Puerto Rico Statehood Admission Act

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, introduced in July 2022, H.R. 8393, the Puerto Rico Status Act, would authorize a federally sponsored plebiscite to occur on November 5, 2023, and it would dictate to the voters of Puerto Rico three and only three choices: independence, sovereignty and free association, or statehood. If no one option receives a majority vote, there will be a runoff on March 3, 2024.

I cannot support this measure because of process concerns and wide- ranging policy changes that involve the jurisdiction of the Natural Resources Committee, along with several

other House committees that haven't even seen this bill.

The Committee on Natural Resources has not held a hearing on this bill, nor have the other committees with expertise on complex issues of U.S. citizenship, taxation and entitlement programs, foreign policy, and many other matters. None of them have been given an opportunity to openly consider, debate, and amend this bill.

The question of Puerto Rico's political status is a life-altering decision for the people of Puerto Rico. Just as we would expect the people of Puerto Rico to deliberate its questions, understand its consequences, and accept responsibility for the choice, so should Congress.

These issues are far too important for this body to act without proper deliberation. Because of the hasty and secretive process that was used to develop this bill, it contains many concerning and unresolved issues.

The bill contradicts itself, offering Puerto Rico the promise of independence while prescribing actions that should be taken by the newly sovereign nation. How can you be independent yet have another nation dictate what your actions will be?

It promises the trappings of U.S. citizenship without the responsibilities of being a part of the United States.

It is unfortunate that we are here considering this legislation on the House floor after the majority has held backroom negotiations instead of open, transparent hearings and markups. A regular and open legislative process would have allowed Members of this body and the people of Puerto Rico--more than 3 million United States citizens--to fully assess what this bill proposes and what it means for this and future generations.

In fact, the majority made changes to the bill that had even less consideration than the version ordered to be reported by the Committee on Natural Resources in July, cutting backroom deals as recently as this week.

We learned this bill would be on the floor even before we had the text from the Rules Committee. We didn't even know what we would be debating when we learned this bill would be on the floor.

Madam Speaker, there is a favorite Latin expression of mine. It is lux et veritas. It means light and truth. This body, this Congress, and this Federal Government could use a lot more light and truth.

You see, without light, when you are in the darkness, you don't know what truth is. If you don't know what truth is, then you make bad policy decisions.

Unfortunately, the lack of transparency seems to be par for the course in Congress anymore. This bill should have been debated. It should have had light shone on it.

This is just bad policy. I don't see how anybody could read this bill and think that there are not problems with it, that there is not a lack of logic. There is incoherence in the text of the bill, and it is taking us to a position where we would make bad decisions.

Here we are, just a week after this Chamber was left guessing what would be in the final NDAA and while we are currently guessing what will be in a last-minute omnibus spending bill that will, no doubt, be rolled out in the dark of night. This is another example of what is so broken about this process, what is so broken about the way this majority has led.

If this majority were interested in helping Puerto Rico, we would be advancing legislation to address the reliability of the island's energy grid, ensure its fiscal solvency, repair its infrastructure, or meet any of the other tangible needs for the people of Puerto Rico.

We should be treating these U.S. citizens with respect and letting a full and robust legislative process in the light of day take place to address the status question and the many implications for the people of Puerto Rico and for all Americans.

Madam Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on H.R. 8393, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I want to be as crystal clear as I can. I think this is not only my position, but I believe it is the position of everyone in the minority--the whole Republican Conference and I would hope it would be the position of all of the Democratic Caucus--that America is not a symbol of darkness.

America is still a shining city on a hill. America offers more hope and more protections for freedom than anybody in the history of the world has offered and will continue to offer that. A country that is founded on the protection of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness cannot be considered a country that is a symbol of darkness.

I heard a lot of talk about colonialism. But passing a bill that tells a sovereign nation what its laws should be sounds a lot like colonialism to me.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Bentz).

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I thank the distinguished gentleman, the leader of the Democratic Party, for his remarks. I agree with many things that he said. I think all of us would agree with many of the things that he stated. I was with him right up there until the part about using D.C. statehood as a metaphor with Puerto Rican statehood. If the gentleman wanted to talk about the residents of D.C., we can talk about taking those residential neighborhoods and commercial neighborhoods in D.C. and putting them back with the State of Maryland if that is an issue. D.C. statehood is totally different from Puerto Rican statehood, and it shouldn't even be brought into this discussion.

