Puerto Rico-Demócrata o Republicano?

Por: Kenneth McClintock, Secretario de Estado de Puerto Rico

La principal razón por la cual la mayoría de los republicanos le da la espalda al proyecto HR2499 es su temor que la eventual admisión de Puerto Rico como el estado 51 es que añadiría 6 votos demócratas en la Cámara, dos demócratas al Senado y ocho votos consistentemente demócratas al Colegio Electoral.Desde los 14 me identifiqué como demócrata moderado (más conservador en política exterior y militar, moderado en lo económico y más liberal en lo social).

Sin embargo, creo que el error más grande que comete todo el mundo es creerse que Puerto Rico sería un estado sólidamente demócrata.Del lado social, los puertorriqueños son mucho más pro-life que el continental promedio. Somos mucho más "church-going". No tan solo tenemos "family values" sólidos, sino que nuestra definición de "familia" es mucho más sólida y amplia que la del continental. En el continente, "familia" queda definida por sangre y matrimonio. Acá es por sangre, matrimonio y bautizo, creándose el concepto del compadrazgo, donde el compadre y la comadre usualmente es tratada como si fueran primos o hasta hermanos.

Del lado económico, tendemos a ser más liberales, favoreciendo los programas de ayuda social propulsados por los demócratas. Sin embargo, si muchos republicanos tuvieran una tercera parte del ingreso per capita nacional, desde esa posición de pobreza relativa ellos serían los primeros defensores de esos programas. En la medida que, con la Estadidad, la economía mejore y la dependencia económica a esos programas bajara, el apoyo a tales programas disminuiría.Del lado de relaciones exteriores y militares, el puertorriqueño tiende a ser muy apegado a lo militar. Nos referimos a nuestras mejores carreteras como "la militar". Participamos ampliamente en la milicia, no tan solo cuando había servicio militar obligatorio, sino como voluntarios, y nos distinguimos en ese servicio. Las continuas expansiones del Cementerio Nacional de Hato Tejas son el mejor y silencioso símbolo de esa aportación y apego.

No sería el primer error que cometerían analistas políticos con el comportamiento electoral de un territorio en vías de convertirse en estado.En el caso de Alaska y Hawaii, dos de las más grandes figuras senatoriales del siglo XX se equivocaron desastrosamente. El Portavoz de la Mayoría Lyndon B. Johnson se oponía a la admisión del territorio republicano de Hawaii, mientras que el Portavoz de la Minoría Republicana Everett Dirksen se oponía a la admisión del territorio demócrata de Alaska.

Después de sus respectivas admisiones, Alaska consistentemente ha votado republicano y Hawaii ha votado consistentemente demócrata!¿Que le hace pensar a McConnell, Boehner y Beck que ellos se la saben mejor que Everett Dirksen, el gigante del republicanismo del siglo XX, quien se equivocó con Alaska y Hawaii? ¿Con que seguridad contradicen a TODOS los presidentes republicanos por los últimos 36 años que, sin excepciones (Ford, Reagan, Bush y Bush), han endosado la admisión de Puerto Rico?

Puerto Rico sería un "swing state" donde los issues y los candidatos serían los determinantes de cómo votarían los boricuas a nivel nacional. No sería un estado de comportamiento electoral predecible que los candidatos de ambos partidos ignorarían , uno porque darían por sentado su apoyo, y el otro por no perder tiempo en una causa perdida.

Prelude to Equality

(Me, behind Congressman Jose Serrano in blue tie)

By: Phillip Arroyo

On Tuesday, April 27th, 2010 I took a 1:54 am flight from San Juan to our nation's capital Washington, DC with the objective of visiting congressional offices to urge members to support H.R. 2499 The Puerto Rico Democracy Act. The bill was scheduled for a vote the next day, but was then pushed to Thursday. The night before, I stayed up reflecting and looking back on the path our deconolization movement had taken until then. I began to think of the fathers of our decolonization movement, Jose Celso Barbosa and Luis A. Ferre and the fight they dedicated their lives to; the fight for equality. I remembered when I moved to Puerto Rico from North Carolina and saw how my father was stripped of his ability to vote for President, despite of serving in our nation's military proudly.

At the age of 16 I also remembered watching on T.V. as HR 856 The Puerto Rico Self Determination Act passed by one vote back in 1998 and how it later died in the Senate thanks to the likes of ultra conservative anti hispanic Republican senators like Trent Lott. And yet, here I was on my way to our nation's capital to join our Governor , our Resident Commisioner and dozens of volunteers to finally help push H.R. 2499's approval and put an end to our island's unfair and undemocratic colonial political status.

I was glad that God had given me the opportunity to travel to Washington, not only to witness history, but to help garner democratic votes as a part of our Resident Commisioner Pedro Pierluisi's Democratic Party lobbying team. I left my wife and daughter behind, yet I knew this journey would be for a noble cause. It would be to assure that my beautiful 1 year old daughter will one day grow up in Puerto Rico enjoying the same rights, resposibilities and priviledges as the rest of our brothers and sisters on the mainland. I owed it not only to her, but to every single child of our great Puerto Rico.

Upon arriving to DC, we began visiting offices right away alongside Francisco Domenech, the Young Democrats of America National Committeeman. As suspected, democratic members of congress were in favor of the bill, and those who were undecided informed us of the member's inclination to support it. Ever once in a while, a staffer would present questions or doubts in regards to the fairness of the voting mechanism offered by the legislation. " Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez has told us that this bill excludes the current political status on the island," expressed one legislative assitant. It was at that moment that I realized what we were up against. We were now facing a discredited campaign of lies whose premier architects were congresswoman Nydia Velazquez and congressman Luis Gutierrez.

I was in awe at how these two hispanic members of congress were actually going against not only the will of the people of Puerto Rico, but against what our beloved Democratic Party stands for! They would argue that H.R. 2499 was a statehood bill geared and designed to create an artifical support for statehood when in reality this bill was a civil rights piece of legislation. Obviously, they were terribly mistaken, and they knew it. It was truly shameful to watch them join forces with some of the most conservative ,radical and anti hispanic republicans in the house against letting the people of Puerto Rico to decide their final political status.

I stood in disgust when I approached a Republican Congressman from Alabama. I spoke to him about the Puerto Rican soldiers who sacrifice their lives for our nation and yet cannot vote for our Commander in Chief. He replied by saying, "Son, your preaching to the Choir. I agree with you." In response I expressed, "Then we can count on your vote, right?" The congressman, a bit befuddled, timidly answered," Now, I didn't say that son. Politics is politics." This answer pretty much sums up what the Republican Party represents, a party of divisive nature, political interests and unwillingness to support the hispanic agenda. It was at that moment that I realized that we would not have a significant amount of support among Republicans, regardless of whether or not our Governor was Republican. It seemed the race barrier was very much still alive within the GOP.

