[House Hearing, 112 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
TO AMEND PUBLIC LAW 89-732 TO MODIFY THE REQUIREMENT FOR A CUBAN
NATIONAL TO QUALIFY FOR AND MAINTAIN STATUS AS A PERMANENT RESIDENT
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
IMMIGRATION POLICY AND ENFORCEMENT
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
H.R. 2831
__________
MAY 31, 2012
__________
Serial No. 112-108
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
Available via the World Wide Web: http://judiciary.house.gov
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
74-417 WASHINGTON : 2012
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
LAMAR SMITH, Texas, Chairman
F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., JOHN CONYERS, Jr., Michigan
Wisconsin HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina JERROLD NADLER, New York
ELTON GALLEGLY, California ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT,
BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia Virginia
DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ZOE LOFGREN, California
DARRELL E. ISSA, California SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
MIKE PENCE, Indiana MAXINE WATERS, California
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
STEVE KING, Iowa HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
TRENT FRANKS, Arizona Georgia
LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas PEDRO R. PIERLUISI, Puerto Rico
JIM JORDAN, Ohio MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois
TED POE, Texas JUDY CHU, California
JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah TED DEUTCH, Florida
TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas LINDA T. SANCHEZ, California
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania JARED POLIS, Colorado
TREY GOWDY, South Carolina
DENNIS ROSS, Florida
SANDY ADAMS, Florida
BEN QUAYLE, Arizona
MARK AMODEI, Nevada
Richard Hertling, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Perry Apelbaum, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
------
Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement
ELTON GALLEGLY, California, Chairman
STEVE KING, Iowa, Vice-Chairman
DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California ZOE LOFGREN, California
LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
TED POE, Texas MAXINE WATERS, California
TREY GOWDY, South Carolina PEDRO R. PIERLUISI, Puerto Rico
DENNIS ROSS, Florida
George Fishman, Chief Counsel
David Shahoulian, Minority Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
MAY 31, 2012
Page
THE BILL
H.R. 2831, To Amend Public Law 89-732 to modify the requirement
for a Cuban national to qualify for and maintain status as a
permanent resident............................................. 3
OPENING STATEMENTS
The Honorable Elton Gallegly, a Representative in Congress from
the State of California, and Chairman, Subcommittee on
Immigration Policy and Enforcement............................. 1
The Honorable Zoe Lofgren, a Representative in Congress from the
State of California, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Immigration Policy and Enforcement............................. 5
WITNESSES
The Honorable David Rivera, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Florida
Oral Testimony................................................. 7
Prepared Statement............................................. 9
Juan Carlos Gomez, Director, Carlos A. Costa Immigration and
Human Rights Clinic, Florida International University College
of Law
Oral Testimony................................................. 12
Prepared Statement............................................. 14
Mauricio Claver-Carone, Executive Director, Cuba Democracy
Advocates
Oral Testimony................................................. 18
Prepared Statement............................................. 20
Tomas Bilbao, Executive Director, Cuba Study Group
Oral Testimony................................................. 25
Prepared Statement............................................. 27
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
Material submitted by the Honorable Zoe Lofgren, a Representative
in Congress from the State of California, and Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement............. 33
Material submitted by the Honorable Elton Gallegly, a
Representative in Congress from the State of California, and
Chairman, Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement... 42
Material submitted by Mauricio Claver-Carone, Executive Director,
Cuba Democracy Advocates....................................... 47
Prepared Statement of the Honorable Albio Sires, a Representative
in Congress from the State of New Jersey, submitted by the
Honorable David Rivera, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Florida............................................... 61
Material submitted by Tomas Bilbao, Executive Director, Cuba
Study Group.................................................... 62
TO AMEND PUBLIC LAW 89-732 TO MODIFY THE REQUIREMENT FOR A CUBAN
NATIONAL TO QUALIFY FOR AND MAINTAIN STATUS AS A PERMANENT RESIDENT
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 31, 2012
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Immigration
Policy and Enforcement,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 1:30 p.m., in
room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable Elton
Gallegly (Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Gallegly, Ross, Lofgren, and
Jackson Lee.
Staff Present: (Majority) Dimple Shah, Counsel; Marian
White, Clerk; and (Minority) David Shahoulian, Subcommittee
Chief Counsel.
Mr. Gallegly. I call the Subcommittee to order.
We are going to have votes here shortly so we will try to
get our opening statements, mine and the Ranking Member's,
before we go to vote, and hopefully we will not be interrupted
too long.
Over the last 2 years, due to changes in U.S. policy, there
has been a marked increase in travel to Cuba. In fact, travel
from the U.S. to that country has tripled, with most of the
increase coming as a result of travelers taking multiple trips
per year. As a result, visiting Cuban Americans have become one
of the Castro regime's top sources of revenue.
The Cuban Adjustment Act was enacted in 1966 to provide
Cubans fleeing persecution with the ability to adjust to
permanent residency status in the U.S. after 1 year. However,
some Cubans who sought refuge in the U.S. under the CAA
immediately and repeatedly travel back to Cuba once they
receive permanent residence. Essentially, they are returning to
the very same country that supposedly persecuted them.
The original intent of the CAA must be maintained. The law
was enacted to provide permanent residency to Cuban refugees
who were not able to return to Cuba due to the fear of
persecution and the political situation in that country. Today,
the political situation in Cuba remains the same, with a
Communist dictatorship that denies basic human rights to its
people. The fact that some persons avail themselves of the CAA
citing political persecution, and then quickly travel back to
the persecuting country, is an abuse of the generosity of the
American people and is unacceptable.
