[House Report 104-713]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
104th Congress Rept. 104-713
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session Part 2
_______________________________________________________________________
UNITED STATES-PUERTO RICO POLITICAL STATUS ACT
_______
September 18, 1996.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Solomon, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 3024]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Rules, to whom was referred the bill (H.R.
3024) to provide a process leading to full self-government for
Puerto Rico, having considered the same, report thereon with an
amendment and recommend that the amendment be adopted.
The amendment is as follows:
Amend section 6 to read as follows:
SEC. 6. CONGRESSIONAL PROCEDURES FOR CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATION.
(a) In General.--The majority leader of the House of
Representatives (or his designee) and the majority leader of
the Senate (or his designee) shall each introduce legislation
(by request) providing for the transition plan under section
4(b) and the implementation recommendation under section 4(c)
not later than 5 legislative days after the date of receipt by
Congress of the submission by the President under that section,
as the case may be.
(b) Referral.--The legislation shall be referred on the date
of introduction to the appropriate committee or committees in
accordance with rules of the respective Houses. The legislation
shall be reported not later than the 120th calendar day after
the date of its introduction. If any such committee fails to
report the bill within that period, that committee shall be
automatically discharged from consideration of the legislation,
and the legislation shall be placed on the appropriate
calendar.
(c) Consideration.--
(1) After the 14th legislative day after the date on
which the last committee of the House of
Representatives or the Senate, as the case may be, has
reported or been discharged from further consideration
of such legislation, it is in order after the
legislation has been on the calendar for 14 legislative
days for any Member of that House in favor of the
legislation to move to proceed to the consideration of
the legislation (after consultation with the presiding
officer of that House as to scheduling) to move to
proceed to its consideration at any time after the
third legislative day on which the Member announces to
the respective House concerned the Member's intention
to do so. All points of order against the motion to
proceed and against consideration of that motion are
waived. The motion is highly privileged in the House of
Representatives and is privileged in the Senate and is
not debatable. The motion is not subject to amendment,
or to a motion to postpone, or to a motion to proceed
to the consideration of other business. A motion to
reconsider the vote by which the motion is agreed to or
disagreed to shall not be in order. If a motion to
proceed to the consideration of the legislation is
agreed to, the respective House shall immediately
proceed to consideration of the legislation without
intervening motion (except one motion to adjourn),
order, or other business.
(2)(A) In the House of Representatives, during
consideration of the legislation in the Committee of
the Whole, the first reading of the legislation shall
be dispensed with. General debate shall be confined to
the legislation, and shall not exceed 4 hours equally
divided and controlled by a proponent and an opponent
of the legislation. After general debate, the
legislation shall be considered as read for amendment
under the five-minute rule. Consideration of the
legislation for amendment shall not exceed 4 hours
excluding time for recorded votes and quorum calls. At
the conclusion of the bill for amendment, the Committee
shall rise and report the bill to the House with such
amendments as may have been adopted. The previous
question shall be considered as ordered on the
legislation and amendments thereto to final passage
without intervening motion, except one motion to
recommit with or without instructions. A motion to
reconsider the vote on passage of the legislation shall
not be in order.
(B) In the Senate, debate on the legislation, and all
amendments thereto and debatable motions and appeals in
connection therewith, shall be limited to not more than
25 hours. The time shall be equally divided between,
and controlled by, the majority leader and the minority
leader or their designees. No amendment that is not
germane to the provisions of such legislation shall be
received. A motion to further limit debate is not
debatable.
(3) Appeals from the decisions of the Chair relating
to the application of the rules of the Senate or the
House of Representatives, as the case may be, to the
procedure relating to the legislation described in
subsection (a) shall be decided without debate.
(d) Consideration by Other House.--(1) If, before the passage
by one House of the legislation described in subsection (a)
that was introduced in that House, that House receives from the
other House the legislation described in subsection (a)--
(A) the legislation of the other House shall not be
referred to a committee and may not be considered in
the House that receives it otherwise than on final
passage under subparagraph (B)(ii) or (iii); and
(B)(i) the procedure in the House that receives such
legislation with respect to such legislation that was
introduced in that House shall be the same as if no
legislation had been received from the other House; but
(ii) in the case of legislation received from the
other House that is identical to the legislation as
engrossed by the receiving House, the vote on final
passage shall be on the legislation of the other House;
or
(iii) after passage of the legislation, the
legislation of the other House shall be considered as
amended with the text of the legislation just passed
and shall be considered as passed, and that House shall
be considered to have insisted on its amendment and
requested a conference with the other House.