Returning to the topic of the Puerto Rican members in Congress, we all know in Puerto Rico, that Velazquez and Gutierrez have been allies of the local colonialist party in Puerto Rico headed by Hector Ferrer. Everyone knows that Congresswoman Velazquez owes her congressional seat to the colonialist party in Puerto Rico. She was director of the Puerto Rico federal affairs office during the term of Governor Rafael Hernandez Colon of the colonialist party in the 1980's. This move was cleverly planned to insert a Puerto Rican "colonialist" that would later respond to that party's ideological interest in Congress.

So it should be no surprise to anyone that Velazquez betrayed our democratic party's principles by opposing H.R. 2499, because she was never a democrat! She was and still is a "Popular" or "Populete", a term used to describe members of the local colonialist party on the island.

Finally, as the day dwindled and our visits were done, all that was left was expectation and hope. H.R. 2499 would finally be brought to the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives the very next day. Years of advocacy and efforts were now behind us and all of Puerto Rico awaited the outcome. That night, I remember being exhausted and yet I could not sleep; I kept staring at the ceiling, obviously due to the expectation, but also anxious, and hoping that the will of the Puerto Rican people be respected. The Puerto Rican people had waited too long for the opportunity to put an end to almost 112 years of colonialism and it would be a disgrace if due to political maneauvering and trickery by the opposition, their voices be silenced.

The next day, I remember waking up to a beautiful sunny morning in DC. I took a cab to the capitol and during the ride I remember being quite nervous. The driver asked me where I was from and after I answered, he indicated his awareness on the Puerto Rico Political Status issue. I told him there was a Bill to be voted on that very same day to possibly begin a process to end colonialism on the island. As I paid the fare, the driver bid me farewell and wished me goodluck, not before expressing enthusiastically, "Equality for Puerto Rico!" I winked at him and said, "You're damn right!"

After an intense and fiery debate on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives between supporters and opposers of the Puerto Rico Democracy Act, the final passage vote was announced. Members of Congress would have 15 minutes to cast their vote while the eyes of our nation observed via C-SPAN. We would need to reach the 216 vote threshhold for final passage. One by one, the votes started to come in and were displayed in the House Gallery. With each vote in favor, a feeling of proudness overcame me. I was proud of the members of congress who decided to do the right thing and vote in favor of our cause.

On thursday, April 29th, 2010 at around 6:35pm, The Puerto Rico Democracy Act received vote number 216......... H.R. 2499 was finally approved on a final 223 to 169 vote..... I remember sitting in amazement as my eyes began to water. We did it..............

Only one amendment was approved, inserting the current political status of Puerto Rico in the second process alongside the other options: statehood, independence, and free association. Among all members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus presided by Nydia Velazquez, 22 voted in favor and only 2 opposed the bill.

Care to guess which two voted nay? That's right, Nydia Velazquez and Luis Gutierrez. As a matter of fact the only 2 hispanic names on the Nays list were them! It's a shame these 2 members of Congress joined forces with the conservate right in an attempt to derail self determination for the 4 million American citizens of Puerto Rico. But our voices and efforts prevailed and the U.S. House of Representatives sent a clear message to the U.S. Senate stating the importance of permitting the people of Puerto Rico to finally decide.

In past days, the Senate Committee on Natural Resources has announced a public hearing to be held next May 18th, 2010 to immediately attend H.R. 2499. It is now the duty of all democrats in Puerto Rico and the mainland to continue to advocate and promote the passage of this bill in the Senate. Our moment of destiny is now. Years from now, we will be able to say to our children, that at this very moment, at this time in our history, a group of young men and women of our generation assumed their historical responsibility to put an end to colonialism in Puerto Rico and achieve full equality for all Puerto Rican Americans.

We stand before the beginning of the end of our journey. A journey paved away by the fathers of our movement for equal rights in Puerto Rico. The approval of H.R. 2499 is our "Prelude to Equality". The time has come......

Puerto Rico Young Democrats censure letter sent to Cornell by PDP Youth

by Xavira Neggers Crescioni
xneggers@prdailysun.net

PR Daily Sun

A former president of Cornell University’s Puerto Rican Student Association, Manuel Natal Albelo, denounced Gov. Fortuño’s slated speech on Puerto Rico Monday evening at Cornell University, saying Fortuño is not an appropriate envoy to discuss this since his statehood stance is not representative of all Puerto Ricans and his administration’s policies have caused many problems on the island.

Fortuño was scheduled to speak before Cornell students at the invitation of Cornell College Republicans.

“I have spoken personally with the current PRSA leaders as well as other Latino organizations and I have asked for them to be the spokespeople for Puerto Ricans. In the past few weeks I have sent them different news articles about the firings of thousands of public workers, rising crime, and decisions by the Supreme Court — in sum, the call of a people,” said Natal, who is studying law at the University of Puerto Rico.

Natal said his aim was not to sabotage the activity, but to create consciousness within Cornell, where there is a diversity of opinion on Puerto Rico, adding that Fortuño would be asked hard questions that he has avoided by failing to attend similar activities at the UPR.
“While I was PRSA president we organized countless activities to educate people about Puerto Rico’s situation. The activities and forums were impartial and featured a diversity of opinion, including representatives from the different political ideologies. This activity is aimed at promoting statehood and not the cause of the Puerto Rican people and for me that is unacceptable,” Natal said.

After news of Natal’s comments came to light, the Popular Democratic Youth jumped on the bandwagon, sending two letters to the Cornell Daily Sun and Cornell College Democrats denouncing the governor’s visit and Pedro Pierluisi’s federal status bill for a congressionally binding plebiscite in Puerto Rico as undemocratic.

“[Fortuño is attending with the aim] of creating the impression our people overwhelmingly support statehood by speaking to the students as a representative of all Puerto Ricans, hiding the historic opposition of the country to his ideal,” Popular Democratic Youth said in a press release.

This in turn prompted the Democratic Youth of Puerto Rico and National Committeeman Phillip Arroyo to send a counter letter saying the vast majority of young Democrats in Puerto Rico favor Resident Commissioner Pedro Pierluisi’s status bill.

Arroyo called Popular Youth “hypocrites” for identifying themselves as Democrats when they are members of a party that supposedly opposes the presidential vote for Puerto Rico.

