Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, good morning. My name is
Carlos Romero-Barcelo' and I am the sole, duly elected, non-voting
representative to Congress of the island's 3.8 million United States
citizens.
I want to thank the Chairman and the members of this Committee for
scheduling this hearing and discussion on the Puerto Rico Status
Bill--S. 472--and its companion legislation in the House, H.R. 856. It
is a real privilege to be here today to take part in this historic
process. The unresolved dilemma of Puerto Rico's status is the single
most important long-term issue of concern to all Puerto Ricans; it
permeates every aspect of our political and economic life and it holds
our future hostage. 1998 marks the centennial anniversary of the end of
the Spanish-American War and the beginning of Puerto Rico's status as
an unincorporated territory of the United States. It marks one hundred
years of Congressional indifference to the Puerto Rican dream of
political equality; and it marks a century through which the democratic
rights of the people of Puerto Rico have been ignored; unhappily I may
add, as a result of our acquiescence and our inaction and acceptance. of
a relationship which denies democracy to almost 4 million U.S.
citizens.
But 1998 could sound a grace note. This centennial year offers the
people of Puerto Rico and Congress a historic opportunity to undo the
unequal relationship between the U.S. and Puerto Rico and to extend to
the U.S. citizens of the island the full rights and guarantees of
citizenship--through the exercise of the right of self-determination
S. 472 and H.R. 856 pack the "right stuff" to accomplish this
historic mission. By providing definitions that detail the privileges
and limitations of each status option, Congress introduces a
truth-in-labeling policy that is essential if the process of
self-determination is to have meaning and legitimacy.
For nearly five decades, an honest debate on status has been
frustrated by misrepresentations ' of the truth about the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico and the nature of the U.S. citizenship bestowed on the
residents of the island.
In 1950, when Congress passed the Puerto Rico Federal Relations Act,
it authorized the people of Puerto Rico to draw up a constitution and
develop a local self-government. Although a by-product of this process
was the creation of the so-called Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the
Federal Relations Act did not alter the island's status as an
unincorporated territory subject to the authority and plenary powers of
Congress under the territorial clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Congressional intent was clear; the purpose of the legislation was to
give a new name to the political relationship and allow the local
government to be set up under a Constitution in lieu of a federal
statute until the issue of status was resolved.
Commonwealth architect Luis Munoz Marin understood this. In testimony
during a Congressional hearing on March 4, 1950, he acknowledged that
the Federal Relations Act "did not change the fundamental conditions of
Puerto Rico as to non-incorporation and only permitted Puerto Rico to
develop its own self government." Although he did not expressly use the
phrase "local self government," he obviously understood that the word
"local" was implied.
However, when partisans "sold" the Commonwealth status to the people
of Puerto Rico, the sales pitch did not reflect the reality of our
circumstances as a territory. Instead, Commonwealth was hailed as a
treaty, a "bilateral pact" that could only be altered by "mutual
consent." Under this rubric, the island's territorial status was called
"commonwealth" in English, but in Spanish it was called "Estado Libre
Asociado," which literally translated means "Free-Associated State."
But the notion that Puerto Rico supposedly signed a bilateral pact
with the United States and that it really was a free associated state
implied a degree of sovereignty that Puerto Rico never possessed, much
less exercised. For that reason, Gov. Munoz Marin realized that he could
not use the literal translation of Estado Libre Asociado and decided to
use the word "commonwealth," which meant nothing more than a "body
politic."
Unfortunately, the U.S. government became a party to this
misrepresentation. In 1953, it notified the United Nations that it would
no longer submit reports regarding the status of Puerto Rico because it
claimed that the island had achieved a "full measure" of self-government
and administration under the "new constitutional arrangement."
We all know that was a fiction. The unvarnished truth is that Puerto
Rico's colonial status never changed. To this day, the economic, social
and political affairs of the people of Puerto Rico are controlled and
influenced by a government which is in no way politically accountable to
us. Puerto Ricans may not vote in presidential elections and we have no
voting representation in Congress. We proudly march off -to war under
the stars and stripes, but we may not vote for the President who calls
us to arms. Landmark legislation on status comes before Congress, but
the sole, duly elected representative of the nearly 4 million American
citizens living in Puerto Rico, has no vote when the legislation
reaches the floor of either chamber.
Inexcusably, the deception continues. In English, Puerto Rico is
called a Commonwealth, alluding to the likes of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts or the Commonwealth of Virginia and inferring that Puerto
Rico has been incorporated into the United States and that its residents
enjoy the same rights and guarantees as those citizens in the states of
Virginia and Massachusetts. In Spanish, the island is described as el
Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico, which translates as the
Free-Associated State of Puerto Rico. This nomenclature creates the
illusion that the island is an independent country which enjoys equal
stature with the United States in the community of nations.
In one deft rhetorical flourish, Commonwealth appears to be all things
to all Puerto Ricans while failing to secure the elemental right of
self-determination upon which our independence or our incorporation as a
state or even our status as free-associated state depends.