The gentleman talked about the inherent right to self-determination. He said it is something that shouldn't be dictated by the Congress of the U.S. to the people of Puerto Rico. He said the decision belongs to the people of Puerto Rico. Their destiny belongs to them. I think we would all agree with that in principle, but that is not what this bill says.

Section 102 talking about the independence option. I am reading directly from the bill: ``The constitutional convention under section 101 shall formulate and draft a constitution for Puerto Rico that guarantees the protection of fundamental human rights . . . ''

We all agree that should happen, but if they are an independent nation, what right do we have to tell them that? It says it shall include: ``Due process and equal protection under the law; freedom of speech, press, assembly, association, and religion; the rights of the accused; any other economic, social, and cultural rights as the constitutional convention may deem appropriate and necessary; and provisions to ensure that no individual born in the nation of Puerto Rico shall be stateless at birth.''

I don't disagree with that, but if they vote for independence, what right do we have to dictate to them how they write their constitution and what is included in it?

The other option of free association, section 202 of the bill: ``The constitutional convention under section 201 shall formulate and draft a constitution for Puerto Rico that guarantees

the protection of fundamental human rights . . . ''

Again, if they have the sovereignty under a free association, what right does Congress have to dictate what their constitution will say? The leader's words that their destiny shouldn't be dictated by the U.S. Congress. Their destiny belongs to them. Yet, this bill tells them what they shall do if they vote for either of those options.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Puerto Rico (Miss Gonzalez-Colon).

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Smucker).

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining?

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

If there is one thing that I think has come out in this discussion is that there are problems with this bill. It is not a ``perfect piece of legislation.'' It needs work done on it.

But we have to look at what the bill says. The way this bill is written, if it were to pass today, if it passes out of this House and it went through the process in the Senate, signed by the President, then we have abrogated all of our responsibilities and authority, because it doesn't come back to Congress for any kind of approval.

So both sides have agreed, in a bipartisan manner, that this bill has problems, yet we are voting on it today to

say, with problems, that is okay; we are just going to go ahead and move it through the process, even though we have all recognized that there are problems with the bill.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Our neighbors in Puerto Rico are American citizens. They are afforded the protections under the Constitution of the United States. I am from Arkansas. Arkansas was a territory at one time. There is a process for becoming a State.

The American citizens in Puerto Rico deserve the respect to have a process that has actually been thought out, that has been debated, and that gives them an opportunity to enter statehood in a way that is more common to the way other States have entered. This bill is not that. This bill has serious problems with it.

We are right here at the end of Congress. To me, this just looks like a political ploy as we are waiting to pass a massive spending bill before we go home for Christmas and start the new Congress.

Madam Speaker, in closing, it is obvious there is bipartisan support for Puerto Rican self-determination. That is not the issue. The issue is the process, and this is a bad process.

If this is so important to the majority, then I ask: Why today? Why today?

Less than 20 days before this Congress ends and Democrats transition to the minority, why bring this bill today?

Was there not time in the past 4 years to have hearings on this bill, to have other committees look at this bill?

But yesterday, we get notice of an emergency Rules Committee meeting to consider this bill that all of a sudden is so important, but it wasn't important, certainly not in this Congress. We didn't have a hearing on this bill. We had a markup, a markup without a hearing.

The committee spent more time talking about big cats. We had hearings on big cats, then we talked about Puerto Rican status. There are 10,000 big cats in the United States, and there are over 3 million Puerto Rican citizens.

That is why we are not supporting this bill today, and that is why it is disingenuous to bring it to the House less than 20 days before the end of this Congress when both sides have agreed that there are problems with the bill, problems that need to be worked out, but there is no recourse in this bill for Congress to have a second look at it.

We can't control the Senate, but I doubt very seriously the Senate is going to be taking up this bill. So that leads me to conclude that what we are doing here at the end of December, discussing Puerto Rican status, is simply just a political ploy on the backs of the

Puerto Rican citizens of the United States.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the subject of this Special Order.

Madam Speaker, I rise today joined by a good group of colleagues and legislators here in the House to commemorate the 105th anniversary of granting U.S. citizenship to the people of Puerto Rico and to reaffirm our commitment to full equality for the island's two million Americans, which can only be achieved through statehood.

Many people will ask how long has Puerto Rico been part of the United States? Before the Spanish-American War, Puerto Rico was part of Spain. After the Spanish-American War we became a possession, a territory of the United States in 1898.