La Fortaleza declined to enter the fray, declining to comment on the controversy stirred up by the governor’s visit to Cornell, while issuing a written statement on his visit with snippets from his speech. The speech includes “an outline of the fiscal and economic challenges he found upon assuming his post last year, and initiatives he is taking to put Puerto Rico once again on the route to economic growth and progress,” La Fortaleza said.
In his speech, Fortuño was to say that island’s current status creates inequality for those who live in Puerto Rico, adding the best way to resolve this matter is through Pierluisi’s status bill.

“The matter of what place Puerto Rico has at the family table of what we call America … is the great unfinished task of American democracy,” Fortuño said, according to prepared remarks.

“My own preference for the best and most apt final status for Puerto Rico is well known. I believes in equality. Our people are ready, ready and waiting, to assume full rights and full responsibilities of the citizenship that we share. As I see it, looking for other solutions or doing away with inequality is to do away with the natural destiny that guides us to U.S. citizenship.”
“I see a Puerto Rico that achieves its potential for economic, social and political development and by doing this contributes to enriching the entire nation. That is my vision of Puerto Rico and America, and a more perfect union. I hope you share it. I hope you accompany me in the fight for it,” according to Fortuño's statement.

In the morning, Fortuño met with Cornell President David Korton and professors from the National Astronomy Center that operates the Arecibo radio telescope and is headquartered at the university to discuss future funding for the local observatory, La Fortaleza said.

PR Federal District Judge Gustavo Gelpi Speech at Presidential Statues Inauguration

MENSAJE DEL ORADOR INVITADOJUEZ FEDERAL GUSTAVO A. GELPÍ EN LA CEREMONIA OFICIAL DEL SENADO DE PUERTO RICOEN OCASIÓN DEL DIA DE LOS PRESIDENTESFEBRERO 15, 2010

Muy buenos días a todos. Para mí es un placer comparecer en estaactividad del Senado en ocasión del Día de los Presidentes. Hoy, el tercerlunes del mes de febrero, tanto el gobierno federal como el de Puerto Ricoconmemoran el natalicio de Jorge Washington, el primer Presidente de losEstados Unidos. Originalmente este día se conocía como el día de JorgeWashington, pero en los 1980s se le comenzó a denominar Día de losPresidentes para así también conmemorar el natalicio de Abraham Lincolnque cae en febrero 12.En el estado de Massachusetts históricamente el gobernador en el díade hoy emite una proclama en honor a los cuatro Presidentes queprovinieron de dicho estado (John Adams, John Quincy Adams, CalvinCoolidge y John F. Kennedy). Es apropiado que hoy aquí se lleve a caboalgo similar, y a su vez original, que es el develar en este histórico Capitoliobustos de los siete Presidentes incumbentes quienes visitaron nuestra isla:Theodore Roosevelt, Herbert Hoover, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman,Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy y Gerald Ford.

El Presidente Theodore Roosevelt visitó nuestra isla el 11 dediciembre de 1906, con el propósito de conocer a los puertorriqueños, suscondiciones sociales y económicas, y su flora y fauna. Este compareció a una sesión especial ante nuestra Asamblea Legislativa, donde abogó por la ciudadanía Americana para los puertorriqueños, la cual nos llegaría once años más tarde. Además, este presidente declaró al Yunque como “La Reserva Forestal de Luquillo”.

El Presidente Hoover visitó la isla el 24 de marzo de 1931 y tambiéncompareció ante una sesión especial de la Legislatura. Allí elogió el gransentido de colaboración entre la isla y los Estados Unidos durante la PrimeraGuerra Mundial, en la cual sobre 18,000 soldados puertorriqueñosparticiparon. Señaló además que:

Nuestra Nación se enorgullece del progreso llevadoa cabo por el pueblo de Puerto Rico. Investida conlibertad, gobierno propio y oportunidad individual através de los esfuerzos de sus ciudadanos y lacooperación de los Estados Unidos ha en una solageneración emergido del estancamiento a un altolugar en la marcha del progreso.El Presidente Franklin Roosevelt visitó la isla entre julio 6 y 7 de1934. Llegó en barco a Mayagüez, y luego viajó en automóvil a San Juan,parando en Ponce y en los Baños de Coamo. Desde Fortaleza se comunicócon los puertorriqueños a través de un mensaje radial. Un año más tardecreó la Administración para la Reconstrucción de Puerto Rico con el fin deestimular el sector agrícola, generar obras de infraestructura pública ypropiciar la electrificación de la isla. Años más tarde, el 9 de marzo de1943, Roosevelt recomendó al Congreso enmendar la Ley Orgánica dePuerto Rico para que el Pueblo de Puerto Rico pudiese elegir su propiogobernador—algo que se hizo realidad en 1948, cuando el pueblo eligió aDon Luis Muñoz Marín.El Presidente Truman visitó la isla el 21 de febrero de 1948. Fue elprimer Presidente en llegar en avión, el cual aterrizó en el aeropuerto de IslaGrande. Al desabordar dirigió un mensaje a unas 4,000 personas que lofueron a recibir. Lo acompañó el Gobernador Jesús T. Piñero, a quien elPresidente había nombrado en 1946, éste siendo el primer Gobernadorpuertorriqueño (aunque no electo). En su discurso, el Presidente Trumancomentó que:

Lenguajes diferentes y trasfondos culturales distintosno son un obstáculo para la unidad democrática.Tales diferencias pueden proveer la base para unamás rica y fuerte democracia. . . Tanto en PuertoRico y en el continente, nosotros los Americanosestamos buscando y encontrando la solución a[nuestros] problemas en la manera democráticaAmericana—mediante valor, imaginación ycooperación.

Durante su visita, el Presidente Truman visitó el Fanguito y luego tomó laCarretera Número Dos hacia Bayamón, donde visitó el Hospital de Distrito.Luego fue al Hotel Jagüeyes en Aguas Buenas en donde almorzó antes deregresar a San Juan. Cabe señalar que unos años después de su visita, enenero 28 de 1952, el Presidente Truman nombró al abogado puertorriqueño,Clemente Ruiz Nazario, como el primer juez puertorriqueño para el TribunalFederal en Puerto Rico.

El Presidente Eisenhower visitó la isla el 4 de marzo de 1960. Viajóa Dorado a dirigirse en una reunión de la Asamblea Americana dondecompartió con el Gobernador Muñoz Marín. Bajo este Presidente seconvirtió en ley el Federal-Aid Highway Act de 1956, bajo el cual todos los Estados y territorios recibieron fondos federales para mejorar las vías detránsito y así hacer la transportación de personas y carga más veloz yeficiente.