(2) Upon disposition of the legislation described in
subsection (a) that is received by one House from the other
House, it shall no longer be in order to consider such
legislation that was introduced in the receiving House.
(e) Upon receiving from the other House a message in which
that House insists upon its amendment to the legislation and
requests a conference with the House of Representatives or the
Senate, as the case may be, on the disagreeing votes thereon,
the House receiving the request shall be considered to have
disagreed to the amendment of the other House and agreed to the
conference requested by that House.
(f) Definition.--For the purposes of this section, the term
``legislative day'' means a day on which the House of
Representatives or the Senate, as appropriate, is in session.
(g) Exercise of Rulemaking Power.--The provisions of this
section are enacted by the Congress--
(1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the
Senate and the House of Representatives and, as such,
shall be considered as part of the rules of each House
and shall supersede other rules only to the extent that
they are inconsistent therewith; and
(2) with full recognition of the constitutional right
of either House to change the rules (so far as they
relate to the procedures of that House) at any time, in
the same manner, and to the same extent as in the case
of any other rule of that House.
PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION
The purpose of H.R. 3024, the United States-Puerto Rico
Political Status Act, is to provide a congressionally
recognized process for the people of Puerto Rico to make a
determination with respect to certain options for achieving
full self-government.
SUMMARY OF THE LEGISLATION
H.R. 3024 requires a referendum to be held by December 31,
1998, on Puerto Rico's path to self-government either through
U.S. statehood or through sovereign independence or free
association. It requires the President to submit to the
Congress for approval legislation for: (1) a transition plan of
at least ten years which leads to full self-government for
Puerto Rico; and (2) a recommendation for the implementation of
such self-government consistent with Puerto Rico's approval. It
sets forth specified requirements with respect to the
referendum and congressional procedures for consideration of
legislation.
COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
H.R. 3024 was introduced by Rep. Don Young, Chairman of the
Committee on Resources, on March 6, 1996. It was referred to
the Committee on Resources and in addition to the Committee on
Rules for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker.
On June 12, 1996, the Subcommittee on Native American and
Insular Affairs of the Committee on Resources met to mark-up
3024. The Subcommittee ordered reported the legislation with an
amendment in the nature of a substitute, and forwarded the bill
to the Committee on Resources. On June 26, 1996, the Committee
on Resources met to mark-up H.R. 3024. The Committee favorably
reported H.R. 3024, as amended, to the full House of
Representatives.
On July 26, 1996, upon the filing of the report of the
Committee on Resources, the referral granted to the Committee
on Rules was limited to a period not to exceed September 18,
1996. H.R. 3024 was referred to the Committee on Rules because
the Committee has jurisdiction over Section 6 of the
legislation (Congressional Procedures for Consideration of
Legislation), and the matters contained in Section 6 are solely
within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Rules.
On Tuesday, September 17, 1996, the Committee on Rules held
a hearing on H.R. 3024 and received testimony from the Hon. Don
Young (AK), the Hon. Carlos Romero-Barcelo (PR), the Hon. Dan
Burton (IN), the Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL), the Hon Toby Roth
(WI), the Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY), and the Hon. Jose Serrano
(NY). Written testimony was submitted from the Hon. George
Miller (CA), the Hon. Eni F.H. Faleomavaega (AS) and the Hon.
Dana Rohrabacher (CA).
On Wednesday, September 18, 1996, the Committee met to
mark-up H.R. 3024. The Committee ordered reported H.R. 3024 by
a nonrecord vote. During the mark-up, one amendment was agreed
to.
BACKGROUND ON THE LEGISLATION
The report of the Committee on Resources (H. Rept. 104-713,
Part 1) discusses the political history of Puerto Rico and to
some extent previous efforts to define the island's political
status. While reference to the report of the Committee on
Resources does not imply that the Committee on Rules endorses
the positions taken in that report, it does recognize that the
matters discussed at length in that report constitute matters
within the jurisdiction of that committee and hence outside the
scope of the Rules Committee.
However, on the issue of political status, it should be
noted that Puerto Rico has held three plebiscites. In 1952,
when Puerto Rico approved a local constitution and the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico was formed, a plebiscite was held
in which the commonwealth received 76.5% and statehood received
23.5%, with many independence supporters boycotting the
election. The 1967 plebiscite found 60.41% supporting
commonwealth, 38.99% supporting statehood and 0.6% supporting
independence. After continued Congressional inaction on the
status issue, the island held a locally governed plebiscite in
1993 in which 48.4% supported commonwealth, 46.2% supported
statehood and 4.4% supported independence.
