Puerto Rico is moving toward sovereignty — Congress should listen

For over a hundred years, Puerto Rico has been stuck in a political limbo that no one is happy with — Puerto Ricans, Congress, or American taxpayers. That status quo is now changing. The 2024 Puerto Rican elections marked a significant turning point, showing a clear increase in pro-sovereignty sentiment and highlighting the decreasing legitimacy of the island’s colonial governance system. In the 2024 gubernatorial election, the statehood-supporting New Progressive Party won with only 39 percent of the vote. The pro-independence candidate, Juan Dalmau, received 33 percent, marking the strongest result for the independence movement in recent history. During the same election, Puerto Ricans were holding a referendum on their territory’s future. Two sovereignty options — for independence and for a “free association” with the U.S. — collectively reached over 43 percent. Although statehood was the most-selected option, it lacked a majority when blank protest ballots were included — which was noticed in Congress. The Sovereignty movement’s momentum has also been evident on the ground. In August, more than 3,000 Puerto Ricans took part in major coordinated pro-independence marches in San Juan and across diaspora communities. A 2026 National Sovereignty Congress is intended to unite pro-independence and pro-sovereignty organizations and voters in Puerto Rico and throughout the diaspora. U.S.-based pro-independence strategists have also been meeting with U.S. officials, members of Congress, and policymakers to discuss Puerto Rico’s transition to sovereign status. In December 2025, Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) said he plans to introduce a first bill of its kind in the U.S. House, backing Puerto Rico’s independence. McClintock’s initiative did not develop in a vacuum. In March 2025, a draft Executive Order was unveiled outlining a federal transition framework toward Puerto Rican independence. The document showed hos independence and free association are not radical departures but practical, lawful options already utilized by the U.S. with some of its partners in the Pacific. Puerto Rico’s current territorial status has led to ongoing, costly fiscal dependency, a lack of self-determination and policy confusion. This has contributed to a $120 billion debt and pension crisis and the installation of an unelected fiscal control board. The U.S. Government Accountability Office has repeatedly warned that statehood would significantly increase federal costs without addressing Puerto Rico’s fundamental economic issues. Meanwhile, Puerto Rico’s current governing party is moving away from democratic reform. Despite receiving less than 40 percent of the vote, the New Progressive Party has recently pushed anti-transparency laws and is again trying to rewrite electoral laws to strengthen its control. This undermines assertions that territorial rule somehow safeguards democratic norms. Despite what some statehood lobbyists claim, Puerto Rico’s strategic importance in the Caribbean is not dependent on statehood. A sovereign Puerto Rico could ensure U.S. interests through a binding bilateral security and defense pact, safeguarding access to ports and airspace, enabling intelligence sharing, and supporting regional power projection — all while removing the democratic inconsistency of territorial rule. Independence would instantly address Puerto Ricans’ lack of political rights, aligning practice with the principle of consent. As a former federal security professional, I believe this would strengthen the U.S., maintaining security and military cooperation. It could also help close narcotrafficking routes to the U.S. And at heart, it would remove the colonial stigma that adversaries use to undermine U.S. credibility in Latin America and the Caribbean. Puerto Rican sovereignty would legitimize U.S. regional leadership and base cooperation on treaties rather than coercive jurisdiction. Statehood is neither essential nor practical for achieving these goals. Congress has been unwilling to admit Puerto Rico, and plebiscites conducted under territorial constraints and amid allegations of electoral fraud do not compel federal action or meet international standards for self-determination. Independence would let Puerto Rico establish a democracy and fully utilize its bilingual workforce, infrastructure, and diplomatic resources as a regional hub, without creating lasting fiscal, legal, or partisan repercussions and burdens for the U.S. This is a national issue for the U.S. Covering the costs of the territory drains federal taxpayers of hundreds of billions over time. It skews federal programs and puts Washington in an impossible position, governing a population that resists assimilation and increasingly supports sovereignty. Sadly, some local leaders and regime-controlled media and organizations want to trade subservient loyalty to the U.S. for welfare and federal aid. Their strategy has not changed Puerto Rico’s territorial status, nor improved its long-term economic stagnation. A sovereign Puerto Rico, in contrast, can become a stable, democratic, and economically sustainable partner to the U.S. Congress currently has a rare chance to take the lead rather than postpone action. McClintock’s bill warrants thoughtful, bipartisan review rather than automatic rejection. Both Democrats and Republicans should see that decolonization is not about giving up; it is an act of responsible governance and realignment for the 21st century. Javier A. Hernández is a Puerto Rican author, linguist, educator and former federal official. He is the author of “PREXIT: Forging Puerto Rico’s Path to Sovereignty, The Patriotic History of Puerto Rico for Young Readers,” and “Puerto Rico: The Economic Case for Sovereignty.”