H.R. 2831 will rectify these abuses. The bill amends the
CAA so that Cuban nationals who obtain permanent residence
pursuant to the CAA will have their permanent resident status
revoked if they travel to Cuba. The bill will help ensure that
the CAA continues to protect Cuban refugees who are truly
fleeing persecution, without becoming a vehicle to support the
economy of the Castro regime.
And with that, I would yield to the gentlelady from
California, the Ranking Member, Ms. Lofgren.
[The bill, H.R. 2831, follows:
__________
Ms. Lofgren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The bill before us today is very simple. If enacted it
would revoke the permanent residence status of any Cuban
national who travels to Cuba prior to becoming a citizen,
whatever the reason for the travel. Put another way, it turns
the act of travel to Cuba into a deportable offense.
No matter what the reason for stepping foot in Cuba, you
lose your status. If you go to visit family members you haven't
seen in years, you lose your status. If you go to attend the
funeral of your father or to donate a kidney to a dying
sibling, you lose your status. If you go to meet with Cuban
dissidents with the aim of transitioning Cuba to a democracy,
you lose your status. Whatever the reason, the bill says to
those who travel, don't bother getting on a plane back to the
United States, your permanent residency has been rescinded, you
are no longer welcome here.
When I first learned of this bill, I had my Subcommittee
staff reach out to Mr. Rivera's office to better understand why
he believed such legislation was necessary. After all, this
bill would appear to punish many of his own constituents simply
for choosing to visit family members still in Cuba. My staff
was told that the bill was necessary to prevent alleged abuses
of the Cuban Adjustment Act. According to Mr. Rivera's staff,
the Act was meant for refugees so beneficiaries should not be
traveling back to Cuba. His staff also expressed concern that
recent arrivals were exploiting the Act to collect public
benefits and then take those benefits back to Cuba where they
could live a more lavish lifestyle.
On the first point, I had my staff explain that permanent
residency through the Cuban Adjustment Act is not limited to
refugees and that the vast majority of Cubans who use the Act
are family-based immigrants who make no claim of persecution.
In fact, in fiscal year 2011, almost 18,000 Cubans were granted
parole to the U.S. as family based immigrants compared to 3,000
who were admitted as refugees. Never has this country denied
the ability for family-based immigrants to visit their homeland
and doing so here would set a dangerous precedent.
With respect to the claim that immigrants are using public
benefits to live extravagantly in Cuba, I took that charge
seriously and had my staff look into it. We searched for
reports or studies on the issue, but there were none. We called
the Social Security Administration, the Florida Department of
Children and Families, Florida Legal Services, the Center for
Budget and Policy Priorities, and other experts on the use of
public benefits, but each person we spoke to said this was not
a serious possibility and each explained how incredibly
difficult it would be to pull something like this off even for
a short period of time.
Nevertheless, we took Mr. Rivera's staff at its word and we
offered to assist them in drafting a bill that would revoke
public benefits for any person who spent an inordinate amount
of time in Cuba absent truly extraordinary circumstances, but
this offer was declined.
I think that a bill that would target abuse of benefits
that may not exist would be one thing, but this bill does
something substantially different. We are left with a bill that
doesn't differentiate between humanitarian travel and travel
for other purposes. It doesn't matter whether a person came to
the U.S. as a refugee or to reunite with family members. It
doesn't matter whether they traveled to Cuba for 1 day or 6
months, and it doesn't matter whether they receive public
benefits or not. It doesn't matter whether they came last year
or 50 years ago.
This bill seems to have one purpose and one purpose only:
to punish people who exercise their right to travel to Cuba. We
all know that some want to restrict travel to Cuba, but
deporting people for not agreeing with this position, I think,
is simply wrong.
Let's talk about a real life example of a person who could
be deported if this bill were to become law. You wouldn't know
it by his name, but my chief counsel on this Subcommittee,
David Shahoulian, is of Cuban descent. His family came to the
U.S. in 1967 on one of the famous ``Freedom Flights'' from Cuba
for America. His grandmother, Fedelini Perez, came on that
flight and received her green card through the Cuban Adjustment
Act the following year.
Forty-five years later, his grandma remains a permanent
resident of the United States. Lack of an education in Cuba
made it difficult for her to pass the English and civics test
required for citizenship, but she worked hard and did not rely
on public assistance. During these 45 years, Mr. Shahoulian's
grandma traveled to Cuba exactly four times, each time for
about a week to visit a sick or dying family member. Had this
bill been law back then, she would not have been able to come
back.
David tells me that now at age 90, she is hoping to go back
one more time to visit her siblings who she will never be able
to see again. But if this were to become law she could go to
see her siblings but not come back. Here is a bill that would
deport David's grandmother and others like her simply for
visiting family members, and it is hard for me to consider this
a serious policy proposal. It is hard for me to imagine our
Committee giving this bill a hearing considering all of the
problems our country is facing.
And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Gallegly. I thank the gentlelady.
As you know, the bells have gone off. We have three votes.
One 15, which translated in Congressional time it is about 29
to 37 minutes, and two 5-minute votes, which translated is 7 or
8 minutes. Put that together, it is probably going to be
between 45 and 50 minutes. But we will be back as quickly as we
can.
Thank you.
[Recess.]
