The sixth question of the 1909 Survey of Puerto Rican Elites examined the limitations of suffrage in
Puerto Rico. More precisely, this question inquired whether the prevailing election law should be
amended. At the time, local elections law was subject to multiple challenges seeking to both expand
the right to vote to women and as well as to limit the power to vote to elites. Underlying these and
other debates was a concern with the ability of local politicians to manipulate elections by
purchasing votes.

This question was limited to local elections. At the time, the United States Constitution was
organized as a federal system with multiple anti-democratic limits on the ability of citizens to vote or
participate politically. Federal voting was generally limited to residents of states. Some states enacted
Jim Crow, misogynist, and other discriminatory laws barring portions of their populations from
voting. Territorial residents were generally able to vote in their territories under local elections laws
or provisions. Because Puerto Rico was an unincorporated territory, voting was limited to local
elections.

Elections laws for Puerto Rico were modified on multiple occasions between 1898 and 1909.
The initial military government (1898-1900) limited the right to vote to male electors over the age of
21 who could read and write or paid local taxes. The Foraker Act of 1900 adopted these provisions
and established a two-year electoral cycle. In 1902, the Puerto Rican House of Delegates passed a
local elections law codifying these requirements. Two years later, the House of Delegates amended
the law establishing universal for male voters over the age of 21. The 1904 law eliminated the literacy
(ability to read and write), tax, and property ownership requirements. In 1906, local legislators once
again amended the local elections law with an expanded voter registration provision. The 1906 law
kept the 1904 electoral requirements in place. [INSERT NEWSPAPER IMAGE HERE]. The
cumulative effect of these laws was to expand the right to vote to Puerto Rican men living in
poverty. In 1909, a large number of Puerto Rican elites argued for the curtailment of the right to
vote of Puerto Ricans and for the imposition of various types of limitations on the right to vote.
Question Six sought to gauge the political temperature of Puerto Rican elites.

Elections Reform
Question six was divided in two parts. The first part of the question asked: Do you believe that
universal suffrage is to the best interests of the island? The question is whether the prevailing legislation,
which essentially enabled working class men in Puerto Rico to vote, should be amended with
restrictions. A majority of respondents supported the affirmation of “universal suffrage.”

[Insert Graph Here: Question 6: Collective Naturalization]

The language of the second part of the question asked: if not, what method of restrictions would you advise?
Due to the nature of the responses, it is difficult to quantify the responses. However, opponents of
universal suffrage generally argued in favor of imposing literacy or educational qualifications on
voters, limiting the vote to taxpayers and requiring property ownership. In at least one instance, one
responded argued in favor of limiting the vote to men. Advocates of the status quo or universal
suffrage generally did not provide a rationale of justification for their answers. Although local elections law
was generally enacted by the Puerto Rican legislature, Section 35 of the Jones Act of
1917 imposed a citizenship requirement for voters and simultaneously barred the legislature from
requiring property ownership qualifications.