And Here’s How to Get it
In 2009 as part of President Obama’s stimulus program, Puerto Rico received $105 million dollars for highway construction. Since then, concrete sales have remained roughly flat or decreased, depending on how you read the data. Cement sales are used as a rough indicator of how much construction is taking place on the island. Based on the combination of cement sale data, home sales and new home constructions it’s generally accepted that the construction industry in PR is in big trouble.
To get an idea of how much of a boost in funding $105 million is, Puerto Rico’s allocation for 2009 was $150 million. The stimulus funding roughly doubled the amount of money that could be spent on highway construction for 2009; $300 million would be a huge increase allowing for a major overhaul of Puerto Rico’s aging highway system, contractors could hire new workers, massive increase in concrete sales, in short a major and much needed economic boost.
In 1984 Congress passed the Federal Minimum Age act seeking to set a minimum drinking age of 21 across all states. Since Congress does not have the power to enforce a minimum drinking age of 21, the act merely “encourages” states to set a drinking age of 21 by withholding 5% (raised to 10% in 1988) of federal highway funding to states that have a drinking age below 21.
Puerto Rico currently has a drinking age of 18 for a number of reasons, it’s often argued that the reduced drinking age is a boon to tourism. As a result, since 1984, the amount of funding that Puerto Rico would otherwise have received for highway construction has been reduced by 10%. Based on some simple estimates over the last 27 years, this has cost Puerto Rico over $300 million in federal funding.
In 1987 the constitutionality of this law was contested in South Dakota v. Dole in it, in their decision, the Court decided that the act was constitutional as the federal government funded the Interstate Highway system and there was a possibility of minors crossing state lines to a state with a drinking age of 18, driving drunk across state lines back to a state with a drinking age of 21 therefore there was a justification for the federal government to enforce uniform drinking age laws.
A Presidential commission appointed to study alcohol-related accidents and fatalities on the Nation’s highways concluded that the lack of uniformity in the States’ drinking ages created “an incentive to drink and drive” because “young persons commut[e] to border States where the drinking age is lower.”
This exposes one simple problem, in the case of Puerto Rico it is simply impossible for young people to drive across state lines in order to purchase alcohol. Florida, the closest state is 1,000 miles away. Despite this simple geographical fact, Puerto Rico has been deprived of hundreds of millions in federal funds for no justifiable reason.
If Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands (who is also penalized for their drinking age of 18) were to challenge the constitutionality of this act, they would finally receive the full federal funding which they are entitled to as well as almost 3 decades worth of funds which were unconstitutionally withheld from them.