Proponents of Commonwealth forestall any movement on status by
maintaining their charade in the poll booth. For example, in a 1993
non-binding plebiscite on Puerto Rico's status, the definition of
Commonwealth offered by its proponents described a status structure that
simply does not exist. And this fantasy of an enhanced--and, by the way,
unconstitutional-Commonwealth was pitted against the immutable
definitions of separate sovereignty and statehood. Such word play makes
a mockery of the process of self-determination and it puts at risk one
of the things Puerto Ricans value most for ourselves and our children,
and that is our standing as U.S. citizens.
For half a century, Commonwealth advocates have assured Puerto Ricans
that their U.S. citizenship is 'irrevocable." That may be true for the
present generation--our citizenship will not be revoked without our
consent--but it is not a heritage that necessarily will transfer,
irrevocably, to future generations of Puerto Ricans. The fact is that a
statute--and ours is a statutory citizenship--does not have the same
staying power as the constitution. And, except for naturalized citizens,
the constitution only guarantees citizenship to individuals born. in one
of the states.
The people of Puerto Rico deserve straight talk and only Congress can
put an end to decades of double talk. This is why it is imperative that
any legislation on status contain explicit descriptions of each status
option. Both S. 472 and H.R. 856 adhere to this principle, providing
accurate and constitutionally-sound definitions. And though the
definitions in the bills differ slightly in degree of detail, they are
compatible in their substance.
S. 472 is thoughtful, status-neutral legislation that addresses all
the elements necessary for the U.S. citizens of Puerto Rico to exercise
self-determination and to see their decision implemented responsibly,
with planning and care. In sports terminology, S. 472 is legislation
that can go the distance; so is H.R. 856. The rest is up to Congress.
Congress must reject the arguments of those who would deny the
American citizens in Puerto Rico the right to vote on status, because
they fear that the island's residents will choose statehood. It must
reject the nativist sentiment that the Hispanic heritage of Puerto Rico
disqualifies our American citizens from equal participation in the
American dream; and it must reject obstructionist tactics to impose
historically-unprecedented language or super-majority requirements on
the Puerto Rican electorate in order for it to petition for statehood.
The people of Puerto Rico have affirmed, repeatedly, their desire to
be an integral part of this great nation. In the poll booth, more than
95% have voted for U.S. citizenship and some form of association with
the United States. To require a super-majority standard for statehood is
prejudicial to that status option, since no one has suggested that a
super majority be required of a vote for commonwealth or independence.
What is more, incorporation as a state has never depended on either an
electoral or a Congressional super majority. Congress ignored the
indifference of territorial residents to pass enabling acts for Colorado
and Nebraska. The citizens of Colorado rejected statehood by
resoundingly defeating their first state constitution. Later, the second
state constitution prevailed by a mere 150 votes. Nebraskan voters
defeated two proposals for state constitutional conventions before
grudgingly consenting to join the union with only 100 votes to spare.
When the Republic of Texas and the United States each failed to ratify
a treaty of annexation, Congress adopted a different strategy and drew
up a Joint Resolution for Annexing Texas. Even that almost failed; in
the Senate the resolution squeaked by with just two votes to spare. And
let us not forget that these United States were preserved in the face of
and despite the outright hostility on the part of the states south of
the Mason-Dixon line.
The American citizens in Puerto Rico are patriots who have risked life
and limb for this democracy. Since 1917, when citizenship was extended
to island's residents, more that 400,000 Puerto Ricans have served in
the U.S. Armed Forces. In fact, beginning with World War I, an estimated
197,000 Puerto Ricans have fought in every military engagement the
country has faced during this century. Forty-eight thousand Puerto
Ricans served in Vietnam and during the Korean conflict, the 61,000
troops sent to the front by Puerto Rico outnumbered the forces of 32
states in absolute numbers and were second only to Hawaii when measured
on a per capita basis. It is a sad irony that the language or ethnicity
of Puerto Ricans is irrelevant when they are called to defend democracy,
but it becomes a cause of alarm when they want to participate as equals
in the democracy they have helped secure.
Finally, Congress must turn a deaf ear to the economic arguments
raised against Puerto Rican self-determination. To justify colonialism
because a territory fails to thrive under a colonial economy is the
ultimate catch-22. The arguments that statehood will be too costly,
locally and nationally, and that Federal taxes will destroy the local
economy are arguments that were raised, most recently, against Alaska
and Hawaii. Similar economic objections were voiced in protest against
the inclusion of at least twenty other states which have managed to
thrive since their incorporation.
Puerto Rico will thrive as well, because it has outstanding human
resources and the assets for growth. These assets include a strong
manufacturing base, skilled workers, many of whom are bilingual and
experienced in the use of hi-tech equipment, it's strategic location and
the tourist appeal of its scenic beauty and historic landmarks. If the
members of Congress want the territory's economy to grow, they need to
liberate Puerto Rico's economic and political future from the terminal
uncertainty of its unresolved territorial status.
Carpe diem, seize the day! "There is a time for everything, and a
season for every activity under heaven," to quote Ecclesiastes. And
after a century of debate, now is the time for Congress to pass status
legislation and now is the season for the people of Puerto Rico to
exercise democracy's fundamental right of self-determination. Thank
you.
See Entire Hearing Transcript
