[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 19 (Tuesday, March 3, 1998)]
[House]
[Page H695]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1245
                       STATEHOOD FOR PUERTO RICO

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Snowbarger). Under the Speaker's 
announced policy of January 21, 1997, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. 
Duncan) is recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on the question of 
whether Puerto Rico will become our 51st State. Last year I was the 
only member of the Committee on Resources who voted against this bill 
on the final committee vote. I did not speak against this bill at the 
time or try to get anyone else to vote against it, primarily due to my 
great respect for and friendship with Chairman Young, the primary 
sponsor. Chairman Young and I agree on almost all issues, particularly 
on the need to open up a very small portion of Alaska to further oil 
production.
  After I cast this lone dissenting vote, I was asked to visit Puerto 
Rico by its government and some of its leading citizens, and in an 
attempt to be as fair as possible, I went there for a weekend visit 8 
or 9 months ago. While there, I met some of the nicest people I have 
met anyplace in this world. I was greatly impressed with the beauty of 
the island and the great progress that is being made toward freedom and 
a strong economy and away from the shackles of socialism.
  I was impressed with the close ties and favorable feelings most 
Puerto Ricans have with and for the United States. I was told that 
Puerto Rico had sent more soldiers and sailors to the U.S. military 
than any other State per capita, and I really appreciate this.
  I had never thought much about this before I went there, but Puerto 
Rico is closer to Washington, D.C., and the Southeastern United States 
than are some of our Western States. I believe that Puerto Rico is fast 
on its way to becoming an island paradise. Some of it already is.
  Puerto Rico has a great future, if it continues moving even further 
toward a free market economy and lower taxes. The island is in a 
strategic location and could be a valuable asset to us militarily.
  However, in spite of all the many good things there are about Puerto 
Rico and its people, I do not believe Puerto Rico should become a State 
at this time. First and foremost to me, the American people do not 
support this expansion. In every poll or survey, the people of my 
district hold opinions almost identical to the national average. I have 
not received even one phone call, comment, letter or postcard in favor 
of this from my district. Every local contact has been against this. 
This is very important to me.
  Second, according to the Congressional Research Service, Tennessee 
would potentially be one of six or seven States to lose a House Member 
if Puerto Rico becomes a State. This would not have much effect on me 
because most of the growth in our State has been in and around 
Knoxville and Nashville, so my district will be about the same or even 
possibly shrink in size for the foreseeable future. However, it would 
definitely hurt our State if we lose the equivalent of 11 percent of 
our House delegation.
  Third, the GAO and others have estimated this could cost American 
taxpayers $3 to 5 billion a year in added costs to the Federal 
Government. We are not in nearly as strong a shape economically as some 
people think with the stock market at record levels. Also in about 8 to 
10 years when the baby-boomers begin retiring, we are about to face 
some of the greatest costs we have ever seen in the history of this 
country. With national debt of $5.5 trillion right now and a debt 
almost quadruple that when you figure in future pension liabilities, we 
really cannot afford to do this until Puerto Rico strengthens its 
economy significantly.
  Fourth, when I went to Israel 3 or 4 years ago, our group met, among 
many others, with the woman who headed Israeli immigration. She told us 
they gave all immigrants to Israel up to 2 years of intensive language 
training if they needed it because Israel felt that it was very 
important to have a common, unifying national language.
  It is fine with me if everyone in this country learns Spanish or some 
other second language, but I think all U.S. citizens need to be truly, 
honestly fluent in English. We need a unifying national language. Look 
at the problems Canada has now with many in French-speaking Quebec 
wanting to split Canada in the middle. English is and should be our 
national language, even if some do not like it.
  I am told that a little over 20 percent of the people in Puerto Rico 
are fluent in English. I believe Puerto Rico should greatly emphasize 
the English language training if they want to become a part of our 
Union.
  Fifth and finally, some say only a little over half of Puerto Ricans 
want to become a State of the United States if they are given a truly 
free choice with fair definitions. I do not believe we should add any 
State unless an extremely high percentage, at least 75 percent or even 
more, want to become citizens. We certainly do not need to add a State 
where almost half of the people do not want it.
  Puerto Rico should vote first. They can hold a referendum without our 
permission. The Congress should not take a vote that as a practical 
matter we cannot get out of unless, and until we have a truly fair, 
accurate assessment of how many Puerto Ricans really want this.
  For all of these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I believe we should maintain 
our present friendly, close relationship with Puerto Rico as a U.S. 
Territory.

                          ____________________