El Presidente Kennedy visitó a Puerto Rico el 15 de noviembre de1961. Este campeón de los derechos civiles trabajó junto al GobernadorMuñoz Marín en el desarrollo del Estado Libre Asociado. También contócon el apoyo de Muñoz Marín en su Alianza de Progreso para Sur América,bajo la cual se envió ayuda económica a varios países en la región y seabogó por los derechos humanos de sus ciudadanos.

Finalmente, el Presidente Ford visitó la isla el 26 de junio de 1976,donde participó en la Conferencia de la Cima Internacional. Allí comentó:Señor Gobernador, esta es mi primera visita comoPresidente a Puerto Rico. Es un momento adecuadopara reflexionar sobre la rica y larga historia decooperación y participación que esta isla y su gentecomparten con los Estados Unidos . . .

Existen algunos, sin embargo, quienes buscandistorsionar los hechos, y confundir a otros sobrenuestra relación con Puerto Rico. El récord es claro;el récord está abierto. Estamos orgullosos de larelación que hemos desarrollado juntos, e invitamosal mundo a examinarlo . . .

Aquellos quienes pueden inclinarse a interferir ennuestras libremente determinadas relaciones, debensaber que tal acto será considerado una intervenciónen los asuntos domésticos de Puerto Rico y EstadosUnidos. Será un acto no amigable el cual se resistirápor las vías necesarias.El Artículo II de la Constitución de los Estados Unidos crea el cargode Presidente. El Presidente, también conocido como el “PrimerMandatario” es la cara de la nación. Es quien pone en vigor la políticapública nacional, o sea, ejecuta las leyes de los Estados Unidos. Porejemplo, las iniciativas nacionales sobre combatir el crimen, la inmigración,el medio ambiente, y el exterior, entre otras, las inicia y lleva a cabo elPresidente.

Bajo sus poderes constitucionales, el Presidente es quien nombra, conel consentimiento del Senado, a todos los jefes de agencia que lo asisten enejecutar su política pública, al igual que a los embajadores y juecesfederales. Además, es quien firma tratados internacionales, para luego serratificados por el Senado. Finalmente, el Presidente es el comandante y jefede todas las Fuerzas Armadas de la Nación.Nuestro diario vivir es impactado por numerosas e importantísimasdecisiones que toma el Presidente de los Estados Unidos.


Sin embargo,históricamente los puertorriqueños nunca hemos gozado del votopresidencial mientras residamos en la isla.

Los puertorriqueños sí participamos desde 1980 en el importantísimoproceso de primarias presidenciales, para el cual la designación y uso defondos públicos ha sido avalado por el Tribunal Supremo de Puerto Rico.En el 2008 la isla vivió un momento histórico cuando los Senadores HillaryClinton y Barrack Obama se enfrentaron en primaria para la candidatura ala presidencia del Partido Demócrata. Ambos vinieron a la isla para hacercampaña, la cual fue cubierta por los medios noticiosos a través de losEstados Unidos. El voto de los puertorriqueños quienes participaron endicha primaria ciertamente tuvo impacto nacional.

Retomando el tema del voto presidencial en Puerto Rico, el mismo hasido objeto de discusión y debate en múltiples foros gubernamentales, tantoa nivel federal como local. El 6 de abril de 1960 el Gobernador Luis MuñozMarín, en una comparecencia ante el Congreso federal favoreció se leextendiese el voto presidencial a los puertorriqueños, ya que en esemomento se contemplaba extenderlo a los residentes del Distrito deColumbia. En aquel entonces, señaló Muñoz que: “esto resolvería uno delos problemas sin resolver en los Estados Unidos y es el problema de notener ciudadanos americanos en ninguna parte bajo la bandera Americanaexcluidos de votar para Presidente de los Estados Unidos”.Una década más tarde el Comité Ad Hoc, nombrado por el PresidenteRichard Nixon y el Gobernador Luis A. Ferré para estudiar la concesión delvoto presidencial a los residentes de la isla, recomendó en su informe de 18de agosto de 1971 el extender dicho derecho.

En el 1974, durante los 1990s y en el 2004, se llevaron ante variostribunales federales, como cuestión de derechos civiles y constitucionales,casos en los cuales se buscaba por vía judicial el voto presidencial para lospuertorriqueños en la isla. Los casos fueron presentados dada la inacción delCongreso Federal a resolver este asunto. En dichos litigios, aunque concierta renuencia por parte de algunos jueces, consistentemente se determinóque el voto presidencial no es posible salvo enmienda constitucional o quePuerto Rico se convirtiese en estado de la Unión.


Un número significante de estos juristas en sus dictámenes, no obstante, comentaronenergéticamente sobre dicho paradigma. Por ejemplo, en 1974 el Juez deDistrito Federal visitante, Luther W. Youndahl, señaló: “Este Tribunalprofundamente comparte las expresiones [del Comité Ad Hoc de 1970 -1971] y opina que es inexcusable que todavía existe un número sustancialde ciudadanos de Estados Unidos que no pueden legalmente votar por elPresidente [ ] de Estados Unidos.” La Juez del Distrito Sur de Nueva York,Shira Sheindlin en el 2000 comentó:

Igual que aquellos ciudadanos de Estados Unidosresidiendo en el Distrito de Columbia y en loscincuenta estados, aquellos quienes residen enPuerto Rico han llevado a cabo el llamado más altode su ciudadanía, luchando y muriendo en loscampos de batalla en dos guerras mundiales, y lasguerras de Korea, Vietnam y el Golfo. Aún así, apesar de pagar por su ciudadanía con sangre, losciudadanos americanos en Puerto Rico no hanentrado a la caja de votos presidencial. Esinconcebible a nuestro orden constitucionalpretender que el gobierno ponga a nuestros hijos ehijas en la línea de peligro y no reconocer el poderde estos individuos a tener voz en elegir quien tomaesa decisión.El Juez Presidente del Tribunal de Apelaciones para el SegundoCircuito, John Walker, igualmente expresó en el 2001: “Comparto con micolega la preocupación que a ciudadanos de Estados Unidos residiendo enlos territorios no se les da una voz con significado [en elegir a supresidente].” A su vez, otro Juez del Segundo Circuito, Pierre Leval,observó que la exclusión de los puertorriqueños en la elección delPresidente crea serios “problemas de justicia, resentimiento y reputaciónmenoscabada ante la comunidad de naciones”. Este Juez fue más allá alsugerir que el Congreso de los Estados Unidos, para solucionar estainequidad, podría requerir a los Estados a que porcentualmente aceptencomo suyos votos presidenciales emitidos por los residentes de Puerto Rico.El Juez Howard del Primer Circuito señaló en 2005 que “dichainhabilidad [de votar por el presidente] es antiética a nuestra fundación devalores democráticos”. Y su colega, el Juez Torruella, quien ha llegado aopinar que los puertorriqueños sí tienen el derecho al voto presidencial,señaló:

Es particularmente repugnante en este momento ennuestra historia, cuando tratamos de convencer a loshabitantes de lugares lejanos del mundo del procesodemocrático y la validez de su expresión mediante elvoto. Es sumamente irónico que cerca de 3,500ciudadanos Americanos de Puerto Rico apoyandichas metas mediante su presencia en Iraq yAfghanistan como miembros de nuestras FuerzasArmadas, a la vez que a ellos mismos se les deniegaestos derechos, en particular el elegir a suComandante en Jefe.

