress hasn’t hesitated to exercise its authority over Puerto Rico in many vital issues. In 1984, for example, Congress unilaterally decided not to return to the Treasury of Puerto Rico the excise taxes in excess of $10.50 a gallon collected on locally produced rum, although Section 9 of the Puerto Rico Federal Relations Act provides that "taxes collected on articles produced in Puerto Rico and transported to the U.S. shall be reverted to the Treasury of Puerto Rico."
Another clear example of Congress’ plenary powers over Puerto Rico was the derogation of Section 936 of the Internal Revenue Code. Congress, through the Small Business Job
Protection Act of 1996, unilaterally terminated the Section 936 credit.
In U.S. v. Casablanca Motors (1994), the U.S. District Court for Puerto Rico concluded, "The current [federal] tax exemption Puerto Rico enjoys is dangerously at the mercy of Congress because there is no basic principle of the U.S. Constitution preventing Congress from gradually extending its full taxing power to Puerto Rico."
Validating the island’s colonial status once again, Judge Juan Perez Jimenez of the U.S. District Court for Puerto Rico wrote in PDP v. Government of Puerto Rico (1998), "Never was Puerto Rico’s approval sought in the derogation of Sec. 936, in the enactment of the Federal Aviation Act, or in the implementation of the legislation related to the rum excise tax. All of these laws of Congress reflect not agreements between equals in the nature of a compact, but unilateral acts pursuant to the Territorial Clause of the United States Constitution."

Excerpts from an article written by Carlos Marquez for Caribbean Business in 2004.