Mr. Gallegly. We have a very distinguished panel with us
today. Each of the witnesses' written statements will be
entered into the record in its entirety. However, I would ask
that your verbal testimony be held to 5 minutes and we provided
the lights and you all know how those work. So if you would
help us with that, I would be grateful.
Today, we will start with our colleague, Congressman David
Rivera, who represents the 25th Congressional District in
Florida and is currently serving his first term in the House of
Representatives. He serves on the House Committee on Foreign
Affairs and on the House Committee on Natural Resources. Prior,
he served in the Florida House of Representatives and worked in
the U.S. Information Agency in the Office of Cuba Broadcasting.
Congressman Rivera received his Bachelor's Degree from
Florida International University and a Master's of Public
Administration.
Welcome, David. Glad to have you.
TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE DAVID RIVERA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA
Mr. Rivera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this
hearing regarding a very important immigration enforcement
matter.
In 1966, the United States of America granted Cuban
nationals one of the most benevolent immigration provisions
ever granted to nationals of any country on the planet, what
became known as the Cuban Adjustment Act. The Cuban Adjustment
Act provides Cubans fleeing persecution in Cuba who arrive in
the United States eligibility for permanent residency status
after 1 year. In the history of America only one other
nationality has been granted this benefit, Hungarians in 1956.
The Cuban Adjustment Act is a precious gift to Cuban political
refugees that must be preserved and protected and should never
be abused or manipulated.
Unfortunately, abuse and manipulation is exactly what has
occurred in recent years. Because of these abuses and in order
to preserve and protect the benefits of the Cuban Adjustment
Act for future Cuban asylum seekers, the time has come to
adjust the Cuban Adjustment Act.
The fact is that in recent years it has become a common
occurrence for Cubans to seek political asylum in the U.S.
under the Cuban Adjustment Act and after a year and a day
immediately and repeatedly travel back to the persecuting
country.
Increasingly, Cuban Americans are citing family
reunification to justify travel that in reality that more
closely resembles common tourism and other unauthorized travel.
One of the latest manifestations of abuse of this law occurred
when travel agencies providing Cuba travel services actually
incentivized passengers to inducements such as free airfare as
long as the passenger is willing to carry baggage filled with
merchandise to be used for sale in Cuba. In these cases, Cuban
Adjustment Act beneficiaries actually become human cargo
vessels to promote commercial activity for Cuba.
In many cases, those Cubans traveling are also recipients
of U.S. taxpayer funded welfare programs such as Medicare,
Medicaid, Social Security, food stamps, public housing and cash
assistance. In these cases, U.S. taxpayers are actually
subsidizing travel to a country that has been designated a
sponsor of terrorism by our own government.
The original intent of the Cuban Adjustment Act was to
provide residency status to Cuban refugees because they were
not able to return to Cuba due to the political situation in
Cuba in 1966, which certainly has not changed. In fact the
political situation in Cuba is worse today with a Communist,
totalitarian dictatorship in power that continues to deny basic
civil liberties and human rights to its people, continues to
imprison peaceful pro-democracy activists and continues to
cause the deaths of Cubans who desperately seek to escape
across the Florida straits.
The fact that Cubans avail themselves of the Cuban
Adjustment Act citing politically persecution and then quickly
travel back to the persecuting country is a clear and blatant
abuse of the law. In fact it is outright fraud being
perpetrated on the people and government of the United States.
If Cubans are able to travel back to the Communist
dictatorship, then they should not have received the residency
benefits associated with the Cuban Adjustment Act and they
should lose that benefit immediately.
My legislation simply says that any Cuban national who
receives political asylum and residency under the Cuban
Adjustment Act and travels to Cuba while still a resident will
have their residency status revoked. By reforming the Cuban
Adjustment Act to stop its abuses, we are ensuring the
residency benefits will be there for all future asylum seekers.
In other words, adjust the Cuban Adjustment Act in order to
save the Cuban Adjustment Act.
Recent statements by Cuban leaders and Cuban state media
regarding the facilitating of Cuban Americans traveling to Cuba
make it abundantly clear that the regime is looking for this
travel activity for its own economic benefits.
But let me be clear, Mr. Chairman, in the final analysis my
legislation is about protecting the rule of law here in the
United States. The reason I believe this Committee was
designated as the Committee of jurisdiction over my legislation
is precisely because this Committee is charged with oversight
responsibility to ensure that the spirit and letter of our
immigration laws are followed.
There are some that may try to distract attention from this
issue of rule of law and attempt to divert this legislation
into a debate about U.S. policy toward Cuba or Cuba travel
regulations. I would strongly urge the Committee to maintain
the focus on the purpose of my legislation to ensure that the
spirit and letter of U.S. immigration law is enforced.
Besides protecting against fraud and abuse in our
immigration laws, my legislation will also protect American
taxpayers from fraud and abuse in our social welfare program
such as Medicare and Medicaid. These programs have been the
victim of billions of dollars in stolen funds by individuals
who come from Cuba under the Cuban Adjustment Act, receive
refuge in Cuba after they have committed their illegal
activities against the American taxpayer and live in Cuba
protected by the Cuban Government as fugitives from U.S.
justice.
In sum, Mr. Chairman, it is imperative that Congress do
everything in its power to enforce U.S. immigration law. I
believe many Americans will be shocked to learn that we allow
individuals to come to America from a terrorist nation with a
special immigration status citing political persecution and
then after a year and a day allow those same individuals to
travel back to that terrorist nation.
