Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2006

U.S. House of Representatives ^ | 3/02/2006 | Luis Fortuño (R-PR)

[cll]

109TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R.

To provide for a federally sanctioned self-determination process for the people of Puerto Rico.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Mr. Fortuño introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on ..........................

A BILL

To provide for a federally sanctioned self-determination process for the people of Puerto Rico.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2006’’.

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. Sec. 2. Findings. Sec. 3. Federally sanctioned process for Puerto Rico’s self-determination, including initial plebiscite and subsequent procedures. Sec. 4. Applicable laws and other requirements. Sec. 5. Availability of funds for the self-determination process.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS. The Congress finds the following:

(1) On November 30, 1992, President George H.W. Bush issued a Memorandum to Heads of Ex5 ecutive Departments and Agencies recognizing that ‘‘As long as Puerto Rico is a territory . . . the will of its people regarding their political status should be ascertained periodically by means of a general right of referendum . . .’’.

(2) Consistent with this policy, on December 23, 2000, President William J. Clinton issued Executive Order 13183, establishing the President’s Task Force on Puerto Rico’s Status for purposes that in cluded identifying the options for the territory’s future political status ‘‘. . . that are not incompatible with the Constitution and basic laws and policies of the United States . . .’’, as well as the process for realizing such options.

(3) President George W. Bush adopted Execu20 tive Order 13183 and, on December 3, 2003, amended it to require that the President’s Task Force on Puerto Rico’s Status issue a report ‘‘. . . no less frequently than once every 2 years, on progress made in the determination of Puerto Rico’s ultimate status.’’.

(4) On December 22, 2005, the Task Force appointed by President George W. Bush issued a report recommending that:

(A) The Congress provide within a year for a federally sanctioned plebiscite in which the people of Puerto Rico would be asked to vote on whether they wish to remain a United States territory or pursue a constitutionally viable path toward a permanent nonterritorial status.

(B) If the people of Puerto Rico elect to pursue a permanent nonterritorial status, Congress should provide for a subsequent plebiscite allowing the people of Puerto Rico to choose between one of the two permanent nonterritorial status options. Once a majority of the people has selected one of the two options, Congress is encouraged to begin a process of transition toward that option.

(C) If the people of Puerto Rico elect to remain as a United States territory, further plebiscites should occur periodically, as long as a territorial status continues, to keep Congress informed of the people’s wishes.

SEC. 3. FEDERALLY SANCTIONED PROCESS FOR PUERTO RICO’S SELF-DETERMINATION, INCLUDING INITIAL PLEBISCITE AND SUBSEQUENT PROCEDURES.

(a) FIRST PLEBISCITE UNDER THIS ACT.—The Puerto Rico State Elections Commission shall conduct a plebiscite in Puerto Rico during the 110th Congress, but not later than December 31, 2007. The ballot shall provide for voters to choose only between the following two options:

(1) Puerto Rico should continue the existing form of territorial status as defined by the Constitution, basic laws, and policies of the United States. If you agree, mark here.........

(2) Puerto Rico should pursue a path toward a constitutionally viable permanent nonterritorial status. If you agree, mark here .............

The two options set forth on the ballot shall be preceded by the following statement: Instructions: Mark the option you choose as each is defined below. Ballots with more than one option marked will not be counted.

(b) PROCEDURE IF MAJORITY IN FIRST PLEBISCITE FAVORS CONTINUED TERRITORIAL STATUS.—If a majority vote in a plebiscite held under subsection (a) favors the continuation of the existing territorial status, the Puerto Rico State Elections Commission shall conduct additional plebiscites under subsection (a) at intervals of every 8 years from the date that the results of the priorplebiscite are certified unless a majority of votes in the prior plebiscite favors pursuing a permanent nonterritorial status.