. . . Y lejos de ser un asunto de interés local para losciudadanos americanos en Puerto Rico solamente, lainequidad a la que se somete a estos ciudadanos esuna lesión para todo americano, porque tanseguramente como la situación actual causa dañoirreparable a los ciudadanos americanos que residenen Puerto Rico, denigra igual de profundamente a laNación completa y a la Constitución.

Aunque en Puerto Rico, al día de hoy, existen y se respetan diversasideologías políticas y opiniones sobre el voto presidencial, lo que acabo deresaltar evidencia, sin duda, la importancia que ha cobrado en el sistemafederal de gobierno la figura del Presidente, en particular desde laperspectiva de los derechos civiles de todos los ciudadanos americanos.Como estamos aquí para celebrar los cumpleaños de Washington yLincoln, entiendo apropiado acabar este mensaje con unas anécdotas deambos Presidentes, las cuales nos muestran su enorme impacto en la vida detodos los ciudadanos americanos, aún más de doscientos y ciento cincuentaaños de sus respectivas muertes.En su discurso inaugural el 30 de abril de 1789, el PresidenteWashington declaró:

Ningún pueblo puede estar más atado a reconocer laMano Invisible que el pueblo de los Estados Unidos.Cada paso mediante el cual el Pueblo ha avanzadohacia el carácter de una nación independiente, parecehaber sido distinguido por un regalo de la divinaprovidencia.

En el caso de Washington mismo, la intervención divina no puede habersido más cierta. A sus 19 años, durante su único viaje fuera del continenteamericano, contrajo viruela en Barbados en el año 1751. A pesar de sugravedad, que duró un mes, su recuperación lo inmunizó contra esta seriaenfermedad, lo cual lo beneficiaría en el futuro. Durante la Guerra de laIndependencia, la viruela tomó la vida de miles de soldados americanos.Washington, quien era el General de las tropas Americanas, sin embargo, nose vio afectado. Así pudo estar al mando en todo momento, y más aún,constantemente visitar a sus tropas con frecuencia para motivar a lossoldados.Como capitán en el ejército inglés durante la Guerra entre Inglaterray Francia, durante una batalla en Pittsburgh en el año 1754, murieron todoslos soldados ingleses y americanos, salvo Washington, quien entonces eraun joven de 23 años.

Durante la Guerra de la Independencia, la noche del 25 de diciembrede 1776, se congeló el Río Delaware como consecuencia de senda tormenta.Esto llevó a las tropas enemigas a bajar su guardia, lo cual Washingtonaprovechó. Llevó a cabo su famoso cruce del Río Delaware junto a sustropas, para luego ganar la batalla de Trenton, que marcó el momentodecisivo en la Guerra para los Americanos.Una vez acabó la guerra, Washington entregó su comisión militar y asíse retiró. No obstante, el pueblo Americano en señal de aprecio, quería queWashington se convirtiese en el Rey de la nueva nación. Este, tajantementey con humildad, rechazó tal idea, pues entendía que la Nación Americanaera producto de la desconfianza del Pueblo Americano hacia los gobiernosmonárquicos. Sin embargo, una vez los Estados ratificaron la Constituciónde los Estados Unidos, Washington fue llamado a ser el Primer Presidentede la Nación. Este humildemente acordó salir del retiro y fue nominado ala presidencia sin oposición alguna.

En 1796, cuando finalmente decidió que no aspiraría a un tercertérmino en la Presidencia, Washington compartió las siguientes palabras,tomadas de su mensaje de despedida que circuló en periódicos a través delos Estados Unidos y que reflejan sus valores federalistas:Es importante . . . que el hábito del pensamiento enun país libre inspire precaución en aquellosencomendados con su administración para que selimiten dentro de sus respectivas esferasconstitucionales, evitando en el ejercicio de lospoderes de un departamento [del gobierno] que seextralimite en [los poderes] de otro. El espíritu de laextralimitación tiende a consolidar los poderes detodos los departamentos [del gobierno] en uno [solo]y de esta forma crear, cualquiera que sea la forma delgobierno, un verdadero despotismo. Una estimaciónjusta de ese amor por el poder y tendencia a abusarloque predomina en el corazón humano es suficientepara satisfacernos de la verdad de esta posición.Abraham Lincoln, quien nunca conoció a Washington, nació en sumapobreza. Su intelecto y perseverancia, sin embargo, lo llevaron aconvertirse en excelente abogado y un gran orador. Durante la convenciónRepublicana de 1858 dijo su famosa frase “Una casa dividida contra símisma no se puede sostener”, refiriéndose a que el Gobierno de los EstadosUnidos no podría continuar unísono mientras los estados sureñospromoviesen la esclavitud y los del norte no. Luego, durante suincumbencia como Presidente durante la Guerra Civil, Lincoln aseguró lapermanencia de la Unión Americana y acabó con el mal de la esclavitud.

El 19 de noviembre de 1863, durante plena Guerra Civil, en elcementerio de Gettysburg, Lincoln dio su más famoso discurso — ElGettysburg Address — el cual duró sólo dos minutos y medio. Entiendoapropiado en esta ocasión leérselo a ustedes:Ochenta y siete años ha, nuestros padres crearon eneste continente una nueva nación, concebida bajo elsigno de la libertad y consagrada al principio de quetodos los hombres nacen iguales.

Estamos ahora envueltos en una vasta guerra civilque pone a prueba la idea de que esa nación, ocualquier otra así concebida y consagrada, pueda porlargo tiempo subsistir. Nos hemos reunido en laescena de una de las grandes batallas de esa guerra.Hemos acudido para dedicar parte del campo debatalla a que sirva de última morada de quienesdieron sus vidas para que la nación viviese. Esenteramente justo y propio que obremos de estemodo.

