This presents a different issue from statehood for D.C.: Up to now, a territory was never admitted as a state until English-speaking Protestants had become a majority of the population -- or at least clearly the dominant culture, as in Hawaii. That will never happen in PR, it will always be part of the Latin-Catholic culture complex. So statehood for PR does, at some level, mean redefining American identity.
Apart from that, I see no reason why not.
In partisan terms, statehood for DC would mean two more Democratic senators forever. Not so with PR, the picture there is more complicated -- PR has its own parties and they do not map neatly onto the mainland parties.
Apart from that, I see no reason why not.
In partisan terms, statehood for DC would mean two more Democratic senators forever. Not so with PR, the picture there is more complicated -- PR has its own parties and they do not map neatly onto the mainland parties.