This abuse, fraud and manipulation of our immigration laws
must end. The spirit of and letter of our immigration laws must
be enforced. My legislation will do exactly that.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Rivera follows:]
__________
Mr. Gallegly. Thank you, Mr. Rivera.
Our next witness, Juan Carlos Gomez, serves as the Director
of the Carlos A. Costa Immigration and Human Rights Clinic at
the Florida International University College of Law, where he
is an assistant clinical professor. Within the field of
immigration law, he has helped thousands of individuals in
situations, including removal and deportation proceedings,
family immigration, and the transfer of professionals and
executives to the United States. Mr. Gomez received his BA from
Florida International University with honors and his JD from
the University of Pennsylvania Law School.
Welcome, Mr. Gomez.
TESTIMONY OF JUAN CARLOS GOMEZ, DIRECTOR, CARLOS A. COSTA
IMMIGRATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS CLINIC, FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW
Mr. Gomez. I am honored to appear here before you in the
hope that I can be of assistance in regard to House Bill 2831.
I came here as someone who was able to become an American
because of the Cuban Adjustment Act, as someone who benefited
from the freedom flights, and ironically I was made to feel a
bit old because your grandmother and I seem to have been in the
same boat in a way.
As someone who has represented Cubans for over 20 years who
were applying for lawful permanent residence under the Cuban
Adjustment Act and as someone who has taught the workings of
the Act in law school, the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966 is
meant to be a tool to alleviate the suffering of Cubans who
made it to the United States after fleeing oppression in Cuba.
There have been amendments to the Act over the decades. The act
currently requires only 1 year of physical presence in the
United States in order to apply for adjustment.
This act is an embarrassment to the Castro government
because it serves as a reminder to the world that their failed
system has for decades forced Cubans to flee Cuba. Some say the
Cuban Adjustment Act is a magnet that attracts Cubans to the
United States. They are wrong. It is freedom and opportunities
that are the magnets that attract Cubans to the United States.
It is particularly embarrassing to the Castros and their
henchmen that it was not just persons who fled immediately
after 1959 change in government but hundreds of thousands over
the last 2 decades alone. As long as the caudillos, or military
strongmen essentially, and their thugs are in power in Cuba,
the Act must continue to exist.
The main refugee system in the United States has been
inadequate to address the problem of Cuban refugees seeking
freedom in the United States. In the Cuban situation, parole
authority has been used since the 1960's because the global
refugee quota system would have failed to alleviate the
suffering of those who sought freedom in the United States. And
while there have been various ways of migration of Cubans
seeking freedom, the vast majority of Cubans have been paroled
into the United States and have benefited from the Cuban
Adjustment Act. Those of us who work in the field have seen
thousands of good people become permanent residents, and many
like myself have become United States citizens.
The legislation seeks to ensure that we keep the intent of
the Act in place and protect those legitimately seeking refuge
in the United States. We must distinguish between the poor
factory workers who are struggling to support themselves and
their families here and their relatives in Cuba from the role
of the wise guy who would take advantage of our laws. We must
distinguish the victims of the oppressors from the
opportunists.
And in addressing that, I would respectfully like to
address a concern in the bill that I have mentioned in my
written testimony. In its current form, the bill contains no
exception for a person who would return to the island to deal
with illness or death of a parent, spouse or child. I think
that this is a matter that needs to be considered.
In the context of this important discussion, we must also
be aware that we have mechanisms in our immigration laws to
filter out persons who would not be allowed to be admitted as
lawful permanent residents. There are still unfortunately big
weaknesses in our immigration laws as related to the Cuban
situation.
Congressman Rivera has mentioned some of them. The best
example that I can think of is where the children, as we define
the word ``child'' in the INA, of officers of the Cuban
military or the elite of the Cuban machinery, including
ministers, vice ministers, heads of bureaucracies, politburos
from the local level on up who have immigrated to the United
States. They benefited from the lifestyles of the elite along
with the Castros in Cuba, and they did not have to actually be
members of the Communist Party. So they have actually also
benefited from the generosity of the Cuban Adjustment Act.
Another example is that you have persons who are
voluntarily part of the machine of government in Cuba who still
can benefit from the Cuban Adjustment Act. It is ironic that
while a country, and many individuals, have had to wait 50-plus
years for freedom, former members of the Communist Party need
only wait 5 years and then apply for benefits under the Cuban
Adjustment Act.
If I may be so bold as to suggest that everyone from the
officer class and management level on up in Cuba should be
denied access to the Cuban Adjustment Act. For instance, if you
work for the Ministry of Interior in Cuba, which serves as
Castros main tool of repression and you are not a member of the
Communist Party, you can become a lawful permanent resident in
the United States under the Cuban Adjustment Act. I would also
suggest that these individuals be denied access to the parole
status or parolee status which is the mechanism that triggers
access for most Cubans to the Cuban Adjustment Act.
It is imperative that we continue to protect those who are
fleeing Cuba as legitimate refugees. I appreciate the intention
of House Bill 2831 in an effort to strengthen the Cuban
Adjustment Act. We need to protect the Cuban Adjustment Act
from abuse.
I urge the Committee to be cautious and to protect the law
from persecutors and others who are part of the machine of
oppression in Cuba without hurting its victims.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gomez follows:]
__________
Mr. Gallegly. Thank you very much, Mr. Gomez.