In 1906, President Theodore Roosevelt called on Congress to confer American citizenship to Puerto Ricans. Legislation was introduced to that effect between 1912 and 1913, which was supported by President William Howard Taft and then the Wilson administration. President Wilson had even campaigned in 1912 on a promise to ensure U.S. citizenship for Puerto Ricans.

On this day, March 2nd, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Jones- Shafroth Act, which extended statutory U.S. citizenship to the residents of the island.

The Jones-Shafroth Act would not be the last time Congress acted on a question of citizenship. In 1940, the Nationality Act conferred birthright citizenship to persons born in Puerto Rico.

The signing of the 1917 law cemented our relationship as an integral part of the United States.

For 150 years, Puerto Ricans have been proud American citizens, and we have contributed greatly to this country in every field of endeavor. We even have Supreme Court judges, a lot of entrepreneurs, and many others in many areas. We proudly uphold and defend the ideals that define our Nation, including more than 235,000 Puerto Ricans who have honorably served in the U.S. Armed Forces fighting side-by-side with our fellow citizens from the States.

Yet, despite our contributions, despite a longstanding commitment to the values that come with being an American citizen, the reality is that we are still not equal. That is the reality of Puerto Ricans every day. And then you have 3.2 million Americans living on the island and more than 5 million living on the mainland. That tells you that because of the current territorial status, Americans in Puerto Rico lack full voting representation in this Congress.

For example, I can represent people on this floor, but I cannot vote here for any measure that affects my island.

I do the job of at least four Members of Congress. We do not have Senators that can be the voice of Puerto Rico because they are not elected on the island. Yet, we need to apply all Federal laws to the island but without having a say or a vote on each of them.

Our people cannot vote for our President, our Commander in Chief, and we have no say in the Federal decisionmaking process, which impacts every aspect of our lives.

Even though we are U.S. citizens and the Federal Government can and often does treat the island unequally under Federal laws and programs, and while it is true that Congress could pass legislation today to address some of those disparities, it is similarly true that any future Congress could undo such efforts.

When you revise our Constitution, specifically, the territorial clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article IV, Section 3, it says specifically that: ``The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States.''

Yet, we are the most powerful Nation on Earth still having a colony in the Caribbean for more than 105 years.

That is the reason. Because we are a territory, we will be always at Congress' mercy. As a territory, we will never truly enjoy the same rights and responsibilities as our fellow citizens in the States.

Only statehood can guarantee our full equality as U.S. citizens. That is why the people of Puerto Rico have voted to reject the current territorial status, not once, not twice, three times in a row. To be admitted as a State of the Union, most recently in November 2020 when a clear majority, an absolute majority of the people, 73 percent of the people who voted in that election, of those 73 percent of the people who voted, 53 percent voted for statehood. That is an absolute majority.

You don't have any delegates. You don't have any mail. This is direct votes, in-person votes of the people of the island asking for statehood. Even statehood got more votes than any politician on the island. Statehood got more votes than any political party on the island. That means that is the biggest consensus ever on the island, three times in a row.

As we commemorate the 105th anniversary of our American citizenship, it is crucial that Congress act to end Puerto Rico's undemocratic territorial status and to respond to a vote for equality through statehood.

I am proud to have partnered with Congressman Darren Soto, our brother from Florida, to introduce bipartisan legislation to achieve this using H.R. 1522, the Puerto Rico Statehood Admission Act, that will make a formal offer of statehood.

Never before has Congress even asked the people of Puerto Rico whether we want to continue as a territorial colonial status or we want to achieve statehood or independence.

This will be the first time ever this question will be made to the people on the island coming from Congress in a binding process--same thing happened in Hawaii, same thing happened in Alaska. They were asked the simple question: Do you want to become a State of the Union, yes or no?

That same question was a referendum we held locally in Puerto Rico by the local laws with that majority.

To say that, this bill will make a formal offer of statehood, outlining a clear process to enable the island's admission into the Union, should it be ratified by Puerto Rican voters in a federally sponsored yes-or-no referendum.

Having said that, I think it is time. It is long overdue that we resolve the Puerto Rican unfinished democracy business.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Soto), our main sponsor on the Democrat side.

Madam Speaker, I say thank you to our main sponsor. I will say, I don't have the vote here in the House so I depend on all Members of the House to support Puerto Rico in many ways.

In that sense, I will be always grateful, Darren, for your commitment and your help.

Madam Speaker, I recognize now a dear friend from Florida as well who is here.