Con todo, a decir verdad, mal podríamos dedicar, niconsagrar, ni glorificar este campo. Los valientes,vivos aún o muertos ya, que aquí combatieron, lohan consagrado muy por encima de nuestros escasospoderes. El mundo apenas si advertirá o recordará loque aquí se diga, mas no podrá olvidar jamás lo queaquí hicieron aquellos. A los vivos nos corresponde,ante todo, dedicarnos a completar la obra que tannoblemente adelantaron los que aquí combatieron.Más bien, nos corresponde a nosotros dedicarnos ala ingente tarea que nos aguarda: que esos muertosvenerados inspiren en nosotros una mayor devocióna la causa por la cual dieron ellos la postrera suma desu fe; que aquí solemnemente proclamemos queestos muertos no habrán muerto en vano; que estanación, bajo la guía de Dios, vea renacer la libertad,y que el gobierno del pueblo, por el pueblo y para elpueblo no desaparezca de la faz de la tierra.La humildad y fe en lo divino del Presidente Washington, al igual quela firmeza del presidente Lincoln en preservar la unión Nacional bajo unaforma de gobierno democrática, son valores que todo Presidente de laNación debe tener. Más aún, son cualidades que cada uno de nosotros ennuestras propias vidas debemos emular.

Pongámonos ahora todos de pié en señal de respeto y admiración aestos dos grandes presidentes, Washington y Lincoln, al igual que a todosaquellos otros que hasta el día de hoy han seguido sus pasos.

¡Que Dios bendiga al Pueblo de Puerto Rico y la Nación Americana!Gracias.

Doing Nothing is Not an Option

Washington (CNN) -- Michelle Obama expressed confidence Tuesday that Congress will enact some sort of change to improve the nation's health care system.

"We don't have a choice," the first lady told CNN's Larry King in an interview that aired Tuesday night. "When we look at these statistics, we're spending billions of dollars on preventable diseases, and new health care legislation could go a long way to improving prevention, first and foremost."

She addressed the need for people to have access to specialists such as pediatricians who can gather critical information and track it.

"So we have to get this done and I'm hopeful that Congress will come together, that the American people will recognize that doing nothing is absolutely not an option."

Obama's appearance coincided with the launch of her initiative to improve the fitness of young people, starting with her own two grade-school children. Obama said her daughters, Sasha and Malia, were not eating right and not exercising enough before her husband won the White House, and it showed in their body-mass index.

"I was fortunate enough to have a pediatrician who worked in an urban environment in the African-American community," she said. And he was tracking BMI. And he saw little uptick in the kids' BMI, and he kind of pulled me aside."

Obama said she was initially shocked.
"I thought I was doing what I was supposed to do, and I hadn't noticed any changes in my kids," she said. But she accepted the doctor's admonition as a "wake-up call" and began to make changes.

"It was portion sizes; it was a few more cooked meals," she said. "We had no absolutes except no desserts during the week. Took sugary drinks out of the lunch boxes and put in water and had more milk, had more fresh-squeezed juices, things like that."
The point is that small changes made a difference.

The 44-year-old Chicagoan said she felt it was important to share her family's success with other Americans and to point out that the changes they made were manageable ones.
"The point is that small changes made a difference," she said. "It wasn't a whole-scale upheaval of our lives to see the outcomes."

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 12.4 percent of children ages 2 to 5 are obese; 17 percent of those 6 to 11 are obese; and 17.6 percent of those 12 to 19 are obese.
Obesity is linked to risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease, such as high blood pressure, high cholesterol and Type 2 diabetes.

"This isn't about weight, and it's not about looks," Obama said. "It's not a physical issue. It's really about the quality of life of our kids."

Though members of the first family eat less fast food than they once did, they have not eliminated it from their diets, the first lady said.

"What I tell my kids is if they're eating right, you know, 70 percent of the time, then when they go to a birthday party or it's a Saturday and they're out and they can stop for ice cream and somebody wants to grab pizza, or they have pancakes with chocolate chips in it, it's not a big deal."

The graduate of Princeton University and Harvard Law School said she works to keep the White House "sort of a stress-free, work-free zone" for her husband.
In some ways, the family's life is like many others', she said. Her husband reads to the children at night and tucks them into bed.

"He still goes to the parent-teacher conferences. ... He goes to basketball games and soccer games. He can't go to every single one of them because some -- on Saturdays, oftentimes, he's working."

Still, the trappings of power can be limiting. He does not drop his children off at the nearby Sidwell Friends School.

"Quite frankly, they don't want him to," she said. "They think his motorcade is a complete embarrassment."

The first lady described life in the White House as "like living in a big hotel with a whole bunch of fun people that you can work with. But then when -- when the doors close, it's -- it's like home."
She acknowledged, in response to a question, that sometimes her husband gets mad.
"Oh, yes. Yes, he's human. You know, if you prick him, he'll bleed."

But the president tries to maintain a constructive approach, she said. "He's always about finding the solution. And he knows if you go too far emotionally, if you get too angry or you -- if you become too complacent, sometimes you miss the answer in between. And that's, I think, one of the strengths of him as a leader."

Asked for her read on Sarah Palin, the former governor of Alaska who ran on the GOP ticket for vice president, Obama would not bite.

"I don't have a read," she said. "I mean, I try not to make or set opinions about people that I haven't had any, you know, substantive interaction with. I mean, I know what you see on TV."
She added, "I think it's wonderful to have strong female voices out there, but I don't know her."
The first lady was effusive about her husband's former rival for the top spot on the Democratic ticket, Hillary Clinton.

"She would have been an amazing president. She was an amazing attorney. She's a phenomenal professional. And she's proven to be a tremendous asset in -- in so many ways," she said.
Asked what she expects on Valentine's Day, Obama told King, "Oh, I expect the moon, the stars and the sun, honey."

Asked what she usually gets, she said, "I usually get dinner, and a gift of some sort."
And what does her husband get?
"A nice card."

Puerto Rico May Face Statehood Choice

Puerto Rico May Face Statehood Choice
January 29, 2010
National Journal
Puerto Rico May Face Statehood Choice
Even some insiders are surprised to hear that Congress is about to take up the issue of Puerto Rico’s political status

By Erin McPike

The issue of Puerto Rico’s political status has been simmering for nearly 50 years. Now, at a time when Congress has plenty of other pressing items on its agenda, lawmakers may soon be voting on a measure to allow the residents of the largest U.S. territory to determine their own fate.

Last July, the House Natural Resources Committee approved the Puerto Rico Democracy Act, which would establish at least one plebiscite in the Caribbean territory to survey the populace about what status they want for their island. According to the office of House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., the bill will come up for a floor vote this year. “It remains a priority,” spokeswoman Katie Grant said.