Our next witness, Mr. Mauricio Claver-Carone, is the
Executive Director of Cuba Democracy Advocates in Washington,
D.C., a nonpartisan organization dedicated to the promotion of
human rights, democracy, and the rule of law in Cuba. Prior to
his work in government, he served as a clinical assistant
professor at the Catholic University of America's School of Law
and as an adjunct professor at the George Washington
University's National Law Center.
Mr. Claver-Carone earned his BA from Rollins College, his
JD from the Catholic University of America, and a Master of Law
from Georgetown University Law Center.
Welcome, Mr. Claver-Carone.
TESTIMONY OF MAURICIO CLAVER-CARONE,
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CUBA DEMOCRACY ADVOCATES
Mr. Claver-Carone. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It is
truly a privilege to be here with all of you today to testify
in support of H.R. 2831.
The Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act of 1966 gives Cuban
nationals once they reach the United States and stay for a year
a right to become legal permanent residents. Cubans are the
only nationality to which the U.S. Congress has awarded this
special privilege. The legislative history of the Cuban Refugee
Adjustment Act holds that immigrants from Cuba are refugees
under international law, hence the original name of the Act.
Under the United Nation's convention relating to the status
of refugees of 1951, a refugee is a person who, owing to a
well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race,
religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group
or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality
and is unable to or, owing to such fear, unwilling to avail
himself of the protection of that country.
Undoubtedly, Cubans remain persecuted for their political
opinions by the Castro dictatorship, which remains as brutal as
ever. So it is not yet time to repeal the Cuban Refugee
Adjustment Act.
According to U.S. Department of State's most recent human
rights report, the Castro's regime violations include
abridgement of the right of citizens to change their
government; government threats, intimidation, mobs, harassment,
detentions to prevent citizens from assembling peacefully; and
a significant increase in a number of short-term detentions,
which in December rose to the highest monthly number in 30
years. Moreover, it recognizes that these abuses were official
acts committed at the discretion and direction of the
government, and consequently the perpetrators enjoyed impunity
for their actions.
In 2011, Cuban independent journalists documented over
3,835 political arrests by the Castro regime, more than 150
percent increase from the previous year. As a result, Cubans
should undoubtedly continue to be paroled into the United
States as refugees fleeing persecution from the sole remaining
dictatorship in the Western Hemisphere.
However, some things have changed since the Cuban Refugee
Adjustment Act was originally enacted. In 1994, as rising
political pressure and economic woes threatened the regime's
post-Soviet existence, Fidel and Raul Castro resorted to their
old tactic of creating a migration crisis but with a new twist,
that they began allowing Cubans to take to the sea in makeshift
rafts.
From this crisis, the Castro regime extracted a migration
accord, the 1994 Accord, from the Clinton administration which
allocated a minimum of 20,000 yearly visas to residents of
Cubans regardless of their political status vis--vis the
dictatorship.
Since the 20,000 minimum visas per year could not be met
through the Immigration Nationality Act preference system, the
Clinton administration decided to use the Cuban Refugee
Adjustment Act as its legal authority to allow this new
category of humans to come to the United States and become
legal permanent residents. Pursuant to the 1994 Accord, nearly
half a million Cubans have entered the United States and become
legal permanent residents under the Cuban Refugee Adjustment
Act.
Although no longer a prerequisite, most have nonetheless
had a political rationale for fleeing the island, others have
not. Yet both are equally afforded the benefits of the Cuban
Refugee Adjustment Act not only regarding their migratory
status but also the generous means-tested public assistance
programs afforded to refugees and to which they qualify thanks
to the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act.
These include supplemental security income and Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families. Such public assistance is meant
to help Cuban refugees settle here in the United States.
The time has come to legally ensure that only Cubans who
come to the United States as refugees are afforded the special
privileges provided under the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act and
thus restore the law's original intent.
This does not mean that Cubans who are not refugees should
be denied entry into the United States. It simply means that
they should be subject to the same set of immigration rules as
Mexicans, Canadians, Filipinos, or any other nationalities
patiently waiting to do so. They should not be allowed to jump
the line.
Thus, H.R. 2831 would bring non-refugee parity in this
regard; otherwise this current back door loophole risks
altogether ended the needed special protections to Cuban
Refugee Adjustment Act originally intended for those persecuted
by the Castro regime.
The Castro regime has manipulated 1994 Accord to create a
system of travel back and forth for tens of thousands of
nonrefugee Cubans who nonetheless adjusted their status under
the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act. This travel network carries
minimum political risk for the regime and for many reasons.
These incongruences are further exacerbated by the fact
that the U.S. government outsources first-year screening of
Cubans chosen to be paroled into the United States under the
Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act to the Castro regime. That is
right. The U.S. Interest Section in Havana hires Castro regime
personnel to interview Cubans seeking visas. Thus, adding
insult to injury, current U.S. policy allows the persecutors to
choose who will ultimately be afforded the privilege of the
Adjustment Act.
The fairest and easiest way to legally classify Cubans who
have a legitimate political rationale versus those who don't is
by identifying those who quickly turn around and travel back to
the islands. Identifying those who travel back for a political
rationale is not a new rubric. It is how the law distinguishes
legitimate versus fraudulent refugee claims for every other
nationality in the world. Therefore, it would bring parity for
refugees as well.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony, and I truly
appreciate the invitation and opportunity, and I will be
pleased to respond to any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Claver-Carone follows:]
__________
Mr. Gallegly. Thank you very much, Mr. Claver-Carone.