(c) PROCEDURE IF MAJORITY IN FIRST PLEBISCITE FAVORS PERMANENT NONTERRITORIAL STATUS.—If a majority vote in any plebiscite held under subsection (a) favors permanent nonterritorial status, the Puerto Rico State Elections Commission shall conduct a plebiscite under this subsection. The ballot on the plebiscite under this subsection shall provide for a vote to choose only between the following two options:

(1) Statehood: Puerto Rico should be admitted as a State of the Union, on equal footing with the other States. If you agree, mark here.........

(2) Sovereign nation: Puerto Rico should become a sovereign nation, either fully independent from or in free association with the United States under an international agreement that preserves the right of each nation to terminate the association. If you agree, mark here.......

The two options set forth on the ballot shall be preceded by the following statement: Instructions: Mark the option you choose as each is defined below. Ballots with more than one option marked will not be counted.

(d) PERIOD FOR HOLDING PLEBISCITE.—If a majority vote in the first plebiscite under subsection (a) favors permanent nonterritorial status, the plebiscite under subsection (c) shall be held during the 111th Congress, but no later than December 31, 2009. If a majority vote in a plebiscite referred to in subsection (b) favors permanent nonterritorial status, the plebiscite under subsection (c)shall be held not later than 2 years after the certificationof the majority vote in such plebiscite under subsection (b).

SEC. 4. APPLICABLE LAWS AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS.

(a) APPLICABLE LAWS.—All Federal laws applicable to the election of the Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico shall, as appropriate and consistent with this Act, also apply to any plebiscite held pursuant to this Act. Any reference in such Federal laws to elections shall be considered, as appropriate, to be a reference to the plebiscites, unless it would frustrate the purposes of this Act.

(b) FEDERAL COURT JURISDICTION.—The Federal courts of the United States shall have exclusive jurisdiction over any legal claims or controversies arising from the implementation of this Act.

(c) RULES AND REGULATIONS.—The Puerto Rico State Elections Commission shall issue all rules and regulations necessary to carry out the plebiscites under this Act.

(d) ELIGIBILITY.—Each of the following shall be eligible to vote in any plebiscite held under this Act:

(1) All eligible voters under the electoral laws in effect in Puerto Rico at the time the plebiscite is held.

(2) All United States citizens born in Puerto Rico who comply, to the satisfaction of the Puerto Rico State Elections Commission, with all Puerto Rico State Elections Commission requirements (other than the residency requirement) applicable to eligibility to vote in a general election. Persons eligible to vote under this subsection shall, upon request submitted to the Puerto Rico State Elections Commission prior to the plebiscite concerned, be entitled to receive an absentee ballot for such plebiscite.

(e) CERTIFICATION OF PLEBISCITE RESULTS.—The Puerto Rico State Elections Commission shall certify the results of each plebiscite held under this Act to the President of the United States and the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States.

(f) REPORT AFTER SECOND PLEBISCITE.—No later than 6 months after the plebiscite provided for in section 3(c), the President’s Task Force on Puerto Rico’s Status shall submit a report to the Congress, prepared in consultation with the Governor, the Resident Commissioner, the President of the Senate of Puerto Rico, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of Puerto Rico, detailing measures that may be taken to implement the permanent nonterritorial status option chosen in the plebiscite together with such recommendations as the Task Force may deem appropriate.

SEC. 5. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR THE SELF-DETERMINATION PROCESS.

During the period beginning October 1, 2006, and ending on the date the President determines that all the plebiscites required by this Act have been held, the Secretary of the Treasury may allocate, from the funds provided to the Government of Puerto Rico under section 7652(e) of the Internal Revenue Code, not more than $5,000,000 to the State Elections Commission of Puerto Rico to be used for expenses of carrying out each plebiscite carried out under this Act, including for voter education materials certified by the President’s Task Force on Puerto Rico’s Status as not being incompatible with the Constitution and basic laws and policies of the United States.

Such amounts may be as identified by the President’s Task Force on Puerto Rico’s Status as necessary for such purposes.

[cll]

Looks like we have a statehood bill once again. The fireworks have started.

[cll]

Puerto Rico PING!

