A ‘State’ of Limbo: The Puerto Rico Question
September 30, 2026
The Puerto Rican public has yet again called for statehood. On June 10, 2026, Puerto Rico’s Resident Commissioner, Pablo Jose Hernández, introduced H.R.9246, the Puerto Rico Democratic Self Determination Act (“Self Determination Act”). If passed, the Act would mandate a plebiscite to resolve Puerto Rico’s political status on March 14, 2027, with the result binding the federal government. The introduction of the Act followed a referendum conducted in 2024, where 56.82% of Puerto Ricans voted in favor of statehood when given a choice between statehood, independence or sovereignty in free association with the United States. If enacted, the Self Determination Act would give Puerto Ricans the right to decide whether they want to become the 51st state, and by extension, gain access to federal electoral power. If the vote resulted in a majority in favor of statehood, the Act mandates Puerto Rico’s admission as a State of the Union, the initiation of federal elections of Senators and Representatives, and changes to federal laws as they apply to Puerto Rico regarding taxation; health care; housing; transportation; education; and entitlement programs.
This is not the first time that Puerto Rico has asserted a desire to join the Union. Puerto Rico has held plebiscites on the question of statehood numerous times since its inception, the most recent of which occurred in 2012, 2017, 2020, and 2024. Currently, those born in Puerto Rico are U.S. citizens, but do not pay federal income taxes, or enjoy funding in parity with the States regarding federal programs like Social Security and Medicaid. For example, Puerto Rico’s FMAP for Medicaid (the rate at which the federal government matches local funding) is 76% through FY 2027, when it will drop down to the statutory baseline of 55% unless Congress acts. Furthermore, Puerto Rico receives its funding in the form of block grants, with statutory caps. This means that when increased need arises, no adjustments may be made to help keep the island’s federal programs afloat.
Aside from the financial implications of the statehood question, Puerto Rico’s status as a territory directly impacts its citizens’ right to vote and enjoy congressional representation. Puerto Rican citizen-residents, like those in other U.S. territories, cannot vote in Presidential elections, and have no constitutional entitlement to federal representation. Territories’ only option for representation is a nonvoting member in the House. For Puerto Rico, this means representation in Congress by a Resident Commissioner. This position was originally established in 1900 by the Foraker Act and later expanded upon in 1917 through the Jones-Shafroth Act. Originally, the role involved only limited authority within the House and two-year terms. However, over time House amendments and the Jones-Shafroth Act expanded the position’s authority. Now, the Resident Commissioner serves a four-year term, may introduce legislation, sit on committees and participate in debates, but the role lacks what is arguably the most consequential power: the right to vote on the House floor (with some limited exceptions for when the House sits as a Committee of the Whole). Furthermore, the Resident Commissioner is elected in a General Election to serve the entire island of Puerto Rico rather than a single district as would be typical of a voting-member of the House. Thus, an inherent tension exists on whether the primary purpose of the role is to elevate local or federal interests.
With its impending Medicaid funding cliff on October 1, 2027, now more than ever it is important that Puerto Rico’s citizens have robust representation in Congress. However, despite Puerto Rico’s clear desire to strengthen (and eventually solidify) its relationship with the United States, measures such as the plebiscites and the Self Determination Act are seeming increasingly unlikely to see success in the current Congress. In fact, some members of Congress are considering measures to remove access to the franchise for those born in U.S. territories. After the Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship for those born to noncitizen parents in Trump v. Barbara, questions lingered about the citizenship status of those born in the U.S. territories, including Puerto Rico. In the wake of these questions, Representative Griffith Morgan of Virginia’s 9th District introduced H.R. 9724, the End Birthright Citizenship for Territories Act on July 16, 2026. This bill, if enacted, would end birthright citizenship for some individuals in the territories by reserving citizenship to only those born in the territories to U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident parents.
Furthermore, the Republican Party, which currently holds the majority of seats in both houses of Congress, has historically expressed skepticism about Puerto Rican statehood. In 2022, Congress considered H.R. 8393, the Puerto Rico Status Act (“Status Act”). While the Act passed the House, the vote was mainly along partisan lines, with 217 Democrats voting in favor of the bill but only 16 Republicans doing the same. The bill stalled in the Senate after it failed to schedule a floor vote, and recent attempts to revive the bill have failed.
In sum, Puerto Rico is in rather a difficult position. At a time when the statehood question and its knock-on effect on the territory’s electoral power matters the most, the island seems to be on the proverbial “back foot” with lawmakers in Congress. Therefore, the role of Resident Commissioner will become more important over the next year, especially if the Self Determination Act suffers the same fate as the Status Act.