The next witness is Mr. Thomas Bilbao. Mr. Bilbao is
Executive Director of the Cuban Study Group. Prior to joining
the Cuban Study Group, Mr. Bilbao served as Director of
Transition for Senator-elect Mel Martinez and Director of
Operations for Mel Martinez for the U.S. Senate.
In addition, he served in the administration of George W.
Bush as Deputy Director of Operations for Advance at the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Mr. Bilbao holds a Bachelor's Degree from American
University and an MBA from the Kellogg School of Management at
Northwestern University.
Welcome.
TESTIMONY OF TOMAS BILBAO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
CUBA STUDY GROUP
Mr. Bilbao. Thank you very much, Chairman Gallegly and
Ranking Member Lofgren, and other honorable Members of the
Committee, for the opportunity to present a point of view which
all too often goes unrepresented in this body despite the fact
that it reflects the opinions of the overwhelming majority of
the Cuban American community. I believe it is important to
provide this perspective on a bill that amounts to little more
than yet another travel ban to Cuba, which it does so by
targeting a longstanding benefit afforded to our community.
For over a decade, the Cuba Study Group has advocated for
human rights in Cuba and for policies to help break the
isolation imposed on the Cuban people mainly by the policies of
the Cuban regime, but sadly also by the policies of the U.S.
government.
Our moral beliefs tell us that dividing Cuban families is
wrong no matter who is responsible for it and that the best way
to help Cubans on the island become authors of their own future
is by empowering them through resources and information.
Since the reversal of restrictions on family travel and
enacted in 2004, Cuban Americans have taken over 400,000 trips
annually, and this number continues to grow. Hundreds of
thousands of Cubans in our community are voting with their
feet, and they are telling us that for them family is more
important than politics.
A September 2011 poll conducted by Florida International
University demonstrates that 57 percent of Cuban Americans in
Miami-Dade County favor unrestricted travel to Cuba by any
American, not just family travel, and those numbers rise to 75
percent for more recent arrivals, the target of H.R. 2831.
In addition, leaders of Cuba's pro-democracy movement have
called on the U.S. to eliminate all travel restrictions to
Cuba. Almost exactly 2 years ago today, 74 of Cuba's top
democracy advocates wrote to Congress and stated that, quote,
we share the opinion that the isolation of the Cuban people
benefits the most inflexible interests of its government while
any opening serves to inform and empower the Cuban people and
helps to further strengthen our civil society, end quote.
Now, at a time when the Cuban Government is in the process
of reforming its own onerous migratory laws, which deny its
citizens the right to travel and divides Cuban families, this
bill seeks to impose similar restrictions in the United States.
Unfortunately, for the Cuban American community this latest
effort to restrict travel to the island targets a longstanding
benefit afforded to us which has enabled countless Cuban
immigrants to adapt to life in the United States and to rise to
the highest levels of academia, business, the arts, and public
service.
Proponents of this bill have suggested the beneficiaries of
the Cuban Adjustment Act shouldn't travel to the island because
they benefit from this law by claiming political persecution.
However, the Cuban Adjustment Act does not make persecution a
condition for obtaining lawful status.
U.S. immigration law toward Cuba has a long history of
providing resettlement assistance to Cuban immigrants
regardless of whether they claim political persecution. This is
because as Americans we understand that Cuban immigrants,
whether they claim political asylum or not, are victims of a
system that systematically violates individual liberties and
which stifles private initiative.
Suggesting that all Cuban immigrants benefiting from the
Cuban Adjustment Act have claimed political persecution or were
required to by law is simply incorrect. The bill's proponents
claim that it is necessary in order to prevent abuse and
manipulation by Cuban Americans. Not only are these attacks
unfounded as no evidence of widespread abuse has been
presented, but they are divisive and they are insulting.
Moreover, the bill is written so broadly as to penalize
those Cuban Americans who by virtue of having family on the
island must travel back to Cuba. The broad scope of the
language of this bill seeks not just to prevent the abuses
alleged by proponents of the bill but rather forces all Cuban
immigrants who want to maintain stable legal status in the
United States to give up visiting their family in Cuba.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Lofgren, and other Members of
this Committee, this bill as currently drafted amounts to
little more than another concerted effort by some to restrict
travel to Cuba regardless of the human costs and to criminalize
those who do so by targeting longstanding benefits enjoyed by
our community.
The overwhelming majority of Cuban Americans reject efforts
to restrict our rights to visit family on the island. We reject
suggestions of abuse and manipulation waged against us in an
effort to pass legislation that would force us to choose
between not seeing a family member before they die and falling
into undocumented status or even deportation proceedings.
Thank you for this opportunity. I am happy to answer any
questions that you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bilbao follows:]
__________
Mr. Gallegly. Thank you all for your testimony.
Mr. Claver-Carone, do you believe and can you give us your
assessment of what kind of persecution, if any, remains in Cuba
today?
Mr. Claver-Carone. As I mentioned in my testimony, Mr.
Chairman, there actually--we are currently seeing a spike in
repression in Cuba. Just in the month of December there was the
highest number of political arrests per month in 30 years. So
we are seeing despite all of the media reports about Raul
Castro and whether he is a reformist or not, what we are seeing
is that one thing has changed in Cuba since Raul Castro is in
power, that repression has increased and is continuing to
increase dramatically. We saw that just, as I mentioned before,
in the month of--there was a 150 percent increase year over
year in political arrests on the island.
So we are seeing, you know, a huge spike and therefore
those Cubans that are out there heroically fighting for freedom
need to have the protections, and they need to know that the
United States is out there in the moral and historic
responsibility that they have had.
