Mr. Chairman, this is a rehash of 12 years ago. I want to compliment the Delegate from Puerto Rico for representing his people. The Governor supports this legislation, the Senate supports this legislation, and the House supports this…
Mr. Chairman, this is a rehash of 12 years ago. I want to compliment the Delegate from Puerto Rico for representing his people.
The Governor supports this legislation, the Senate supports this legislation, and the House supports this legislation. Strongly, the Puerto Ricans that represent their people support this legislation. I think it's inappropriate for those that do not represent those people to speak out against this legislation. I think it's wrong not to recognize that this is long overdue.
Mr. Chairman, 112 years ago, 112 years ago Puerto Rico became Puerto Rico. They were supposed to be a State. And I am the only Member of this House that has gone through the statehood battles. This is not a statehood bill. As the Delegate has said, this is an opportunity to make that decision. Puerto Rico is not a territory. They're a Commonwealth. We were a territory. There is a great deal of difference. We did make that decision with the help of Congress, and we became a State. And I am proud of that, and I was proud of this body.
I am a little disappointed in some of the arguments that I hear against this bill: This is a statehood bill. This is a sneak attack. It was brought on us unexpectedly.
This bill has been before this Congress for 18 months, and we have discussed this issue for 12 years and longer. My bill, as I call it, the Young bill, was a statehood bill. That is a bill I would have preferred, but this is not. But this is what the Governor wants, the Delegate wants, the Senate wants, the House wants, and the people of Puerto Rico want. I think that's what we have to consider in this House. We are not the body as a whole. We are the body of the individual that represents the people, and I've argued this for many years because I am one, as the Delegate is.
It is time that we act on this legislation. Let it go forward. Let us do what is fair.
And the arguments against this legislation, some of them are very frivolous. The English language. We were not required to have English when we became a State. We had many different languages, and we became a State. We do speak English, and we speak other languages within my State. That doesn't hold us back or make us any less.
But the idea that we have 4 million people that have waited for an opportunity to become a State, an independent nation, or whatever they wish, a free association, it is time we give them that opportunity. To have a body that is supposed to represent all the people but individually represent an area, we should recognize that right, as we did when we became a State.
I am proud that the Congress made us a State. We worked for that, and I think it's time we give an opportunity for the Puerto Ricans to make a decision as to whether they are a State again or whether they're a territory, or whatever they want to be, but to give them the opportunity.
And again, when that bridge comes--and again, I can talk about bridges, ladies and gentlemen--when that bridge happens, we will cross it, as far as cost goes. But it's time we recognize the great people, the warriors of Puerto Rico as they serve this country, but yet they cannot vote for their Commander in Chief. It's time we pass this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, as an original co-sponsor of H.R. 2499, I am pleased that the House of Representatives is now considering this important legislation. I want to compliment the author of the bill, Resident Commissioner Pedro Pierluisi and my good friend the Governor of Puerto Rico, Luis Fortuno for their tireless commitment on behalf of democracy in Puerto Rico.
I have been involved in Puerto Rico democracy for most of my Congressional career. In fact, it was my bill, H.R. 856 that was approved by the House of Representatives on March 4, 1998. Prior to passage, I conducted two public hearings in Puerto Rico and literally heard from hundreds of Puerto Ricans who passionately love this country and thirst for the opportunity to determine their own political future.
The Puerto Rican people are warm, hard-working, passionate and patriotic. In fact, only one state has proportionately sent more of their sons and daughters to fight for this nation than Puerto Rico. Yet, for over a century, we continue to deny these brave warriors, who proudly wear the uniform of this nation, the chance to vote for their Commander in Chief. This is fundamentally wrong and must be changed prior to our next Presidential election.
As someone who arrived in Alaska 50 years ago, I can certainly relate to the pleas of those of my good friend former Governor and Resident Commissioner Carlos Romero Barcelo who reminds us that: ``We are now being ruled by the President and Congress without the consent of the people of Puerto Rico.''
I still vividly remember the words of our Former Territorial Governor and U.S. Senator, Ernest Gruening, who would shout to anyone who cared to listen that: ``Let us end American colonialism.'' While he was talking about Alaska, similar statements have been made by Puerto Rican elected officials for decades.
H.R. 2499 may not be a perfect bill. It is, however, a fair bill which does not exclude or favor any status option.
It is frankly hard to believe that it has been 12 years since the House last voted on a Puerto Rico status bill and 112 years since Puerto Rico became a U.S. territory. It is far past time to allow the 4 million people of Puerto Rico to vote in a federally sanctioned plebiscite and it would be appropriate if this the 111th Congress were to make that vote a reality.
I urge an ``aye'' vote on H.R. 2499. We should no longer deny the people of Puerto Rico their right to determine their own political future.
Mr. Chairman, I strongly support this amendment. This is the same amendment we had 12 years ago. It does promote Spanish and it does promote English. This is nothing new. Right now in my State we are printing our ballots in my State in different languages within the State. This is an amendment everybody should accept, except if you are just adamantly opposed to the legislation, as some people are.
I have spent some time in Puerto Rico, not as much time as some others, but I find an awful lot of Puerto Ricans who do use English. I think that is a blessing. I am one who thinks everybody should speak two or three languages if they can. This amendment is the right way to go, and all of the plebiscites will be in both languages, not one language, so those who speak English and Spanish and those who speak Spanish and English, both of them have a right to read and understand what they are voting on. It is the right bill. It is the right amendment. Let's vote on both things.