★ 89–006 

111TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 111–294 

PUERTO RICO DEMOCRACY ACT OF 2009 

OCTOBER 8, 2009.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State 

of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. RAHALL, from the Committee on Natural Resources, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 2499] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred the 

bill (H.R. 2499) to provide for a federally sanctioned self-determination process for the people of Puerto Rico, having considered the 

same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. 

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2009’’. 

SEC. 2. FEDERALLY SANCTIONED PROCESS FOR PUERTO RICO’S SELF-DETERMINATION. 

(a) FIRST PLEBISCITE.—The Government of Puerto Rico is authorized to conduct 

a plebiscite in Puerto Rico. The 2 options set forth on the ballot shall be preceded 

by the following statement: ‘‘Instructions: Mark one of the following 2 options: 

‘‘(1) Puerto Rico should continue to have its present form of political status. 

If you agree, mark here ll. ‘‘(2) Puerto Rico should have a different political status. If you agree, mark 

here ll.’’. 

(b) PROCEDURE IF MAJORITY IN FIRST PLEBISCITE FAVORS OPTION 1.—If a majority 

of the ballots in the plebiscite are cast in favor of Option 1, the Government of Puerto Rico is authorized to conduct additional plebiscites under subsection (a) at intervals of every 8 years from the date that the results of the prior plebiscite are certified under section 3(d). 

(c) PROCEDURE IF MAJORITY IN FIRST PLEBISCITE FAVORS OPTION 2.—If a majority 

of the ballots in a plebiscite conducted pursuant to subsection (a) or (b) are cast in 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
2 

favor of Option 2, the Government of Puerto Rico is authorized to conduct a plebiscite on the following 3 options: 

(1) Independence: Puerto Rico should become fully independent from the 

United States. If you agree, mark here ll. (2) Sovereignty in Association with the United States: Puerto Rico and the 

United States should form a political association between sovereign nations that 

will not be subject to the Territorial Clause of the United States Constitution. 

If you agree, mark here ll. (3) Statehood: Puerto Rico should be admitted as a State of the Union. If you 

agree, mark here ll. 

SEC. 3. APPLICABLE LAWS AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS. 

(a) APPLICABLE LAWS.—All Federal laws applicable to the election of the Resident 

Commissioner shall, as appropriate and consistent with this Act, also apply to any 

plebiscites 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) RULES AND REGULATIONS.—The Puerto Rico State Elections Commission shall 

issue all rules and regulations necessary to carry out the plebiscites under this Act. 

(c) ELIGIBILITY TO VOTE.—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 Commission requirements (other than the residency requirement) applicable to eligibility to 

vote in a general election in Puerto Rico. Persons eligible to vote under this subsection shall, upon timely request submitted to the Commission in compliance 

with any terms imposed by the Electoral Law of Puerto Rico, be entitled to receive an absentee ballot for the plebiscite. 

(d) CERTIFICATION OF PLEBISCITE RESULTS.—The Puerto Rico State Elections 

Commission shall certify the results of any plebiscite held under this Act to the 

President of the United States and to the Members of the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States. 

(e) ENGLISH BALLOTS.—The Puerto Rico State Elections Commission shall ensure 

that all ballots used for any plebiscite held under this Act include the full content 

of the ballot printed in English. 

(f) PLEBISCITE COSTS.—All costs associated with any plebiscite held under this Act 

(including the printing, distribution, transportation, collection, and counting of all 

ballots) shall be paid for by the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of H.R. 2499 is to provide for a federally sanctioned 

self-determination process for the people of Puerto Rico. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Puerto Rico has been a U.S. territory since 1898, when it was 

ceded to the United States by Spain under the treaty that ended 

the Spanish-American War. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that 

Puerto Rico has not been incorporated into the United States 

(Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244). This means, among other 

things, that Puerto Rico’s ultimate political status has not been resolved. Incorporated territories are those destined for statehood, 

whereas unincorporated territories can become sovereign nations or 

States. Persons born in Puerto Rico have been granted U.S. citizenship by federal statute since 1917. 