However, our concern though is how do those people, how do
those courageous freedom fighters in Cuba feel when they see
people, people that even persecuted them coming to the United
States, receiving the benefits under the Cuban Refugee
Adjustment Act, and then going back to the Cuba as if nothing
happened. These are sometimes people that persecuted them,
people that were parts of the Committees for the Defense of the
Revolution and other things. It is very demoralizing for them,
and that is our big concern in making sure that we have a
bright line.
Mr. Gallegly. Mr. Bilbao, under the CRAA, Cubans are
provided with benefits that no other Nations' citizens enjoy.
Don't you believe these benefits should be preserved?
Mr. Bilbao. Mr. Chairman, of course I believe that these
benefits should be preserved. It is something that our
community appreciates. It is a gesture by the American people,
and the suggestion, however, that this bill is--that this
benefit is under attack I think is baseless in the sense that
we have not seen any evidence of widespread abuse.
The only evidence I can see of this benefit being
threatened is H.R. 2831, which seeks to repeal these benefits
especially during a time when, as Mr. Claver-Carone suggests,
repression is increasing on the island.
Mr. Gallegly. In your testimony you state the intent of the
CRAA was to regularize the immigration status of Cubans in the
U.S. Wasn't the intent to provide Cubans with refuge from an
oppressive regime?
Mr. Bilbao. Mr. Chairman, the intent of the Act was to
regularize the status of thousands of Cubans who were already
in the United States at the time and who did not have--and were
basically in legal limbo and the fact that that act in no place
mentions the fact that they have to be politically persecuted
would suggest to me that the practice that has been common for
the last 10 years of overwhelming majority of people who have
benefited from this being actually folks on track for family
reunification as opposed to political persecution, that this
act is intended to help Cubans adjust their status and is not
limited solely to those who claim political persecution.
Mr. Gallegly. Mr. Claver-Carone, if I ask you the same
question would you give me the same answer?
Mr. Claver-Carone. No. Actually, if you read the
legislative history of the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act, thus
the name, the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act, it was meant to
protect people that were persecuted in Cuba and to provide them
a way to adjust their status here in the United States.
We are not saying that people should not travel back to
Cuba. We want to have the foreign policy debate. We can have
that in the Committee down the hall. However, if people are
coming to the United States and adjusting under the Cuban
Refugee Adjustment Act, they should apply and they should be
based on those rules and they should be subject to those rules.
If people want to come here under non-refugee status, then
they should get in line with a lot of people throughout the
world that are patiently waiting to come to the United States
and enjoy those privileges. So it is how you use the Cuban
Refugee Adjustment Act.
Mr. Gallegly. Congressman Rivera, would you like to comment
on that?
Mr. Rivera. Sure. I will just conjure up the words of our
former colleagues from the United States Congress in 1966.
Congressman Michael Feighan of Ohio stated the granting of
permanent resident status would further American policy
objectives by further demonstrating the desire of the United
States to play a full and sympathetic role as a country of
asylum to refugees from communism.
Former Congressman Claude Pepper: I want to commend the
Committee to provide humanitarian aid for these people fleeing
from Communist persecution and tyranny under Castro toward
establishing permanent residence in our country.
Obviously, the pretext of the Cuban Adjustment Act is
political persecution. The only reason it was ever enacted in
1966 was because of the political situation in Cuba, the
existence of a Communist, totalitarian dictatorship that denied
basic human rights and civil liberties, the exact same
conditions that exist today.
Mr. Gallegly. My time has expired.
I yield to the gentlelady from California, the Ranking
Member, Ms. Lofgren.
Ms. Lofgren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would just like to make a quick statement for the record.
I notice in Congressman Rivera's written remarks that he
describes U.S. taxpayer funded welfare programs and includes
Social Security and Medicare as those welfare programs. And I
would just like to note for the record I think that would come
as quite a surprise to the Social Security recipients who have
paid into that program their entire lives in order to be
eligible along with Medicare recipients who have paid in their
entire lives in order to be eligible for Medicare. I personally
do not consider Medicare and Social Security to be welfare.
Now, as to this Act, as you look at immigration law, it
seems to me that the bill doesn't actually affect Cuban
refugees. There were 3,000 Cubans who came as refugees last
year, and 18,000 who came from Cuba who were not refugees, and
I would ask unanimous consent to put in the record a report
from the Congressional Research Service titled ``Cuban
Adjustment Act of 1966,'' pointing out that the Cuban
Adjustment Act does not require any claim of persecution or a
showing that you must be a refugee or asylee or any
individualized hardship under the Act.
Mr. Gallegly. Without objection.
[The information referred to follows:]
__________
Ms. Lofgren. So the refugees could actually, under the law,
under section 209 of the Immigration Act, they can become a
permanent resident anyhow. This bill really directs the
attention to people who are coming, the 18,000 who came last
year who adjusted under the Cuban Adjustment Act. Now, I
understand from Mr. Claver-Carone's comment that he may feel
that the Cuban Adjustment Act as to family and non-refugees
doesn't have a purpose. I would actually like to see something
like the Cuban Adjustment Act extended to other victims of
communism.
For example, I think about the people in Venezuela who are
suffering from a Communist dictator. Maybe we should see
whether they should also receive a benefit such as the Cuban
Adjustment Act, or the people in Vietnam who are suffering from
the vicious Communist dictatorship. Maybe they should also
receive a benefit such as this.
But that is for another day.