Resident Commissioner Pedro Pierluisi, a Democrat who represents Puerto Rico in Congress, together with Gov. Luis Fortuno, an energetic and rising Republican star, have marshaled 182 House co-sponsors for the legislation, including 58 Republicans. The two say they have commitments from more than 264 House members — 180 Democrats and 84 Republicans — to vote for the bill.

Puerto Rico’s quest for self-determination has, in fact, long had supporters on both sides of the political aisle, and in an election year, both parties are interested in courting Hispanics. “Every Republican president in the last 50 years has supported this process,” Fortuno said in an interview. “President Reagan was a strong supporter of this process, and actually of statehood as well.”

President Obama has also signaled support. “We… pledged during my campaign to work with Congress and all groups in Puerto Rico to enable the question of Puerto Rico’s status to be resolved during the next four years,” Obama wrote in a letter to Fortuno last January, shortly before his inauguration. “I am fully aware of the difficulties that Puerto Rico has faced in the past when dealing with this issue, but self-determination is a basic right to be addressed no matter how difficult.”

Although the House approved a Puerto Rico self-determination bill by a single vote in 1998, the Senate never took up the matter. Back then, it was a pet project for House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., who hoped to attract Hispanic votes, and Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, who saw echoes of his home state’s long fight for statehood.

In a recent interview, another Alaska Republican, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, said she also is sympathetic. Murkowski is vice chairwoman of the Senate Republican Conference and has taken the lead in reaching out to Hispanics and women. She noted that she has met with Puerto Ricans in Washington and has visited the island to discuss the statehood issue.

“It needs to be that decision of the people,” Murkowski said. “I know that it has been an issue that has provoked a great deal of stress on both sides, but I think if the people of Puerto Rico believe strongly that they need to become a state, we need to respect that.”

Puerto Rico’s commonwealth form of government — in Spanish, Estado Libre Asociado (ELA), or Free Associated State — was approved in a public referendum in 1952 under the leadership of then-Gov. Luis Munoz Marin, according to The Almanac of American Politics. Under ELA, Puerto Rico is part of the United States for purposes of international trade, foreign policy, and war, but has its own laws, taxes, and representative government. Ever since Munoz retired in 1964, the central issue in Puerto Rico’s politics has been status: Should the island continue or modify ELA, should it seek statehood, or should it seek independence?

For many years, public sentiment moved gradually toward statehood. In a 1967 referendum, Puerto Ricans voted for ELA over statehood 60 percent to 39 percent. But in a 1993 referendum, the vote was 48 percent for ELA and 46 percent for statehood, according to The Almanac. In a November survey of 787 Puerto Rican voters, pollster Pablo Ramos found that 58 percent favored statehood, results almost identical to a 2008 survey.

The pending legislation is not self-executing: It simply provides for Congress to authorize an official survey in Puerto Rico that would inform the U.S. government about what the territory’s citizens want. Congress could then move forward as it sees fit. If a majority of Puerto Ricans voted to change the territory’s status, a second plebiscite would take place three to six months later that would ask residents whether they would like to become a state, gain independence, or become a sovereign nation with U.S. ties. If a majority voted for the status quo in the first plebiscite, the proposal allows for another plebiscite eight years later.

Fortuno, a telegenic 49-year-old who has begun turning heads in national political circles, served as resident commissioner in Congress for the four years preceding Pierluisi. The two are close friends who grew up together and share support for statehood. But they emphasize that the legislation they are pushing merely calls for self-determination, not statehood.

“The Founding Fathers never intended for 4 million American citizens to be left in any territory forever,” Fortuno contended. Pierluisi put it this way: “Until and unless you settle this issue, you have to continuously deal with it, because you need to make sure that the people consent to this, because it is clearly not a permanent-type arrangement; it cannot be. You have to check on the people.”

Pierluisi noted that Puerto Rico is not treated like a state under federal health care or housing programs, for instance, and he says that the duo’s goal is “parity.” Hospitals in the territory receive lower Medicare reimbursements than all other U.S. hospitals.

Opponents contend, however, that the legislation is a statehood bill. Rep. Nydia Velazquez, D-N.Y., a native Puerto Rican who is close to the territory’s Commonwealth Party that supports the status quo, is among the naysayers. She has said she does not support the bill because it would not allow the people of Puerto Rico to establish the process by which the island’s status would be determined. Velazquez introduced legislation in the previous Congress authorizing a constitutional convention, whose proposal would be ratified through a referendum and then submitted to Congress.

Other opponents include Republicans who believe that Puerto Rican statehood would be a boon to Democrats in electoral politics — even though House Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence of Indiana is a co-sponsor of the bill.

Should Puerto Rico become a state, its four million residents would likely equate to six congressional districts and eight electoral votes. But for Republicans worried about the boon for Democrats, Pierluisi has this message: “The last two territories that became states were Alaska and Hawaii. And the members of Congress thought… that Alaska would be Democrat and Hawaii would be Republican, and they read it all wrong.”

Puerto Rico’s population is heavily Catholic and socially conservative, he pointed out. Members of Congress “shouldn’t be trying to predict where Puerto Rico would go,” Pierluisi said. “We have a Republican governor and a Democrat resident commissioner. We have a majority of Republican mayors and members of the Legislature right now.”

Back home, Fortuno has to make massive cuts in the bureaucracy and budget because of the recession. Phil Musser, a GOP strategist and former executive director of the Republican Governors Association, noted that passage of the pending legislation “would just be the feather in his cap.”

“Fortuno is one of the unnoticed assets of the Republican Party,” Musser said, adding that the governor “is making big, tough choices in his first year in office and has the ability to become a larger and more important voice in the Republican Party nationally because he’s a good communicator, well liked by his peers, and is a leading Hispanic in a party that’s bereft of Hispanic voices.”

Even though the House is expected to pass the legislation easily, most leadership aides questioned about it were unaware of the bill’s status and contents. Some called Puerto Rican issues messy. The issue would head next to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, where Chairman Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., said he, too, did not know that the House is all but certain to pass the legislation.

“We’re going to see what the House does,” Bingaman said. “We haven’t discussed it yet in my committee.”

Fortuno and Pierluisi hope that a House victory will provide momentum for them to start lobbying the Senate. Pierluisi aims to find 10 veteran senators — six Democrats and four Republicans, particularly those with large Puerto Rican constituencies — to co-sponsor the bill.