Before recognizing her, I recognize a former Member of the House and current Governor of Puerto Rico. Pedro

Pierluisi is here on the floor of the House. Thank you, Governor, for supporting this.

Madam Speaker, this is a bipartisan issue. You won't find any other bill that will have bipartisan support. This is not a Republican issue. This is not a Democratic issue. This is the cost of equal rights. This is civil rights. This is democracy.

Madam Speaker, I cannot find a better person to speak about that than my good friend from Miami, Congresswoman Salazar.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Salazar).

Thank you, Maria Elvira. You touched my heart with those words.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Wild).

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).

Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize at this time and yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Demings).

Madam Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?

Madam Speaker, you heard many of the Members of Congress supporting this quest of Puerto Rico's civil rights and democracy rights to vote. Sometimes people forget the contributions people of Puerto Rico have made to this great Nation, contributions that we feel proud of, like the nine Puerto Rican Medal of Honor recipients: Private First Class Fernando Luis Garcia, Master Sergeant Juan Negron, Private Demensio Rivera, Private Miguel Armando Vera, Private First Class Carlos Lozada, Staff Sergeant Conde Falcon, Captain Euripides Rubio, Specialist Hector Santiago, Captain Humbert Roque, and I can speak about many others.

Historically, Puerto Rico has ranked among the top U.S. jurisdictions in terms of per capita military service. It is estimated that more than 18,000 Puerto Ricans served our Nation during World War I; 65,000 Puerto Ricans during World War II; 61,000 during the Korean war; 48,000 during the Vietnam war; 10,000 during the Gulf war, and 25,000 during Operation Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. Yet, just last week we have 300 more that are already in Poland with the current situation in Ukraine. That is the patriotism Puerto Ricans feel about this Nation.

Why do all those soldiers never receive the same benefits from being in the military when they come back home? Why should they be treated differently with even programs that do not apply to them? And they cannot vote for the Commander in Chief? Even this Congress gave the Congressional Medal of Honor to our Borinqueneers, the 65th Regiment that fought in Korea, but yet they cannot vote for their Commander in Chief.

Over 1,200 U.S. citizens of Puerto Rico have died while serving, paying the ultimate sacrifice in defense of America's freedom, while lacking full voting representations and equality back home. Defending freedom, defending democracy around the world, but not having them back home.

Our island is proud and rich in the tradition of military service. Today, thousands of Puerto Ricans serve on Active Duty and Reserves and all branches of the U.S. Armed Forces. Approximately, 8,400 currently serve in the Puerto Rico Army National Guard, and since 9/11 they have carried out over 16,000 deployments, more than 34 States in the Union.

Over 90,000 American veterans call Puerto Rico home. Unfortunately, despite our military contributions and their honorable service on behalf of the Nation's ideals, the current territorial status hurts Puerto Rico's veterans and servicemembers. It denies them the representation in the Senate and in the House, and it denies them the right to vote for the President. It perpetuates the inequities of Federal laws and programs which are detrimental to veterans in terms of economic opportunity, health, security, and quality of life.

Statehood for Puerto Rico and congressional action to end the territorial status will benefit our veterans and the thousands of Puerto Ricans who currently serve in the U.S. Armed Forces. It will provide them real democracy through a vote and equal representation in Congress; through the ability to elect their Commander in Chief; and through a permanent union with their fellow citizens in the States.

This is the time to respond for Puerto Rico. This is the right of the island to become part of this great Nation, more than 105 years since being a territory. This is the time for Congress to act.

You have H.R. 1522, a bipartisan bill with more than 79 cosponsors, Republicans and Democrats, asking for statehood and equality. With that, statehood will address many of the inequities in the Federal law that currently hinder economic growth and progress in Puerto Rico.

Madam Speaker, we celebrate the U.S. citizenship for Puerto Rico, but we want statehood now.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1519, I call up the bill (H.R. 8393) to enable the people of Puerto Rico to choose a permanent, nonterritorial, fully self-governing political status for Puerto Rico and to provide for a transition to and the implementation of that permanent, nonterritorial, fully self-governing political status, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 8393.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 8393, legislation I was proud to introduce along with my colleagues, Representatives Nydia Velazquez and Darren Soto, Resident Commissioner Jenniffer Gonzalez- Colon, and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, to resolve Puerto Rico's territorial status.

This bill being on the floor today was far from assured. There were many times over the past several weeks when it appeared there wasn't any hope of ever bringing this bill to the floor. In fact, my colleagues and I were negotiating final changes as recently as 24 hours ago.