Through its Territorial Clause (Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2), 

the Constitution gives Congress full power to govern territories. 

The only limit on this power is that residents of the territories possess certain fundamental rights that cannot be abridged. The 

power of Congress includes the authority to govern territories in 

local as well as national matters. Congress, however, has granted 

Puerto Rico authority over local matters similar to the authority 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
3 

possessed by the states. In 1950, Congress enacted a law authorizing Puerto Rico to draft a local constitution, which was ratified 

by the people of Puerto Rico and approved by Congress in 1952. In 

the exercise of its powers, Congress may choose to treat Puerto 

Rico differently than the States, the District of Columbia, and other 

territories. While Puerto Rico is treated as a state for many purposes, there are significant exceptions with respect to certain programs (e.g., Medicaid, Medicare, Supplemental Security Income) 

and tax law. 

The Constitution does not directly provide for residents of territories to be represented in Congress or to participate in the election 

of the president of the United States. Pursuant to statute and the 

Rules of the House, the nearly four million residents of Puerto Rico 

elect a single Resident Commissioner, who has been given membership in the U.S. House of Representatives and limited voting rights 

in committees. Because residents of Puerto Rico do not have anything approaching equal voting representation in the government 

that enacts and enforces their national laws, they do not enjoy full 

democracy at the national government level. 

Puerto Rico has been under the U.S. flag for 111 years and its 

residents have been U.S. citizens for more than 90 years. Yet, in 

that time, the people of Puerto Rico have not expressed their 

views—in a vote authorized by the Government of the United 

States—on the question of whether they want the current status to 

continue or, in the alternative, whether they would prefer that 

Puerto Rico become a State or a sovereign nation, either fully independent from or in an association with the United States. 

The debate over Puerto Rico’s political status has been—and remains today—the central issue in the territory’s political life. In 

the period immediately following Puerto Rico’s acquisition by the 

United States in 1898, Puerto Rico’s leaders generally expected 

equality and eventual statehood. However, a competing nationalist 

sentiment emerged among a segment of Puerto Rico’s residents. It 

was spurred in considerable part by Supreme Court rulings that 

Puerto Rico had not been incorporated into the United States— 

meaning that it would not necessarily become a state—and by laws 

enacted in the first two decades of the twentieth century that, in 

certain respects, granted Puerto Rico less self-government and representation in the national government than it had been afforded 

under Spanish rule. 

Subsequently, certain leaders in Puerto Rico developed ideas for 

a new political status and relationship between the United States 

and Puerto Rico. The proposal was a hybrid, containing elements 

of territory status, statehood, and national sovereignty, and was 

rooted in the recognition that many residents of Puerto Rico valued 

their U.S. citizenship and that key U.S. officials opposed independence. 

Such hybrid status proposals have undergone various 

iterations—and been given various names—over the years. Under 

the most recent version—put forth in 1998 and called ‘‘Development of the Commonwealth’’—Puerto Rico would be recognized as 

a nation but in an association with the United States. The U.S. 

could not withdraw from this association or modify its terms without the consent of Puerto Rico. Certain federal laws would apply 

in Puerto Rico, but Puerto Rico would have the power to nullify the 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
4 

application of other federal laws and to limit the jurisdiction of the 

federal courts. Puerto Rico would also have the power to join international organizations and enter into international agreements. 

Residents of Puerto Rico would be granted U.S. citizenship in perpetuity and continue to receive all current federal assistance. The 

federal government would be required to grant Puerto Rico a subsidy—in the form of an annual block grant—and to enact incentives 

to encourage investment in Puerto Rico. Proposals for such a governing arrangement have been consistently opposed by federal authorities in the executive and legislative branches, including this 

Committee, on both constitutional and policy grounds. Nevertheless, this hybrid proposal continues to be promoted in Puerto Rico 

as a feasible status option. Such proposals have resulted in misinformed and inconclusive referenda in Puerto Rico in July 1967, 

November 1993, and December 1998. 

