I recently returned from a trip to San Juan, Puerto Rico. The only sign I saw in the Commonwealth’s capital city that a referendum was pending that could lead to statehood was a single, unmarked, white, pickup truck with a bull horn driving through Old San Juan for about an hour urging citizens to vote “Si” on the question of whether they were happy with the island’s current status. (A yes vote is a vote against statehood.) There wasn’t a single poster or a single political ad anywhere to be found—not on TV, not in the magazines, not in the papers that I saw.

What I did see was massive real estate development and renovation of the centuries’ old buildings in Old San Juan (most of which have “For Sale” or “For Lease” or “For Rent” signs on them). Having never visited Puerto Rico before, I have no idea whether these beautiful buildings were previously owned and occupied by Puerto Ricans, but I suspect in the near future they will be occupied by foreigners and people from the Lower 48. Somebody is counting on making a lot of money off Puerto Rico once it becomes the 51st state.

The economics of Puerto Rico becoming a state are questionable. Their government is deeply in debt, so the Feds would likely be asked to bail them out. As a resident of a bankrupt state myself, I don’t think a federal bailout is the answer to Puerto Rico’s problems: they need to attract industries other than tourism, and since it’s a beautiful place where English is widely spoken that shouldn’t be too hard, especially if they provide tax incentives for businesses.

Most Puerto Ricans do not pay federal income taxes, just Social Security and payroll taxes. Since this includes Medicare, I would assume that under Obama Care the State of Puerto Rico will also have to cough up the money to support that as well. However, the median income in Puerto Rico is below the poverty line, which means they won’t pay any income tax anyway—in other words, while they will “benefit” from statehood, they won’t contribute to the federal government.

The way in which the Pelosi Congress last year attempted to force statehood on Puerto Rico was this: The Congress issued legislation permitting a referendum in Puerto Rico on the question of whether citizens were satisfied with their commonwealth status—not on statehood. Many Puerto Ricans would like complete independence as a nation. As a result, a majority of citizens may vote “No” on the referendum, even though a majority does not seem to want statehood. Once the referendum results indicate dissatisfaction, a delegation from Puerto Rico will appear before Congress and offer their credentials to be seated in the House of Representatives. If the Speaker of the House accepts these credentials, Puerto Rico becomes a state de facto.

Article 4, Section 3, of the Constitution gives the Congress the power to admit new states:

“New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union. . . .”

Since “Congress” is both the House and the Senate, after the Speaker recognizes Puerto Rico as a state, then the Senate will have to ratify it, I assume, but since the Senate is Democratic, and since the effort to admit Puerto Rico appears to be an effort to increase the number of Democratic voters in this country, it is likely that the Senate will vote to admit. In addition, Puerto Rico’s admission will increase the number of electoral votes, which means that the Electoral College will tend to be Democratic as well.

It seems pretty clear to me that America will not benefit by the admission of Puerto Rico as a state. It also appears that Puerto Rico is capable of becoming an off-shore tax haven for American businesses. However, the Feds would see this as a drain on their tax revenue—the Feds would rather gouge Puerto Rican businesses by imposing stiff federal income taxes on them, and then subsidize a Democratic votership in Puerto Rico.

Puerto Rico is a beautiful place. More Americans should visit there and spend their money there. That would do more to help the people there than statehood will.