But with the prodding of Leader Hoyer, we persevered. In spite of opposition to the historic nature of what we are about to accomplish, we persevered.

I commend and congratulate my colleagues who put aside their philosophical differences and worked to arrive at a compromise that we can all support.

Last year, the Natural Resources Committee held two legislative hearings where Puerto Rican-elected government officials, legal and human rights experts, and residents offered testimony and feedback to the committee on the details of those bills.

Those bills that we were discussing were two bills, one dealing primarily with statehood status and the other one seeking a self- determination path. Those two bills were diametrically opposed, and until the negotiations began, little progress was seen moving the question of status forward.

The Puerto Rico Status Act combines important elements of these two bills to present a compromise that also incorporates input from the full range of voices among Puerto Rico's status debate and that would be supported by a majority of Members of Congress. That is the bill that we bring forward today.

We had in-person public hearings, including with over 100 individuals who shared comments and suggestions on the text with the delegation at our public forum in Puerto Rico. In addition to these in-person opportunities for public input, we also published the draft text on POPVOX, an online submission tool that members of the public used to share more than 100 comments, all of which were reviewed and considered while developing the final language.

The Puerto Rico Status Act is, therefore, the product of a participatory and informed process. It incorporates expertise and knowledge from a wide range of stakeholders who have grappled with the dilemma of Puerto Rico's second-class political status for many years.

Finding a resolution to Puerto Rico's political status has been elusive and difficult, and it has been that way for a long time. Recent efforts to resolve the issue began in 1991 with competing bills introduced in the House and Senate, followed by legislation sponsored by our former colleague Don Young in 1998, and finally the Puerto Rico Democracy Act in 2010, sponsored by then-Puerto Rico Resident Commissioner and current Governor Pierluisi.

While each of those previous bills passed the House, as we hope our bill will today, as well, they ultimately failed because they did not possess the necessary elements to end the colonial status of the island through a fair and informed process.

In becoming chair of the Natural Resources Committee, I made the issue of resolving Puerto Rico's political status a priority. It is crucial to me that any proposal from Congress to decolonize Puerto Rico be informed and led by Puerto Ricans.

As a non-Puerto Rican, I cannot claim the experience of Puerto Ricans who have fought for equality and autonomy for their island for so many years. However, as someone of Mexican descent and indigenous ancestry, I feel a sense of solidarity with the people of Puerto Rico in that enduring struggle. We continue to strive for equality and preserve our traditions, as we all do that, and that struggle is a shared experience among marginalized and disenfranchised people in this country and in Puerto Rico.

I am proud to be discussing a piece of legislation, a proposal, today that assists the people of Puerto Rico to directly be involved in determining their political future.

In recent years, we have seen all too painfully that the current colonial territory status is no longer viable and is incapable of providing either adequate political or economic benefits to the people of Puerto Rico.

Puerto Rico's current status is what impedes its economic development. PROMESA and its financial oversight and management board, the shortcomings of the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, or PREPA, and the inadequate Federal response under the previous administration to disasters like Hurricane Maria and the COVID-19 pandemic, these are all products of the current territorial status.

Recent Supreme Court rulings have only further clarified that, as a territory, Puerto Rico lacks the same constitutional protections and rights as in the 50 States.

This bill would finally stop offering the problem as a continued solution and would let the people of Puerto Rico choose a nonterritory, noncolonial status for themselves.

I am extremely grateful to all the political and community leaders, residents, and staff who worked to produce this compromise and contributed to this bill.

I thank House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer; the Governor of Puerto Rico, Pedro Pierluisi; Representatives Velazquez, Soto, and Ocasio- Cortez; and Resident Commissioner Gonzalez-Colon for their leadership and dedication throughout a difficult but very necessary process.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, the only point of darkness that I can see is the greatest democracy on Earth, the United States of America, and what this bill does is provides some light and consistency to that great democracy by saying you must rid yourself of this colonial legacy. Our great Nation should not be a colonial holder of other countries and other futures. This is an opportunity to break from that and to encourage democracy.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez). As I indicated earlier, my thanks go to her for her work, as well.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from New York.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

(Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Soto), someone who, with other colleagues, worked through this difficult process and produced the consensus today.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Ocasio-Cortez), one of the principals that worked on this consensus.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

This has been a typical debate on Puerto Rico because the question of status and the question of decolonizing our relationship with the people of the island is a question that causes spirited debate. That is okay, but spirited debate with misinformation and hastily drawn conclusions is not the way to debate. We will leave that for another day.