Please FreepMail if you want on or off the list.

[cll]

Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2006 Original Co-Sponsors

Republicans

1. Rep. Luis G. Fortuño (PR)

2. Rep. Don Young (AK)

3. Republican Conference Chair Deborah Pryce (OH)

4. Chief Dep. Majority Whip Eric Cantor (CA)

5. Rep. Howard P. "Buck" McKeon (CA)

6. Republican Policy Chair Adam Putnam (FL)

7. Rep. Thomas M. Davis (VA)

8. Republican Study Com. Chairman Rep. Mike Pence (IN)

9. Rep. Henry J. Hyde (IL)

10. Rep. Henry E. Brown, Jr. (SC)

11. Rep. Dan Burton (IN)

12. Rep. Jerry Weller (IL)

13. Rep. Lincoln Diaz Balart (FL)

14. Rep. Mario Diaz Balart (FL)

15. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL)

16. Rep. Mark Foley (FL)

17. Rep. Jeff Flake (AZ)

18. Rep. Charlie Dent (PA)

19. Rep. Henry Bonilla (TX)

20. Rep. Katherine Harris (FL)

21. Rep. Wayne Gilchrest (MD)

22. Rep. Lynn A. Westmoreland (GA)

23. Rep. Ted Poe (TX)

24. Rep. Mike Conaway (TX)

25. Rep. Kenny Marchant (TX)

26. Rep. Joe Wilson (SC)

27. Rep. John Mica (FL)

28. Rep. John Peterson (PA)

29. Rep. Tom Feeney (FL)

30. Rep. Charles Boustany (LA)

31. Rep. Marsha Blackburn (TN)

32. Rep. Chris Cannon (UT)

33. Rep. Joe Schwarz (MI)

34. Rep. Melissa Hart (PA)

35. Rep. Connie Mack (FL)

36. Rep. Dave Weldon (FL)

37. Rep. Michael McCaul (TX)

38. Rep. Michael Fitzpatrick (PA)

39. Rep. Rick Keller (FL)

40. Rep. Rick Renzi (AZ)

41. Rep. Randy Kuhl (NY)

42. Rep. Thelma Drake (VA)

43. Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (MI)

44. Rep. Howard Coble (NC)

45. Rep. Steve Pearce (NM)

46. Rep. Zach Wamp (TN)

47. Rep. John T. Doolittle (CA)

48. Rep. John N. Hostettler (IN)

49. Rep. Jeb Hensarling (TX)

50. Rep. Devin Nunes (CA)

51. Rep. Vito Fossella (NY)

52. Rep. Ken Calvert (CA)

53. Rep. Louie Gohmert (TX)

54. Rep. Greg Walden (OR)



Democrats



1. Rep. Jose Serrano (NY)

2. Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (MD)

3. Rep. Nick Rahall (WV)

4. Rep. Loretta Sanchez (CA)

5. Rep. Patrick Kennedy (RI)

6. Rep. Dale Kildee (MI)

7. Rep. Joe Crowley (NY)

8. Rep. Chaka Fattah (PA)

9. Rep. Neil Abercrombie (HI)

10. Rep. Collin Peterson (MN)

11. Rep. Bud Cramer (AL)

12. Rep. Allan Mollohan (WV)

13. Rep. Madeleine Z. Bordallo (Guam)

14. Rep. James Moran (VA)

15. Rep. Albert Wynn (MD)

16. Rep. Ron Kind (WI)

17. Rep. John Conyers (MI)

18. Rep. Jerrold Nadler (NY)

19. Rep. Gene Green (TX)

20. Rep. Ellen Tauscher (CA)





* Names in bold are members of the Resources Committee.

[Michael.SF.]

Looks like we have a statehood bill once again

I read it as three options:

A) Territory or non territory

If non territory: B) Statehood or C)independence.

Right now, I say C.

[cll]

Sorry. You don't get to vote.

BTW, the bill proposes that mainland Americans born in Puerto Rico be allowed to vote.