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., the chairman of the Senate Republican Policy Committee, and Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, both said they were familiar with Fortuno from his four years in the House. But even though the two senators have been actively involved in GOP outreach to Hispanics, they stopped short of saying where they would come down on the Puerto Rico Democracy Act and were even unsure about how to talk about it.

Fortuno, however, is quick to point out the upside for his party. “It would present an opportunity, for example, for senators who may have a tougher position on immigration, to show that they may have that position on immigration but they are not anti-Hispanic,” he said.

Bill Clinton message to Puerto Rico in regards to Haiti!

President Bill Clinton speaks to Puerto Ricans in regards to our brothers and sisters in Haiti who need our help in their great time of need. Click on the video!!!

Maurice Ferre for US Senate 2010

Maurice Ferre : Biographical Sketch

Maurice Ferre is the former six-term mayor of the City of Miami and a candidate for the United States Senate.

The life of Maurice Ferre has been marked by a style of public service that encourages people of vastly different views and philosophies to work together for the common good and progress.

Ferre began his career in public service as a member of the Florida House of Representatives and then went on to be elected a commissioner of the City of Miami. He served as the Mayor of Miami from 1973 until 1985. Ferre provided leadership and vision as Miami took its place as one of the world's most vibrant, eclectic, diverse international cities. As Mayor, Ferre focused on economic development, job creation, and a visionary approach to improving South Florida's transportation, business and public infrastructure.

After his terms as mayor, Ferre has involved himself in far-reaching business interests, public service and commentary on current and political affairs.

Ferre was born in the American territory of Puerto Rico and is a resident of Miami. He is a graduate of the University of Miami and is married to M. Mercedes Malaussena Ferre. They have been blessed with six children and 12 grandchildren.

Contact
Ferre2010
P.O. Box 558807
Miami, FL 33255
305-910-0207
info@ferre2010.com
News Room

Alex Sink for Governor of Florida 2010

About Alex

A Different Kind of Leader. A Watchdog for the People of Florida.

It’s a story all too rare in government these days. The story of a leader whose experience and values, leadership style and perspective, were shaped by a life lived outside of politics.

Drawn to Serve

After a successful twenty-six-year career in private business, Alex Sink looked to Tallahassee and was troubled by what she saw: A city filled with career politicians and entrenched special interests. A capital long on politics-as-usual, but disappointingly short on solutions to Florida’s challenges.

Alex recognized the need for problem-solving, new ideas and accountability in state government.

So in 2006, never having sought elective office before, Alex ran for Chief Financial Officer.

In the words of the Daytona Beach News-Journal, Alex offered Floridians something new and different: “Unmatched business experience and forward-looking plans.” Or, as the Bradenton Herald put it: “There’s no need to pick a politician when there is a professional like Alex Sink standing in the wings.”

Nearly every newspaper in Florida joined the News-Journal and the Bradenton Herald in endorsing Alex’s candidacy for CFO.
The Florida Times-Union praised Alex’s “impressive qualifications,” noting “she has the perspectives of a businesswoman.” The Orlando Sentinel extolled her “results-driven demeanor and results-defining career.” The Palm Beach Post urged Floridians to “start fresh, with Sink.”

A Proven Track Record

Today, as the state’s elected CFO, Alex oversees nearly 3,000 employees and an annual budget of $300 million in the Department of Financial Services – where she puts her business experience and know-how to work as the outspoken fiscal and consumer watchdog for the people of Florida.

As CFO, Alex has kept her pledge to crack down on unaccountable, poorly-performing, no-bid state contracts – slashing her department’s no-bid contracts by more than half just two years into her term. She’s scoured Tallahassee’s bureaucracy for inefficient practices and wasteful spending, using her business acumen to save taxpayers millions.

And Alex has been an aggressive consumer advocate, launching innovative and long-overdue initiatives like the Safeguard Our Seniors Task Force, created to protect older Floridians from financial fraud.

Decades of Experience

Before her election in 2006, Alex’s distinguished business career culminated in her leadership of Florida’s largest bank. For seven years as president, she managed more than $40 billion in customer deposits while supervising more than 9,000 employees in 800 branches and earning a reputation for credibility, integrity and dedication to her customers.

While in the private sector, Alex repeatedly gave back to her state and community. Governor Lawton Chiles appointed Alex to the Commission on Government Accountability to the People, charged with finding ways state government could be more responsive to the people of Florida. As vice chair of Florida TaxWatch, she became a recognized leader on fiscal responsibility. And Alex dedicated herself to Florida’s children through her service on Governor Chiles’ Commission on Education, the Hillsborough Education Foundation Board of Directors and as chair of Take Stock in Children.

Alex’s civic work includes service in the Florida Chapter of the Nature Conservancy, Junior Achievement of West Central Florida and as chairman of the board of the United Way of Hillsborough County.

Alex grew up on a farm in Mt. Airy, North Carolina, and earned a degree in mathematics from Wake Forest University. She resides in Thonotosassa with her husband, Bill McBride. They are the proud parents of Bert, a junior and football player at Stanford University, and Lexi, a sophomore at Wake Forest University.

Congressman Pierluisi speaks to Hispanic Association for Corporate Responsibility

Congressman Pedro R. Pierluisi
Hispanic Association for Corporate Responsibility
Corporate Inclusion Index Survey
Press Conference
December 16, 2009

I want to join my colleagues on the Corporate America Task Force in
commending the Hispanic Association for Corporate Responsibility for
their longstanding efforts to advocate for the inclusion of Hispanics in
corporate America. Hispanics are the largest minority group in the
United States—as well as the fastest growing. Our community should
aspire to be represented in every field and at a level roughly
commensurate with our community’s proportion of the nation’s
population as a whole. I am proud that this Task Force has worked with
organizations such as HACR to make this goal a reality.

The purpose of the Corporate Inclusion Index Survey that HACR is
releasing today is to measure how well—or how poorly—our nation’s
most prominent companies are doing when it comes to reaching out to
Hispanics. Among the factors the survey examines are the number of
Hispanics that these companies are hiring to serve in upper management
positions and on their corporate boards. I am disappointed but not
surprised that the results of the survey indicate that Hispanics still have a
ways to go to be fully included in all aspects of corporate America.

As Hispanics continue to grow as a segment of our nation’s population, we
must emphasize to these companies that including Hispanics in their
business model is not only the right approach but the smart approach. At
the same time, when talking to the Hispanic community, especially our
youth, we must consistently underscore the importance of education and
hard work, so that companies have a broad and deep pool of qualified
Hispanic applicants from which to choose.

Again, I congratulate HACR on the production of this Survey. As we
move into a new year, we must renew our commitment to expand
Hispanic participation in corporate America.