The important point today is that this did not get parachuted at the last minute. This has been a difficult process for all involved, and, I might add, a bipartisan process, to bring one final resolution regardless of where the clock is in terms of this session. This is the time that this was completed.

Madam Speaker, I am proud of this, and I am urging a ``yes'' vote on the legislation.

There are two fundamental differences between ourselves and the minority on this. The intent of the bill is simple: that there be three options, all requiring a deliberate and informed decision by the people of the island.

The current status is not one of those three options. Why? Because the intent of this legislation is to allow the Puerto Rican people not to be colonized and be a colony. That is the decolonization part of the legislation.

The other part, although it has been the habit lately of people wanting not only to predict outcomes of elections but to guarantee outcomes of elections, contrary to that philosophy, this directs that the people of Puerto Rico make the decision and respect that decision.

Our identity as a Nation is built on the values that we are all here to support and respect. It is built on the rule of law. The people of Puerto Rico, as citizens of this Nation, must be extended the respect and the consideration that, since 1898, we have been the overseer of a colony in this country. We must extend them the opportunity to choose their path forward.

That is all it is. It is democratic; it is fair; and it is overdue.

Madam Speaker, I thank all the Members who worked on this--in particular, Representatives Velazquez, Soto, Gonzalez-Colon, and Ocasio-Cortez--for the difficult periods and times they went through in this process, and obviously Majority Leader Hoyer for his insistence, his prodding, and, on occasion, his calmness to get us to this point.

I thank the staff on our committee: chief counsel, Luis Urbina; deputy chief counsel, Margarita Varela; policy aide, Ivan Robles; staff director, David Watkins; and director of our Office of Insular Affairs, Brian Modeste.

I also thank each and every one on Leader Hoyer's staff: Trent Bauserman and Chris Bowman; also Renata Beca-Barragan on Ms. Velazquez's staff; Gabriella Boffelli on Miss Gonzalez-Colon's staff; and Andrea Valdes on Mr. Soto's staff for their hard work and dedication to getting us to this point today. Sometimes that kind of work is underappreciated. I acknowledge their work and thank them.

Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I have been working on this issue almost all of my career in the Congress of the United States.

The previous gentleman said: Let's do it right.

This does it right. This does it after years and years and years and years and years of consideration.

I hesitate because I agree, I think, almost in whole with the remarks that Mr. Westerman has made. Mr. Westerman is a Member of the Congress that I respect. He and I work on things that we think are very important to mankind, here in this country and around the world, in terms of our global environment.

America is a great nation. It is a generous nation. I have said throughout the world that America is the least acquisitive great power that has existed in the world.

What do I mean by acquisitive?

We did not fight wars to take property and to acquire countries, to do what Putin criminally does today. In fact, what we did in those wars in which we have participated in was to build up countries, and they are now democracies: Germany, Japan, Italy, and other nations which we have occupied for a temporary period of time to make sure they were free and help them be free. This bill is about the Puerto Rican people and their island.

And to redeem a premise that we have argued to all the world ought to be central to their policies. That is the right of peoples to self- determination. The right of peoples to say: This is who I am, and this is the political environment in which I want to live--by free votes, not arms, not force, but by the choice of the people. That is what this legislation does.

Puerto Ricans and people of Puerto Rican descent have had an important place in the American family for over a century. They contribute to American culture. They help protect America's national security. They support the American economy and our shared prosperity.

They are American citizens. We made that decision because that was our decision to make whether we were going to allow them to be American citizens or not. Frankly, whether they have any relationship with us or not is our American Congress' decision. They are today American citizens like all of us.

For far too long, however, the people of Puerto Rico have been excluded from the full promise of American democracy and self- determination that our Nation has always championed. We owe it to our own values, and we owe it to the Puerto Rican people to bring an end to their island's 124-year-old status as a U.S. territory.

Less than us. Less than Maryland. Less than Virginia or Oregon or Texas or Maine or Washington State. Yes, they are citizens but less-- 3\1/2\ million people are less. We hold these truths to be self-evident that all are created equal. Now, not all people ought to be U.S. citizens because of that comment, but all citizens ought to be equal. That

is why I am for D.C. statehood--700,000-plus people. Citizens. Our people.

