Why is a FL GOP Congressman pushing PR statehood?
As the originator of this thread, let me be blunt: I don't want any more sure-to-be liberal House members and electoral college voters and, worst of all, Senators. Beyond that I don't give AF. So on that basis alone I don't want PR as a state. As it is I would love to cut loose some states we already have.
“Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance.”
-
- Posts: 959
- Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:17 pm
- Location: Pensacola to Key West & In-Between
- Contact:
Because Sen. Henry M. Teller did not want Cuba as a US Territory. It would compete with his sugar interests in Hawaii (annexed as a US Territory) and his Sugar Beet holdings in Colorado, which were a major economic industry at the time. If Cuba was annexed, its sugar industry wouldn't be subjected to a tariff and it would be a threat to his wealth.
Sen. Teller lushed to have the Teller Amendment passed restricting US annexation of Cuba when the war started and later pushed for the Platt Amendment which cemented that the US was not to annex Cuba. Puerto Rico was seen as a minor player in the world sugar market and Teller didn't view it as a threat to his holdings.
My gun channel - New Wave Firearms
FL Director & National Spokeman for Gun Owners of America - Join GOA at discount
Communism - 20th Century Mass Murder Champions
FL Director & National Spokeman for Gun Owners of America - Join GOA at discount
Communism - 20th Century Mass Murder Champions
-
- Posts: 959
- Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:17 pm
- Location: Pensacola to Key West & In-Between
- Contact:
Because Sen. Henry M. Teller did not want Cuba as a US Territory. It would compete with his sugar interests in Hawaii (annexed as a US Territory) and his Sugar Beet holdings in Colorado, which were a major economic industry at the time. If Cuba was annexed, its sugar industry wouldn't be subjected to a tariff and it would be a threat to his wealth.
Sen. Teller lushed to have the Teller Amendment passed restricting US annexation of Cuba when the war started and later pushed for the Platt Amendment which cemented that the US was not to annex Cuba. Puerto Rico was seen as a minor player in the world sugar market and Teller didn't view it as a threat to his holdings.
My gun channel - New Wave Firearms
FL Director & National Spokeman for Gun Owners of America - Join GOA at discount
Communism - 20th Century Mass Murder Champions
FL Director & National Spokeman for Gun Owners of America - Join GOA at discount
Communism - 20th Century Mass Murder Champions
What makes you think they would be liberal? The pro-statehood bunch are conservatives and support DJT and the Republican party.tector wrote: ↑Tue Nov 26, 2019 7:20 am As the originator of this thread, let me be blunt: I don't want any more sure-to-be liberal House members and electoral college voters and, worst of all, Senators. Beyond that I don't give AF. So on that basis alone I don't want PR as a state. As it is I would love to cut loose some states we already have.
As it was the sugar industry in PR was still heavily regulated and Teller made sure it would not compete with him. Capitalism and Racism and the general view of PR as a banana republic which sadly many people still have, despite the sacrifices and contributions US citizens of PR decent have made for our nation.Miami_JBT wrote: ↑Tue Nov 26, 2019 11:39 amBecause Sen. Henry M. Teller did not want Cuba as a US Territory. It would compete with his sugar interests in Hawaii (annexed as a US Territory) and his Sugar Beet holdings in Colorado, which were a major economic industry at the time. If Cuba was annexed, its sugar industry wouldn't be subjected to a tariff and it would be a threat to his wealth.
Sen. Teller lushed to have the Teller Amendment passed restricting US annexation of Cuba when the war started and later pushed for the Platt Amendment which cemented that the US was not to annex Cuba. Puerto Rico was seen as a minor player in the world sugar market and Teller didn't view it as a threat to his holdings.