[MplsSteve]

To me, this sounds like a very reasonable bill.

Puerto Rico's future needs to be dealt with - aqui y ahora!

I'm not so sure that I like the idea of a referendum every 8 years though. I'd prefer a final straight up or down vote.

Either Puerto Rico wants to be part of the US or they want to be on their own.

[tcrlaf]

I agree, PR's future does need to be dealt with, but giving ANOTHER state and seats/electorals that go alonng with it to Democrats just isn't going to happen......

[cll]

"I'd prefer a final straight up or down vote."

Me too. But at least this starts the discussion again after almost 10 years in the backburner and 108 years of purgatory.

[cll]

Why would a state of Puerto Rico be Democrat. Republican or Democrat, is up for grabs.

[Brian Allen]

<< Either Puerto Rico wants to be part of the US or [it wants to be on its] own. >>

Puerto Rico lives on American welfare. It's going nowhere.

I'll lay San Juan to a brick the single outcome of any score of referenda is the statUS quo!

[Michael.SF.]

Why would a state of Puerto Rico be Democrat.

They have all the markings of potential democrats: Ethnic minority, poor, under educated.

Sure the smart rich PR's will vote republican, that should be good for a few per cent.

[Toddsterpatriot]

Puerto Rico as a state would be our own very expensive Quebec. Bad idea.

[Michael.SF.]

I'd prefer a final straight up or down vote

Which would then forever hold PR to the chosen status? Every eight years may be too often, but never again is a very long time.

[Michael.SF.]

Sorry. You don't get to vote.

I take it you are not being serious, as I did not intend to imply that I could vote on this issue. But I can still voice an opinion on which way I hope the vote goes.

I see no advantage to the USA in either continuing PR as a territory nor in making it a state.

I do see benefits of being rid of them and potentially saving us a few billion over the course of time.

[Toddsterpatriot]

BTW, the bill proposes that mainland Americans born in Puerto Rico be allowed to vote.

Doesn't seem fair. They get to vote in our elections, we don't get to vote in theirs.

[AuH2ORepublican]

"BTW, the bill proposes that mainland Americans born in Puerto Rico be allowed to vote.

Doesn't seem fair. They get to vote in our elections, we don't get to vote in theirs."

---

I agree 100%. And I'll go one further: I think that if that clause (added at the request of ultraliberal Democrat Jose Serrano of The Bronx so as to obtain Democrat support for the bill) is not excised from the bill prior to passage, the law may be declared unconstitutional. While states may treat U.S. citizens differently when it comes to electoral issues based on their residency, they may not discriminate against U.S. citizens based on their place of birth. The bill would treat two U.S. citizens who are next-door neighbors in Orlando or Fayetteville or wherever differently based on the fact that one was born in Puerto Rico and the other one wasn't, and that is a violation of Equal Protection, since voting requirements may only depend on the citizen's permanent residency, not on where he or she was born. I think this is a similar (albeit not identical) case to the Hawaii law that only allowed U.S. citizens of Native Hawaiian descent to vote for trustees of the Bishop Estate, which law was declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.

And the clause doesn't even have the rationale of giving the votes to people with a real connection to Puerto Rico and a vested interest in the results of the referenda, since perhaps the Puerto Rico-born Orlando resident left Puerto Rico before he turned 2 years old and never returned, while the U.S. mainland-born Orlando resident may have been born to Puerto Rican parents who were attending college or were in the military and returned to Puerto Rico when he was 2 years old, and lived in Puerto Rico until a year ago. This clause doesn't even pass the smell test.

I hope they amend that clause away, since it's high time that Congress did something to end Puerto Rico's colonial status. At the very least, they should have an iron-clad severability clause so that the whole bill doesn't get struck down.

[AuH2ORepublican]

"They have all the markings of potential democrats: Ethnic minority, poor, under educated.

Sure the smart rich PR's will vote republican, that should be good for a few per cent."