Over the years numerous pieces of legislation have been
introduced in Congress to provide the people of Puerto Rico a
fair process of self-determination to deal with the issue of
status. The most notable legislative initiative in recent
history in the House was H.R. 4765, the Puerto Rico Self-
Determination Act, introduced during the 101st Congress. The
bill sponsored by Delegate Ron de Lugo of the Virgin Islands
was considered and approved by both the Committee on Interior
and Insular Affairs and the Committee on Rules. In an effort to
pass this legislation in the closing days of the 101st Congress
a coalition among Puerto Rico's political parties was formed to
support the legislation resulting in its passage by the House
under suspension of the rules in October of 1990.
In the Senate, S. 712, the Puerto Rico Status Referendum
Act was introduced by Senator Bennett Johnston in the 101st
Congress which called for a referendum in 1991, comprehensively
defined the three status options, and was self-implementing.
However, the concept of self-implementing legislation met with
opposition in the House. In response, the Committee on Interior
and Insular Affairs and the Committee on Rules included
expedited procedures in H.R. 4765 to provide the people of
Puerto Rico a commitment that Congress would vote on the
results of their referendum. The Subcommittee on Rules of the
House held a hearing and markup of the bill late in 1990,
incorporating these expedited procedures. While neither S. 712
or H.R. 4765 became law, the expedited procedures contained in
H.R. 4765 are identical to those contained in H.R. 3024 as
introduced.
However, upon further review, the Committee on Rules finds
those procedures to be inconsistent with the stated goals of
the legislation. Consequently, the committee has amended H.R.
3024 with a new Section 6, which more clearly reaches the
stated goal and rationale behind including the expedited
procedures in the bill, as well as being consistent with the
rules of the House governing normal procedure.
analysis of the legislation
Section 1 of H.R. 3024, as introduced, designates the bill
as the ``United States-Puerto Rico Political Status Act'' and
contains the Table of Contents.
Section 2 of H.R. 3024 contains the findings of Congress
with respect to Puerto Rico's political status and self-
determination.
Section 3 of H.R. 3024 contains a statement of policy
respecting the current level of self-government in Puerto Rico,
the desire of the United States and Puerto Rico to enable the
people of the territory to achieve full self-government, and
the commitment of the United States to encouraging the mutual
development and implementation of procedures to determine the
political status of Puerto Rico.
Section 4 of H.R. 3024 provides for a referendum, to be
held no later than December 31, 1998, on the political status
of the island, in which voters could indicate their preference
for independence, free association, or statehood status. Only
under the statehood option would U.S. citizenship for Puerto
Ricans be guaranteed. This section also provides for the
President to submit to Congress, within 180 days of receipt of
the results of the referendum, a legislative transition plan of
a minimum of 10 years that would lead to full self-government
for Puerto Rico. Not later than 180 days after enactment of
transition legislation providing for the political status
option that voters chose in the 1998 referendum, another
referendum would be held in which voters could indicate their
approval of the transition plan. Approval must be by a majority
of valid votes cast. On receiving the results of the
referendum, the President is required to announce the date of
implementation of full self-government for Puerto Rico.
Section 5 of H.R. 3024 provides the legal framework for the
conduct of referenda. The laws of both Puerto Rico (including
those dealing with voter eligibility) and the United States
with respect to the election of the Resident Commissioner shall
apply to the referenda. If the Puerto Rican electorate fails to
approve of a fully self-governing option, the President, in
consultation with Puerto Rican leaders and other interested
parties, may make recommendations to Congress within 180 days
of receipt of the results of the referendum. Puerto Rico would
remain an unincorporated territory of the United States if the
vote is inconclusive.
Section 6 of H.R. 3024 was amended by the Rules Committee.
This section, as amended, specifies the expedited procedures in
the House of Representatives and the Senate for the
consideration of legislation introduced to implement a
transition plan specified in Section 4(b) and an implementation
plan specified to Section 4(c) of H.R. 3024.
Subsection (a) of Section 6, as proposed to be amended,
requires the majority leaders in both the House of
Representatives and the Senate to introduce legislation to
implement the transition plan and implementation plan, as the
case may be, no later than 5 legislative days after the
President submits such legislation to Congress.
Subsection (b) of Section 6 requires such legislation to be
immediately referred to the committee or committees of
jurisdiction. If the committee or committees to which such
legislation is referred fail to report the legislation within
120 calendar days of session after its introduction, the
committee or committees would be automatically discharged from
further consideration of the legislation, and the legislation
would automatically be placed on the appropriate legislative
calendar.