Lack of clear understanding in Puerto Rico regarding its viable, 

non-territorial status options is a chief reason for this legislation. 

A federal law would clarify the viable status options and thereby 

ensure that the self-determination process is well-informed and 

productive. In addition to the current territory status, there are 

three real status options that have support in Puerto Rico: (1) independence, (2) national sovereignty in association with the United 

States, whereby Puerto Rico and the U.S. would form a political association the terms of which would be negotiated between the parties and which would be terminable by either party, and (3) statehood. 

Origins of the Bill 

The status referendum held in Puerto Rico in 1998 included a 

‘‘None of the above’’ choice, in addition to the current status, independence, nationhood in association with the United States, and 

statehood. Advocates of the ‘‘Development of the Commonwealth’’ 

proposal campaigned for a ‘‘None of the above’’ vote. ‘‘None of the 

above’’ obtained just over 50% of the vote, statehood obtained 

46.5%, independence obtained 2.5%, nationhood in association with 

the United States obtained .02%, and the current status obtained 

.01%. 

Because neither ‘‘None of the above’’ nor the ‘‘Development of the 

Commonwealth’’ proposal could become Puerto Rico’s status, President William J. Clinton called for Puerto Rico’s viable status options to be clarified and for a referendum to take place on those 

options. The then-Chairman and Ranking Member of this Committee, Don Young (R–AK) and George Miller (D–CA), issued a 

similar call. To facilitate this process, President Clinton established 

the President’s Task Force on Puerto Rico’s Status. 

In 2005, after extensive consultations with Puerto Rico’s political 

parties, the Task Force issued a report recommending that Congress provide for a referendum in which the people of Puerto Rico 

would express their preference between continuing the current territory status and seeking a non-territory status. If the referendum 

resulted in a majority favoring the current status, the Task Force 

recommended that further referenda on the question be held periodically. If the referendum resulted in a majority expressing the 

desire to seek a non-territory status, the Task Force recommended 

that Congress provide for a referendum between statehood and naVerDate Nov 24 2008 01:01 Oct 10, 2009 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR294.XXX HR294

jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
5 

tionhood. A bill (H.R. 4867) to implement the process recommended 

by the Task Force was introduced in the 109th Congress by thenResident Commissioner—and now Governor—Luis G. Fortun ̃ o (RPR) and was co-sponsored by 110 Members. A similar bill (H.R. 

900) was introduced in the 110th Congress by Rep. Jose ́ Serrano 

(D–NY) and cosponsored by 128 Members, including Resident Commissioner Fortun ̃ o. An amended version of the bill was favorably 

reported by this Committee. 

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 2499 was introduced on May 19, 2009, by Resident Commissioner Pedro R. Pierluisi (D–PR). It was referred to the Committee 

on Natural Resources. On June 24, 2009, the Committee held a 

hearing on the bill. Witnesses included the governor of Puerto Rico, 

who also serves as the president of one of the territory’s three 

major political parties; the presidents of Puerto Rico’s other two 

major political parties; the presiding officers of the Legislative Assembly of Puerto Rico; the minority leader of the Puerto Rico Senate and a designee of the minority leader of the Puerto Rico House 

of Representatives; a former governor and resident commissioner; 

and Representatives Dan Burton (R–IN) and Alan Grayson (D–FL). 

On July 22, 2009, the Committee met to consider the bill. Representative Henry E. Brown (R–SC) offered an amendment that 

would require the Puerto Rico State Elections Commission to ensure that all ballots used for any plebiscite held under the Act include the full content of the ballot printed in English. The amendment was agreed to by a rollcall vote of 35–0, as follows: 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
6 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic foio 6 HR294.001
7 

Representative Jason Chaffetz (R–UT) offered an amendment 

that would require that all costs associated with any plebiscite held 

under this Act be paid for by the Government of Puerto Rico. The 

amendment was agreed to by voice vote. 