---

You're way off on this one. 99% of the residents of Puerto Rico, regardless of skin color (which goes from the lightest white to the darkest black) or national descent (whether of Spanish, Corsican, German, Lebanese, French, or African descent), consider themselves Puerto Rican. The only residents of Puerto Rico who consider themselves "ethnic minorities" are those who grew up in the U.S. mainland and were told that they were minorities. If and when Puerto Rico becomes a state, the Democrats won't be able to play the race card to draw votes in Puerto Rico.

Puerto Rico voters are generally speaking very conservative on social issues and liberal-to-moderate on economic issues. Think Louisiana. I would wager that Puerto Rico would be a swing state in presidential elections (Louisiana has voted for the winner in every presidential election snce 1972) and would send 1 Republican and 1 Democrat to the Senate and 3 Republicans and 3 Democrats to the House.

[Laz711]

What about the other territories? Guam, American Samoa, Virgin Islands? Or our "Protectorate" of the Federated States of Micronesia (not quite a territory, but close enough)? We obtained most of those the same time we got Puerto Rico, after the war in 1898. I for one would like to see Guam as a state, just because it is beautiful and their tourism industry rakes in a lot of cash. It is definatly American, most of it anyways.

[cll]

I'm sorry I couldn't contribute anymore to this tonight. I went to dinner right after I posted this and am conked. Just thought I should post for the record and to help open a discussion.

[Windcatcher]

Does this mean we should start getting used to this?

[cll]

It could happen in our lifetimes. A 51st state. Although I don't particularly like either design shouwn there. Me, I would add the next star to the middle of the current field and nudge the rest just a bit in the same proportion so as not to lose the current square visual appeal.

[cll]

"I take it you are not being serious"

Yes, I was being facetious. Of course you have a say on this through you members of Congress. We've never had such thing. All we want is to work, buy, sell and get on with our lives on a level playing field.

[TomasUSMC]

If it comes down to choosing only between Statehood or Independence... get ready for number 151 ah I mean 51.

[4Freedom]

"If and when Puerto Rico becomes a state, the Democrats won't be able to play the race card to draw votes in Puerto Rico."

The Democrats can't play the race card in Puerto Rico, because 80% of the residents living on the island are white. The white residents on the island chased the majority of Puerto Rico's residents of color to the mainland United States by using the same tactics Mexico is using to drive its unwanted citizens of color over our southern border.

Maybe the Democrats could play the race card against Puerto Rico.

LOL!

[AuH2ORepublican]

"What about the other territories? Guam, American Samoa, Virgin Islands? Or our "Protectorate" of the Federated States of Micronesia (not quite a territory, but close enough)? We obtained most of those the same time we got Puerto Rico, after the war in 1898."

---

The U.S. acquired Guam in 1898 during the Spanish-American War (along with Puerto Rico), American Samoa in 1899, and the USVI in 1917. Micronesia, like Palau and the Marshall Islands, is an independent country with a "compact of free association" with the U.S. (it's a treaty for mutual defense, etc.). The territory you forgot to mention in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

Other than Puerto Rico, no U.S. territory has a large enough population to become a state. Guam and the Northern Marianas are a bit west of Hawaii and are populated by U.S. citizens, so I think they should be invited to join the State of Hawaii (American Samoans are not U.S. citizens, but many have served in our Armed Forces and I think they should be allowed to join the state of Hawaii as well). The USVI is just east of Puerto Rico, and if PR becomes a state, the USVI should be given the choice of joining the state.

[Laz711]

O.K. so my history is a little off, sorry. However, HI is about halfway between the U.S. and Guam, impratical for becoming a part of the state. Also, the population of Guam is over 200,000. Isn't that large enough to become a state? I was stationed there for 3 years, and I can tell you that it could hold its own as a state, it makes a lot of money from tourism.