Subsection (c) of Section 6 makes in order, as a highly
privileged matter in the House and a privileged matter in the
Senate, a motion to proceed to the consideration of the
legislation qualified under these expedited procedures. The
motion must be made by a Member favoring the legislation, but
not until: (1) the legislation has been on the calendar for 14
legislative days; (2) the Member consults with the presiding
officer of the respective House as to scheduling; and (3) after
the third legislative day after the Member gives notice to the
respective House. All points of order against the motion and
against consideration of the motion would be waived. If the
motion to proceed to the consideration of the legislation is
agreed to, the House of Representatives or the Senate, as the
case may be, shall proceed to its immediate consideration
without intervening motion (except one motion to adjourn) or
other business.
Subsection (c) of Section 6 further stipulates that in the
House of Representatives, the legislation would be considered
in the Committee of the Whole and would be debatable for four
hours equally divided between a proponent and an opponent. The
legislation would be subject to a four hour amendment process
(excluding recorded votes and quorum calls). After the
committee rises, the previous question would be considered as
ordered to final passage without intervening motion, except one
motion to recommit with or without instructions. In the Senate,
the legislation, including debate on all amendments, motions
and appeals, would be considered for not more than 25 hours,
equally divided between the majority leader and the minority
leader or their designees. Only germane amendments would be in
order and a motion to limit further debate would not debatable.
Subsection (d) of Section 6 provides that, if one House
receives the legislation as passed by the other House, the
legislation would be held at the desk and not be referred to a
committee. If the legislation received from the other House is
identical to the legislation engrossed by the receiving House,
the vote on final passage would be on the legislation of the
other House. If the legislation is not identical, the vote on
final passage would be on the legislation of the receiving
House, and the text of the legislation passed by the other
House would be amended with the text of the legislation passed
by the receiving House and returned to the other House, as
amended, with a request for a conference between the two
Houses.
Subsection (e) of Section 6 outlines procedures in the
event that one House receives a request for a conference from
the other House. After three legislative days following the
receipt of such a request, it would be in order for any Member
to move to disagree to the amendment of the other House and
agree to the conference.
Subsection (f) of Section 6 defines the term ``legislative
day'' in both the House and the Senate to mean a day on which
such House is in session.
Subsection (g) of Section 6 provides that the provisions of
Section 6 of H.R. 3024 are enacted as an exercise of the
constitutional rulemaking authority of the House and the Senate
with full recognition of the right of either House to change
its rules at anytime.
Section 7 provides Federal funding for conducting the
referenda and voter education that would be made to the State
Elections Commission of Puerto Rico. Fifty percent of the funds
are earmarked for the cost of the referendum and the other 50
percent are earmarked for voter education expenses.
matters required under the rules of the house
Committee vote
Clause 2(l)(2)(B) of House rule XI requires that the
results of each rollcall vote on an amendment or motion to
report, together with the names of those voting for and
against, be printed in the report. During consideration of H.R.
3024, no rollcall votes were taken.
Committee cost estimate
Clause 2(l)(3)(B) of rule XI requires each committee report
that accompanies a measure providing new budget authority, new
spending authority, or new credit authority or changing
revenues or tax expenditures to contain a cost estimate, as
required by section 308(a)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974, as amended and, when practicable with respect to
estimates of new budget authority, a comparison of the total
estimated funding level for the relevant program (or programs)
to the appropriate levels under current law.
Clause 7(a) of rule XIII requires committees to include
their own cost estimates in certain committee reports, which
include, when practicable, a comparison of the total estimated
funding level for the relevant program (or programs) with the
appropriate levels under current law.
The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared
by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office, pursuant to
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
Congressional Budget Office estimates
Clause 2(l)(3)(C) of rule XI requires each Committee to
include a cost estimate prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office, pursuant to section 403 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, if the cost estimate is
timely submitted. The following is the CBO cost estimate as
required:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, September 18, 1996.
Hon. Gerald B.H. Solomon,
Chairman, Committee on Rules,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
reviewed H.R. 3024, the United States-Puerto Rico Political
Status Act, as ordered reported by the House Committee on Rules
on September 18, 1996. CBO estimates that H.R. 3024 would
result in no significant cost to the federal government.
Enacting H.R. 3024 would not affect direct spending or
receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply.
Bill Purpose.--H.R. 3024 would establish a process for
determining and implementing a permanent political status for
Puerto Rico. The process would include three states:
(1) Puerto Rico would hold a referendum by December 31,
1998, whereby voters would choose between a separate
sovereignty from the United States--resulting in either
independence or free association--and statehood.