Representative Jason Chaffetz (R–UT) offered an additional 

amendment that would require that two-thirds of voters, rather 

than a majority, vote in favor of a different political status in the 

first-stage plebiscite authorized by the bill in order to proceed to 

the second-stage plebiscite. The amendment would also add a 

‘‘Sense of Congress’’ that any status option receiving less than twothirds support in the second-stage plebiscite should not be the basis 

of any further legislative action by Congress. The amendment was 

not agreed to by voice vote. 

Representative Paul C. Broun (R–GA) offered an amendment 

that would require that, if Puerto Rico were to become a State, its 

official language would be English and all its official business 

would be conducted in English. The amendment was not agreed to 

by a rollcall vote of 13–24, as follows: 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
8 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic foio 8 HR294.002
9 

The bill was then favorably reported, as amended, to the House 

of Representatives by a rollcall vote of 30–8, as follows: 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
10 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic foio 10 HR294.003
11 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title 

Section 1 provides that this Act may be cited as the ‘‘Puerto Rico 

Democracy Act of 2009.’’ 

Section 2. Federally sanctioned process for Puerto Rico’s self-determination 

Section 2(a) would authorize the Government of Puerto Rico to 

conduct a plebiscite in which individuals eligible to vote under the 

Act would express their preference as to whether they want Puerto 

Rico to (1) continue to have its present form of political status or 

(2) have a different political status. Consistent with the principle 

of self-determination, the bill would authorize—as opposed to require—the Government of Puerto Rico to conduct this plebiscite. 

The Committee believes that it is both logical and sensible to ask 

eligible voters the threshold question of whether they want to 

maintain the current status or to pursue a different status before 

voters are asked to state their preference as to which of Puerto 

Rico’s alternative options they prefer. The argument has been 

made that this plebiscite would place the current status at a disadvantage because supporters of the three alternatives to the current status would collectively outnumber supporters of the current 

status. The factual assumption that underlies this argument is 

speculative and open to question, not least because some proponents of alternatives to the current status might nonetheless 

vote for the current status, based on their belief that a vote for an 

undetermined different status might ultimately lead to an alternative status they do not want. More fundamentally, the Committee strongly believes that if more than 50 percent of eligible voters do not support the present status, Congress and the President 

should be aware of this fact, and voters should then be able to express their preference among the non-territory alternatives to the 

present status in a congressionally-authorized vote. 

Section 2(b) provides that, if a majority of ballots are cast in 

favor of continuing the present status, the Government of Puerto 

Rico is authorized to periodically conduct additional plebiscites on 

this question. A plebiscite held pursuant to this subsection cannot 

be held earlier than eight years after the certification of the results 

of a prior plebiscite on the question. This subsection will provide 

for the people of Puerto Rico to be consulted at reasonable intervals 

to obtain their continued consent to an arrangement that does not 

provide for self-government at the national government level. The 

Committee believes that an eight-year period between plebiscites 

strikes a reasonable balance. On the one hand, it will provide continuing congressional authorization for a meaningful process of 

self-determination in Puerto Rico. On the other hand, it will allow 

for a substantial interlude between plebiscites, so as to reduce the 

likelihood that the status debate will unduly complicate efforts to 

address other important social, economic and political issues in 

Puerto Rico. 

Section 2(c) would authorize the Government of Puerto Rico, in 

the event that a majority of voters in a plebiscite conducted pursuant to Section 2(a) or 2(b) cast their ballots in favor of a different 

political status, to conduct a second plebiscite between the options 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
12 

of (1) independence, (2) national sovereignty in association with the 

United States, and (3) U.S. statehood. These constitute all of the 

alternatives to the current status that have any support in the territory, and exclude only the options of Puerto Rico becoming a sovereign nation in association with a nation other than the United 

States or becoming part of another nation. The three options in the 

plebiscite also correspond to the options that the United Nations 

has identified as the options for decolonizing a territory. 

