The BCS proponents have claimed that the current BCS system, including the distribution of BCS revenues and the system for awarding BCS bids, is required by the marketplace.

Once they do that, then you have to comply.

As a result, the team that finished at the bottom of the PAC 10, which did not win a single game last year, was guaranteed before the season even started to receive more BCS revenues than the University of Utah.

Not if you have a playoff system.

I have to say I am having a lot of troubles with the BCS approach because... there is kind of an arrogance there that I see that just should not be there.

Well, you know it is unfair.

Does the BCS comply with the law?

Isn't it fair to say that it is exclusionary?

You tell Osborne I want a University of Utah game.

If you have a----

That is a long time away.

However, last year both the PAC 10 and the Mountain West had exactly one team qualify for a BCS game.

Now, this, I believe, poses two problems.

I haven't seen it as one.

The fact is that the legally-viable status choices available to Puerto Rico are crystal clear, no matter how loudly some may insist otherwise.

I just want to--appreciate your being here. I appreciate Pedro, what he is doing here...

This line of reasoning is misguided. Although couched in language intended to convey respect for the Island's residents, this argument--if allowed to prevail--would resign the people of Puerto Rico to yet another century of voicelessness.

I feel that H.R. 2499 allows the people of Puerto Rico more opportunities to define their political status.