(2) Within 180 days after the referendum, the President
would submit legislation to the Congress that provides for a
transition period of at least 10 years. In a second referendum,
voters would then approve or disapprove the enacted transition
plan.
(3) At least two years prior to the end of the transition
period, the President would submit legislation to the Congress
to implement the selected form of self-government. A third
referendum would then be held to approve or disapprove the
enacted plan.
The bill would help fund the referenda by earmarking
existing federal excise taxes on foreign rum. Under current
law, the federal government collects and then transfers these
taxes to the government of Puerto Rico. Under H.R. 3024, the
President could elect to make some or all of the funds
available to the Puerto Rico State Election Commission as
grants for conducting the referenda and voter education.
Federal Budgetary Impact.--We estimate that H.R. 3024 would
result in no significant cost to the federal government. Some
minor costs could be incurred to formulate and approve the
subsequent legislation required by the bill if the voters of
Puerto Rico select self-government. Other than such minor
costs, H.R. 3024 would only reallocate, upon request by the
President, a portion of funds derived from federal excise taxes
already paid to the government of Puerto Rico. The total amount
of those funds would not change.
A change in the political status of Puerto Rico could have
a significant budgetary impact on the federal government. The
potential impact could include changes in spending on federal
assistance programs, such as Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
and Medicaid, plus changes in receipts from federal income
taxes, which residents of Puerto Rico currently do not pay. Any
such changes, however, would be contingent on the outcome of
the referenda and future actions of the Congress and the
President. It is unlikely that any change could occur before
fiscal year 2010. Because the potential budgetary impact of a
change in Puerto Rico's status would depend on future
legislation, enacting H.R. 3024 would have no direct budgetary
impact (other than the minor discretionary costs cited above).
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments.--H.R. 3024
contains intergovernmental mandates as defined in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4), but the direct
cost of these mandates would not exceed the $50 million
threshold established by that act. This bill would require the
Puerto Rican government to hold a referendum no later than
December 31, 1998. This bill would then require a second
referendum in fiscal year 2000 and, possibly, another about 10
years later.
CBO estimates that the government of Puerto Rico would
incur costs of $5 million to $10 million for each referendum
required by H.R. 3024. Given the timetable established by the
bill, we expect that one referendum would be held in fiscal
year 1999 and a second in fiscal year 2000. This estimate is
based on the cost of recent elections in Puerto Rico. It
includes the cost of voter education as well as the cost of
holding elections.
Should the process established by this bill result in a
change in the political status of Puerto Rico, this would have
a significant fiscal impact on the government of that island.
Any such change would be the result of future legislation.
Private-Sector Mandates.--This bill would impose no new
private-sector mandates as defined in Public Law 104-4.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are John R.
Righter (for federal costs) and Majorie Miller (for the state
and local impact).
Sincerely,
James L. Blum
(For June E. O'Neill, Director).
Inflation impact statement
Clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI requires each committee report on
a bill or joint resolution of a public character to include an
analytical statement describing what impact enactment of the
measure would have on prices and costs in the operation of the
national economy. The Committee has determined that H.R. 3024
has no inflationary impact on the nation's economy.
Oversight findings
Clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI requires each committee report
to contain oversight findings and recommendations required
pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X. The Committee has no
oversight findings.
Oversight findings and recommendations of the Committee on Government
Reform and Oversight
Clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI requires each committee report
to contain a summary of the oversight findings and
recommendations made by the Government Reform and Oversight
Committee pursuant to clause 4(c)(2) of rule X, whenever such
findings have been timely submitted. The Committee on Rules has
received no such findings or recommendations from the Committee
on Government Reform and Oversight.
Changes in existing law made by the bill, as reported
Clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires the report of each committee on a bill
or joint resolution to contain a comparative print relating to
that measure showing changes in existing law. This rule does
not apply to H.R. 3024 because the bill, as amended, does not
repeal or amend existing law.
Changes in the Rules of the House of Representatives made by the bill,
as reported
Clause 4(d) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires reports from the Committee on Rules to
contain a comparative print indicating changes in the Rules of
the House of Representatives made by the bill or resolution.
This rule does not apply to H.R. 3024 because the bill does not
directly amend the rules of the House.
Views of committee members
Clause 2(l)(5) of rule XI requires each committee to afford
a three day opportunity for members of the committee to file
additional, minority, or dissenting views and to indicate the
views in its report. Although neither requirement applies to
the Committee, the Committee always makes the maximum effort to
provide its members with such an opportunity. With regard to
H.R. 3024, no views were submitted.