Descriptions of independence and U.S. statehood would not be 

provided on the ballot authorized by this subsection because the 

meaning of independence is defined in international law and practice and the meaning of U.S. statehood is defined by the U.S. Constitution. National sovereignty in association with the United 

States is also defined in international law, but this subsection 

notes that an associated nation of Puerto Rico would not be subject 

to congressional authority under the Territorial Clause. 

Section 3. Applicable laws and other requirements 

Section 3(a) would make all federal laws that are applicable to 

the election of the Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico applicable 

to the plebiscites authorized by the Act. 

Section 3(b) would authorize the Puerto Rico State Elections 

Commission to make all policy necessary to carry out the plebiscites. 

Section 3(c) would prescribe the eligibility requirements for voting in the plebiscites authorized by this Act. This subsection would 

make eligible to vote (1) residents of Puerto Rico who are otherwise 

eligible to vote under Puerto Rico electoral law and (2) U.S. citizens 

who were born in Puerto Rico but are not residents of Puerto Rico 

who are otherwise eligible to vote under Puerto Rico electoral law. 

The Committee understands that a substantial number of individuals born in Puerto Rico but not currently residing there hope 

to return to live in Puerto Rico one day. Accordingly, they can be 

said to have a practical stake in helping to determine Puerto Rico’s 

future political status. Although some individuals who are of Puerto Rican descent but who were not born in Puerto Rico may also 

hope to live in Puerto Rico one day, the proportion is likely to be 

less than the proportion among individuals who were born in Puerto Rico. This subsection makes eligible those born in Puerto Rico 

but not those of Puerto Rican descent who were not born in Puerto 

Rico, and thereby chooses place of birth rather than ethnic identity 

as the eligibility criterion. 

Section 3(d) would require the Puerto Rico State Elections Commission to certify the results of the plebiscites authorized by this 

Act to the President of the United States and to the Members of 

the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States. 

The Committee notes that the bill would not specify any next 

steps by Congress once it has received the results of the plebiscite 

among the three alternatives to the current status because Congress would be better able to determine what should be done based 

on the identity of the winning option and the margin of victory. 

Section 3(e) would require that the Puerto Rico State Elections 

Commission ensure that all ballots used for any plebiscite held 

under the Act include the full content of the ballot printed in 

English. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
13 

Section 3(f) would require that all costs associated with any plebiscite held under the Act be paid for by the Government of Puerto 

Rico. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee on 

Natural Resources’ oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in the body of this report. 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Article IV, section 3 of the Constitution of the United States 

grants Congress the authority to enact this bill. 

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII

1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of 

the House of Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) of that rule provides 

that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. 

2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2) of rule 

XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 

308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this bill does not 

contain any new budget authority, spending authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or tax expenditures. 

3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 

clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or objective 

of this bill is to provide for a federally sanctioned self-determination process for the people of Puerto Rico. 

4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause 

3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 

section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate for this bill from the 

Director of the Congressional Budget Office: 

H.R. 2499—Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2009 

H.R. 2499 would allow Puerto Rico to conduct a vote on whether 

the island should retain its current relationship (a commonwealth) 

with the United States or pursue a different political status. If the 

vote favored retaining its current political status, Puerto Rico 

would be authorized to conduct an additional vote every eight 

years. If the vote favored a different political status, the legislation 

would allow Puerto Rico to conduct a second vote among three selfdetermination options (independence, sovereignty in association 

with the United States, or statehood). CBO estimates that enacting 

this legislation would have no significant impact on the federal 

budget because costs of conducting the votes would be paid by 

Puerto Rico. 

H.R. 2499 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
14 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Matthew Pickford. 

This estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant 

Director for Budget Analysis. 

COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4

This bill contains no unfunded mandates. 

EARMARK STATEMENT

H.R. 2499 does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited 

tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9 of rule 

XXI. 

PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or tribal law. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing law. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
(15) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

During the Full Natural Resources Committee markup of H.R. 