[AuH2ORepublican]

Guam's population in the 2000 Census was 154,805. It's population is growing, and may reach 200,000 in 30 years or so, but that is still way too small to be admitted as a state. Our smallest state population-wise is Wyoming, which had 493,782 residents in the 2000 Census and 506,529 in the 2004 Census estimate, and of course its land area covers 97,100 square miles as opposed to only 210 square miles for Guam (Wyoming has a lot more room to grow). Even if you were to attach the Northern Marianas Islands to Guam, that would only add 69,221 persons (as per the 2000 Census), and it would still be way too small to deserve being its own state. However, Guam, the Northern Marianas and small, lightly inhabited islands in the Pacific (mostly populated by U.S. military personnel) could all be added to the State of Hawaii and the state would be more contiguous than iy is now. Presently, the State of Hawaii includes islands to the west of the Midway Islands, but does not include the Midway Islands themselves (those islands are administeres by the Department of the Navy). If Guam, the Northern Marianas, the Midway Islands, Wake Island, and our other small possessions in the Pacific (excluding for purposes of this discussion American Samoa, whose residents are not U.S. citizens and which is geographically farther to the south and surrounded by other nations) were added to the state of Hawaii, the state would be contiguous and would increase the state's Census 2000 population from 1,211,537 to 1,436,213. This map shows were the Midway Islands are located in relation to Wake Island, Guam and the Northern Marianas; remember that the westernmost islands that form part of Hawaii are a bit to the west-northwest of Midway:

This larger Hawaii would be our 39th largest state in population (it is currently 42nd) but its population would still be quite a bit below the level it would need to gain a third U.S. Representative (and thus a 5th Electoral Vote). BTW, in case you're interested, here's something I wrote regarding why should be combinedWashington, DC should be combined with its suburbs in Virginia and Maryland to form the State of New Columbia: http://auh2orepublican.blogspot.com/2005/08/fair-and-reasonable-alternative-to-dc.html

[AuH2ORepublican]

"than iy is now" = "than it is now"

"are administeres by" = "are administered by"

[Michael.SF.]

All we want is to work, buy, sell and get on with our lives on a level playing field.

What would you consider a level playing field, statehood or independence?

My feeling is that those who favor independence will never be fully satisfied until they attain it (much like the Quebecois). Thus I would favor independence. I am also certain that the transition from territory to sovereignty would be financed, to a large extent, by the USA.

[cll]

"What would you consider a level playing field, statehood or independence?"

Statehood. After 108 years the lives, the economies, the culture, the families - the bonds between mainland Americans and Americans in Puerto Rico are too tight and intertwined to be broken. So, the only real options are statehood or statehood.

I can give you thousands of examples, but just to name a few:

- About half my family lives on the mainland and half on the island.

- About a third of my family were born on the mainland.

- About a quarter of my co-workers, if we are to play the "us and them" game, are native mainland Americans, but with permanent ties to the island, in property, business, etc.

- Since I am a retired military guy, most of my close friends, mainlander or islander, are veterans also.

- We all count on each other, no matter were we hang our hats.

- There are over 200,000 thousand living veterans on the island.

- Many mainland retail chains have some of their best performing stores in Puerto Rico. Think of how many jobs does that create on the mainland and what does that do to your investment portfolio.

- We have year round golf.

- We lost track years ago how many snowbirds make Puerto Rico their home for a good part of the year.

The level playing field means that as long as the current tax structure exists in the U.S., we should be fully integrated in it, as long as we get adequate representation and electoral rights as the rest of the Americans.

That's it. Not much is going to change other than the United States of America would shed over one hundred years of a shameful policy under the Insular Cases, our own and still standing Plessy and Korematsu, etc. How can we promote, fight and die for democracy abroad when over four million citizens of the United States of America to this day are ruled by the whim of Congress?

Yes, it has been a benign rule, yadah, yadah, but still a rule over which we have little, if any say.

Call me idealistic, but I still think that the Declaration of Independence and Constitution of the United States mean something.

I think I'll hop on my Harley and do spin around town before sunset. Wish you were here.

Cheers,

cll