They are franchised if they move to Maryland and disenfranchised if they move from Maryland to D.C. That is not right. We passed a bill to say that was not right. This is another opportunity to give the people of Puerto Rico the ability to set it right, and we make that decision.

The gentleman is correct. We don't have to give that right to Puerto Ricans, we make that decision, and we ought to make it. That is what this bill is about--making that decision to give our fellow citizens a choice--their choice, not our choice.

The gentlewoman from New York, a wonderful, dear, close friend of mine, she and I have disagreed through the years as to what that choice ought to be. But what we agree on is it is not our choice; it is Puerto Rico's choice. That is why I am proud to bring the Puerto Rico Status Act to the floor today.

This bipartisan legislation would organize and fund a binding, island-wide plebiscite that would allow the people of Puerto Rico to vote among these three options:

Statehood. That would be my option. If I were a Puerto Rican and I were living in Port-au-Prince or wherever I was living, I would vote to be a State. That is not my choice, I don't live there, I am not in Puerto Rico. San Juan--I said Port-au-Prince. San Juan. It ought to be their choice, and that is what this bill does--statehood.

Independence. They have a right to do that. They are either going to be a State or they will have a right to determine their own destiny, their own status, or as the bill also gives them an option to do, be a sovereign State with an association with our country.

Now, that has to be done through agreement because we have to make that decision as well as the Puerto Ricans. That would have to be an agreement between us, and both sides would have to be willing partners to that agreement.

Additionally, it would implement comprehensive, nonpartisan public- education campaigns to help voters understand the implications of each option long before any ballots are cast.

The gentlewoman from New York has made it an essential part of her argument that the people of Puerto Rico have to know what they are voting on and what the consequences of that vote will be. Ms. Ocasio- Cortez has made that same point correctly.

This bipartisan bill also includes a variety of oversight measures to ensure that the election is secure, transparent, and fair.

I have long-believed that Puerto Ricans deserve the right to determine their political destiny. This is not a new concept for me. I don't think it is a new concept for any of us in this Congress. We believe in self-determination of peoples. We believe that dictators cannot impose upon people a government they do not choose. That is bedrock belief for us. That is what this bill is about.

A group of House Members and senior Puerto Rican officials--I am honored that my former colleague and my dear friend is on the floor with us today, Pedro Pierluisi. The Governor has been selected by the people of Puerto Rico.

I am honored to be the friend of and ally of the gentlewoman from Puerto Rico who is the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico, who has worked tirelessly with Nydia Velazquez, with the rest of us, in ensuring that the people of Puerto Rico have an honest, fair choice available to them to affect their status, and to reach the long-sought consensus on a path forward for self-determination.

Madam Speaker, I thank Chairman Grijalva. This has been a long and torturous path because the disagreements about how we get to where we want to get are so difficult. Chairman Grijalva deserves great praise from all of us for his patience, for his knowledge, for his wisdom, for his role that he played in trying to bring this to a head. He has done it, it is here on this floor, and he is responsible for that.

Madam Speaker, I thank the members of the Natural Resources Committee on both sides of the aisle, and I thank the staff for the work that they have done--tireless hours and difficult discussions, debates, and so much disharmony from all those, both the diaspora and those in Puerto Rico--strong feelings that had to be brought to bear to reach this consensus.

Madam Speaker, I thank Chairwoman Nydia Velazquez; Representative Darren Soto, who is on the floor and perhaps is going to speak after me; Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez; the Puerto Rican Resident Commissioner that I have spoken of, Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon; and you, Governor.

Madam Speaker, the Governor and I have had the opportunity to work together when you were a Member of this House. We passed a bill that this House passed saying that the Puerto Rican people ought to have a choice, so this is not new. The previous gentleman wasn't here in Congress then--I don't know that, but I don't think he was. This is not new. This has not been done haphazardly. This has been done carefully with difficult efforts made by all parties.

All of the people that I mentioned, I thank for their efforts to reach this historic consensus and action on behalf of the people of Puerto Rico. We are all in agreement that the decision must belong to the people of Puerto Rico alone. Their destiny ought to be up to them.

The Puerto Rican Status Act, of which we will consider in just a few minutes, will give them that choice. They will have that choice only if we vote ``yes.'' If we do not vote ``yes'' today, I fear we may not vote ``yes'' for a very long time. The people of Puerto Rico would be held in a status that I believe the majority of them do not want to be in.