2499, the Puerto Rico Democracy Act, Congressman Jason Chaffetz 

offered an amendment that required that a two-thirds vote, not a 

simple majority, apply to any federally sanctioned plebiscite vote to 

end the current 111 year relationship the United States has with 

the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. In addition, the amendment 

stipulated that if less than two-thirds of the voters in Puerto Rico 

selected either Statehood, Independence or a Freely Associated 

State status that it was the Sense of Congress that no further legislative action should occur on that option. 

The amendment was offered for several reasons. First, during the 

past 60 years, the voters in Puerto Rico have gone to the polls to 

express their views on four separate locally sanctioned plebiscites. 

While the results of the first two plebiscites were an endorsement 

of Commonwealth status, the last two votes were inconclusive. If 

the people of Puerto Rico desire to end their current relationship, 

then we believe that at least 66 percent of those voting should 

make that decision. 

Second, this requirement is consistent with what transpired in 

the territorities of Alaska and Hawaii. In fact, on June 27, 1959, 

132,938 residents of Hawaii voted affirmatively on the question of: 

‘‘Shall Hawaii immediately be admitted into the Union as a State.’’ 

There were only 7,854 residents who voted no on statehood which 

means that 94 percent of those voting wanted to end their territorial status. Almost a year earlier, 40,452 Alaskan residents voted 

on the nearly identical question of: ‘‘Shall Alaska immediately be 

admitted into the Union as a State.’’ By contrast, 8,010 Alaskan 

residents voted no on statehood. This represented a resounding 84 

percent favorable vote for statehood. As we know, 50 years ago, 

Alaska and Hawaii became our 49th and 50th states respectively 

and there has been no debate that the overwhelming majority of 

their citizens supported statehood. Based on the results of the Alaska and Hawaii plebiscites, this level of support should not be insurmountable. 

Finally, the issue of Puerto Rico’s political status has been debated passionately and in some isolated cases violently for decades. 

Based on past election results, it is more than likely that up to 50 

percent of the population of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or 

nearly 2 million people may feel disenfranchised by the results of 

any plebiscite. As a hypothetical example, if the voters choose to 

petition the Congress for statehood, then clearly their case is enhanced if 84 or 94 percent of their voters have affirmatively endorsed this idea. In contrast, if only 51 percent of voters support 

statehood, this may well have a chilling impact on Puerto Rico’s 

success of achieving statehood. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS
16 

During Committee debate on this amendment, the sponsor indicated that becoming a state is similar to a marriage. On their wedding day, nearly every bride and groom hopes that their respective 

families will support their decision to enter into this union. However, there are instances where some members of the respective 

families oppose the impending union and will by their actions or 

inactions bring marital discord to the newlyweds. In this example, 

the effect is limited to the married couple. However, in the case of 

Puerto Rico, unhappy results will have a profound effect on millions of Puerto Ricans who may well feel that a change in their political status is being forced upon them. 

We believe that a 66 percent majority vote is not undemocratic, 

unfair or unattainable based on the experiences in Alaska and Hawaii. Congress can establish any standard it wants as a precondition for statehood. For example, in 1807, the formerly predominantly French territory of Louisiana adopted English as its official language as a precondition for its admission into the Union 

as a State. Instead of being a deterrent, we believe this level of 

local support for either Statehood, Independence or a Freely Associated State status will help the people of Puerto Rico make their 

case to the Congress. 

The election outcome in Puerto Rico must be clean, unambiguous, fair and supported by a significant majority of the residents 

of the Commonwealth. It is regrettable that the proponents of H.R. 

2499 felt that this amendment was premature and were unwilling 

to accept this standard to help them in their effort to clarify the 

future political status of Puerto Rico. It is our hope that as H.R. 

2499 moves through the legislative process, the proponents of this 

measure will see the wisdom of our approach. 

JASON CHAFFETZ. 

CYNTHIA LUMMIS. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with REPORTS