Legalisms aside, do people disagree with the content of what Santorum said? Should we ever admit a state to the union in which English is not the primary and/or official language???
No, we should not admit any state where the official language is not English. That’ll never happen in PR, so problem solved. I don’t see why we should care if PR becomes a state anyhow.
Why not, we’ve done it before - Louisiana was majority French speaking in 1812 when they were admitted as a state, and several of their constitutions established the state as being bilingual. Same thing with California in 1849 - Spanish was established in the constitution as being one of the two languages in the state, and the majority of the population spoke it. New Mexico was admitted as a state in 1912 - at that time, 50% of the population spoke Spanish as their primary language, and the state constitution established that state as bilingual. In Pennsylvania, even up into the early 1800s, as much as 40% of the populace spoke German, though admittedly German was not written into the state constitution. And the French-speaking provinces of Canada were invited to join as state during the early years of our nation - that they could join was in fact written into the the Articles of Confederation.
English is taught in schools in Puerto Rico, and is one of two official languages in the constitution of the commonwealth. And while the majority of Puerto Ricans speak spanish as their primary language, roughly half are also fluent in english.
Language issues with illegal immigrants in border states is something I would consider to be a separate issue. I doubt any of us here would question the loyalty of Puerto Rico to the United States - the same cannot be said of illegal immigrants.
I support Rick Santorum but I cannot imagine why he waded into the controversy.
The history of the debates over admission of New Mexico to statehood included questions about how “American” the state was. I'm going from memory here — I lived in New Mexico for about a year and a half when I was a reporter outside Cannon Air Force Base so I know a bit of the history but I am not an expert.
Lots of arguments can be made back and forth about what happened with the admission of New Mexico and how to apply those precedents today, but three things seem clear:
1) As far as I know, there was no English requirement for admission of New Mexico as a state.
2) When New Mexico was admitted, it had been a territory for so long that all but the very oldest native residents had been born as American citizens.
3) Relatively low growth rates showed that New Mexico posed no risk of swamping the rest of the United States with some sort of demographic disaster.
It seems to me that all three apply to Puerto Rico now just as much as they did to New Mexico a century ago. Whatever we can say about Hispanic growth elsewhere in the United States, Puerto Rico is not a threat to the United States and the territory has been part of the United States since the Spanish-American War.
If Puerto Ricans want to become a state rather than a commonwealth, it seems to me that's up to them and to the Congress via the standard admission policy for states.