Madam Speaker, I, therefore, ask all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to represent the values of America in this vote. The values that say to us that people have the inherent right to self- determination, not to have it imposed upon them by force or by dictate of the Congress of the United States, but to choose a status of their choosing, of their desire, of their vision. Vote for this status bill, it represents the best of American values. We have a moral responsibility to do so.

Madam Speaker, for 124 years Puerto Rico, the nation where I was born and raised, has been a colony of the United States.

Invaded by the United States during the 1898 Spanish-American War, Puerto Rico has remained in a state of colonial limbo that flies in the face of the anticolonial values upon which the American Republic was founded.

Congress' unlimited plenary powers over Puerto Rico are reminiscent of the monarchical powers enjoyed by King George III against which the Founders of the American Republic so bravely fought.

If Hamilton and Madison were alive today, they would be shocked to see how the anticolonial Constitution they drafted in 1787 is currently used to legitimize colonialism in Puerto Rico over 300 years later. Advocating now for the continuation of the status quo on the island is the height of hypocrisy.

Colonialism has destroyed the Puerto Rican economy.

Colonialism has divided the Puerto Rican people.

Colonialism has eaten away our people's sense of dignity and self- worth.

Colonialism has made the people of Puerto Rico both psychologically and economically dependent on the United States.

Colonialism is not only humiliating for Puerto Rico, but it is an embarrassment to the United States--the United States that holds itself out as a leader of the free world and that stands up to imperialist tyrants abroad while keeping colonies in the Caribbean and the Pacific.

Puerto Rico's colonial crisis is not a simple domestic issue as some erroneously believe. Make no mistake, Madam Speaker, this is an international issue that directly affects America's standing and image around the world, which is why this double-talk must come to an end.

The time has come to fully decolonize Puerto Rico. It has been 100 years since the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Balzac--the last Insular Case--and 70 years after the ratification of the territorial constitution of 1952. History calls upon us to put politics aside and do right by the people of Puerto Rico.

For the last 2 years, I have been tirelessly fighting to craft a bill for Puerto Rico that is anticolonial, fair, and transparent. A bill that will, first and foremost, put the people of Puerto Rico who--since the days of the 1898 invasion--have remained on the sideline front and center.

From Puerto Rico to Florida, and, yes, to the barrios of New York-- the ones I am proud to represent--the voices of Boricuas are now finally being heard. Let us not forget that it is thanks to the vibrant Puerto Rican diaspora from Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx that my colleague, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and I are able to walk these Halls of Congress today.

Today, I stand on the shoulders of millions of Puerto Ricans who had to flee Puerto Rico because its colonial condition has not allowed them to live on the island where they were born.

But Puerto Ricans are strong. They have been kicked out of their home and yet have managed to succeed and flourish in cold and foreign places and have graced us with the likes of Lola Rodriguez de Tio, Maria Libertad Gomez, Nilita Vientos Gaston, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Rita Moreno, Julia de Burgos, and Mari Carmen Aponte, among many others. I feel so honored to be here standing today on the shoulders of all these women and many others who have paved the way.

More importantly, we are here today for the people on the island: those who suffer every day because the prices they pay for necessities like electricity and food are sky-high thanks to the Jones Act.

We are here for those who have lost all their appliances time and time again because we have failed in helping the island to keep the lights on.

Madam Speaker, we are here for those who have lost loved ones after Maria, the earthquakes, COVID-19, and, most recently, Fiona.

We are here today because we must move towards decolonization. The current status is unsustainable, fundamentally unfair, and un-American.

The process that has led us to this moment has been contentious, complex, and full of debate. It is no secret that Members advocating for this bill, including myself, hold differing opinions on which noncolonial option is the best for the people of Puerto Rico.

The consensus bill before us today clearly defines Puerto Rico's non- territorial status options; namely, free association, independence, and statehood. It is the first time Congress recognizes free association as a separate decolonizing formula.

More importantly, this bill includes dual citizenship rights under both the independence and free association options like we have in the Marshall Islands or Palau.

Madam Speaker, I fought hard for the incorporation of these provisions because Congress has the moral obligation to offer Puerto Rico the necessary tools to transition to a new postcolonial order. And, yes, that includes financial resources to make Puerto Rico whole after 124 years of exploitation of natural resources and environmental degradation.

Madam Speaker, I want to take this time to thank Chairman Grijalva; the Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico (Miss Gonzalez-Colon); Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who has made incredible contributions to make this bill better and transparent; Congressman Soto; and the staff who worked day in and day out.

Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support this bill.