|
 |
|
|
|
Chicago Tribune "PUERTO RICO CLOSER TO STATEHOOD VOTE OPPOSED BY REPS. GUTIERREZ, RUSH, MEASURE NARROWLY PASSED IN HOUSE FACES SENATE HURDLE" Mike Dorning, Washington Bureau. (03/05/98, Copyright 1998) By a one-vote margin and thanks to a last-minute switch of sides by a Democratic congressman, the House voted Wednesday night to begin the steps toward deciding if there will be statehood for Puerto Rico. One hundred years after the United States won the island in the war against Spain, the House voted to authorize a plebiscite on Puerto Rico's future status. The measure still must pass the Senate, where Republican leaders have been cold to the idea. President Clinton has indicated his "strong support" for the measure, which requires a referendum on the island by the year's end. The often impassioned debate ended in a 209-208 vote, with Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D-N.D.) charging down the aisle as the vote was about to close, slamming down a card on the clerk's desk to switch his vote to "yes." Just seconds before, Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) had switched his vote to "no," nearly dooming the measure. The daylong session raised emotional issues of national identity, linguistic heritage and basic constitutional values. It divided Congress's four members of Puerto Rican origin, and it quickly became enmeshed in the contentious struggle over adopting English as the official U.S. national language. "I ask you: Do you cherish the principles of our democracy enough to dismantle 100 years of colonialism and extend the right of self-determination to the U.S. citizens of Puerto Rico? I hope you do," said Carlos Romero-Barcelo, Puerto Rico's non-voting delegate to Congress and a supporter of the measure. Under the legislation, Puerto Rico's 3.8 million residents would be asked to choose between three options: statehood, independence or continuation of its status as a U.S. commonwealth. Few on the island have voted for independence in past advisory referendums. If a majority of residents approved any option, negotiations toward that end would begin, subject to ratification by Congress and another islandwide referendum. The island twice before has chosen to continue its present status in non-binding votes, but the proposed plebiscite would be the first authorized by Congress. Although some Republicans viewed passage of the bill as a way to court Hispanic voters alienated by anti-immigrant provisions in recent welfare legislation and GOP support for "official English" laws, others in the GOP thought it politically unwise because a state of Puerto Rico would likely vote Democratic. Conservatives sought to use the bill to attach a rider making English the nation's official language, an addition viewed as a poison pill by supporters. The House rejected the amendment in favor of a provision to encourage English instruction for Puerto Rico's Spanish-speaking population if it were admitted as a state. It was the format of the plebiscite that most inflamed two lawmakers of Puerto Rican heritage, Reps. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) and Nydia Velazquez (D-N.Y.), both of whom charged that the deck was stacked toward statehood. Gutierrez, a Chicagoan who supports independence for the island, was one of the most visible participants in the debate, popping up to the podium repeatedly, offering a slew of amendments to the legislation and marshaling opposition. Gutierrez was at Rush's side when the Chicago Democrat made his last-minute switch to vote against the bill. "Let's not play games here," Gutierrez said, wagging his finger at his congressional colleagues. "This is a bill that is cleverly designed to obtain an artificial majority (in the plebiscite) for statehood." Gutierrez cited a provision in the bill that would require continued votes every 10 years if the island chose to continue its current commonwealth status but not if it chose statehood or independence. He also objected to the description of the commonwealth option on the ballot. The bill's authors rejected language submitted by Puerto Rican supporters of commonwealth in favor of a description that describes the islanders' U.S. citizenship as not guaranteed instead "as prescribed by Congress." Gutierrez asserted that the description amounted to "fear-mongering." "There are tens of thousands of Puerto Ricans who have served in the United States Armed Forces. What court in this nation would take away their citizenship?" Gutierrez asked. "The Congress has the power to pass a law tomorrow and Puerto Ricans would no longer be citizens," countered Rep. Jose Serrano (D-N.Y.), a supporter of the legislation. "I know what this country is capable of. I don't want to find out what kind of citizenship I have." Much as the issue divides Serrano and Gutierrez, the future status of Puerto Rico has been divisive among Puerto Ricans, including the community of 132,000 found by the latest census in the Chicago area. The issue figures prominently in the current controversy over allegations that state Chapter I anti-poverty funds were misused at Humboldt Park's Clemente High School. State Rep. Edgar Lopez (D-Chicago), an ardent supporter of statehood for Puerto Rico, has accused the school of using the money for cultural programs that promote independence. In their last plebiscite in 1993, Puerto Ricans voted by a 48 percent plurality to retain their commonwealth status. Statehood was supported by 46 percent. The remainder supported independence. Residents of Puerto Rico pay no federal income taxes, but they have no voting representative in Congress and receive reduced federal welfare benefits. [PHOTO GRAPHIC; Caption: PHOTO: Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) is among those who gathered on Capitol Hill this week urging Congress not to open the door to Puerto Rico statehood. AP photo. GRAPHIC: Puerto Rico's future. Chicago Tribune. - See microfilm for complete graphic.]
|