I just think that to target the family members for
deportation if you go for any purpose is an extraordinary
measure.
Now, listening to Mr. Claver-Carone's comment that there
might be people who had oppressed people--I mean, really there
is a provision that makes people excludable from the United
States if they have given material support to terrorist groups
and other things. And maybe, the bill doesn't do this, but I
would be certainly happy to work with you, sir, to tighten up
the language to make sure that people who are engaged in
oppressing the Cuban people are not able to utilize the Cuban
Adjustment Act. I think that would be a worthy goal. This bill
does not do that.
I would just like to talk a little bit as well about the
whole issue of public benefits. We asked, I asked my staff to
research the eligibility for Temporary Assistance to Needy
Families in the State of Florida. Now, it is hard to get. You
have to have minor children. You have to be very poor, and if
you are not disabled, you have to participate in a work
program. It is revoked if you don't maintain your residency. So
if you leave Florida for 60 days, you lose the benefit, but
further, you have to come in every week to work. So obviously
if you are in Cuba, you are not going to be able to meet the
work requirement, you are not going to get this benefit.
The food stamp program also has the 60-day, if you are gone
for 60 days the benefit is revoked, and also SSI, if you are
out of the United States for more than 30 days it is revoked,
and it is worth noting that the Department of Homeland Security
and Social Security Administration have executed an information
sharing agreement to really make sure that nobody has the
capacity to evade this law where you can't get SSI if you are
disabled and go some place else for more than 30 days.
Just speaking for myself, if you are a disabled person, and
your father dies, I think you should be able to go to the
funeral even if you are on SSI, but this bill would say no, if
you are a permanent resident under the Cuban Adjustment Act and
you go to your dad's funeral, don't bother to come back to
Miami. I just don't agree with this.
I would look for--I know my time has expired, Mr. Chairman,
but I would look forward to working with those who want to
tighten the Act to make sure the communists don't benefit from
it. A noble goal. Let us work on that. But let's not deport
David's grandma.
I yield back.
Mr. Gallegly. I thank the gentlelady.
The gentleman from Florida, Mr. Ross.
Mr. Ross. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Rivera, I
understand the reunification of a family and how important that
is. But it seems to me that there is another gain here, and I
guess my question to you is this. What does the Castro regime
stand to gain from the CRA that we have?
Mr. Rivera. Well, I can tell you that precisely in 2004 the
Bush administration changed the travel regulations to Cuba to
making it instead of--I believe at that time it was twice a
year to once every 3 years, and the reason that occurred was
because of the fraud and abuse and manipulation of those
regulations that occurred where people were making claims of
family reunification, which cannot be verified because as you
know when you are dealing with a Communist, totalitarian
dictatorship like the Castro regime, no documentation or
reliable information can be counted upon from the Cuban
Government, which is exactly why we need these types of
regulations.
So to say that there should be some sort of a humanitarian
cause of the Castro regime will somehow play a part in and help
facilitate documentation of these humanitarian cases is absurd.
Mr. Ross. There is no evidence of that, is there? In fact,
there is evidence just to the contrary.
Mr. Rivera. You absolutely cannot rely on them for any type
of information whatsoever. That is their modus operandi is to
provide propaganda, false information, false documentation. But
those cases of abuse represented not millions but hundreds of
millions of dollars in benefits to the Castro regime. Just as
now when we have unlimited travel from people that are under
the new Obama regulations for Cuba travel, again, it has
increased in hundreds of millions of dollars to the regime.
This represents a permanent travel market for the Castro regime
where people come to the United States again under the pretext
of political asylum, under fleeing political persecution. That
is the only pretext.
Mr. Ross. Stay here a year and a day.
Mr. Rivera. And then they return and do so repeatedly.
Mr. Ross. Mr. Claver-Carone, let me ask you that because it
seems to me that there is a list of people who want to go back
to Cuba but the Cuban Government won't let a certain number of
people but do selectively allow others to come back. Why is
that?
Mr. Claver-Carone. It is actually and particularly since
the 1994 interpretation, the Castro regime has gamed the system
in the sense of which is appalling to us and mindboggling to
us, but the first tier of interviews in the U.S. Interest
Section in Havana of people who gave these reviews are done by
the Castro regime. So the persecutor interviews the people that
are coming and basically knowing that they are going to be
coming back because----
Mr. Ross. It is a setup.
Mr. Claver-Carone. Exactly. Meanwhile, there is a blacklist
of hundreds of thousands of Cubans that they consider
politically threatening that they will not give a visa to go
back to Cuba. So it is a game, essentially for them. They have
legitimately gamed the system and the travelers have gamed the
system.
Mr. Ross. What would be the motivation for that? Is it not
that we as a country are somewhat funding their welfare state
through this program?
Mr. Claver-Carone. What is created is a system of travel
back and forth and it is indirectly a--I mean it is a relief
mechanism for the regime, a main relief mechanism for the
regime, and what we see with the rules that now the Obama
administration has interpreted them and allowed them to be
unlimited, it is not a coincidence that we are seeing such a
dramatic rise in the visits to Cuba. It doesn't mean that there
are more travelers to Cuba amongst Cuban Americans. It is the
visits. Why? Because a lot of the travelers are aware of the
limitations in the assistance. They are aware of the 30-day and
the 60-day limitations for SSI and TANF and all these things,
and in that sense they are traveling more often. So they go,
they stay for a month, they come back, then they go back for
the next month, and they have essentially gamed the system as
well. It is a game from beginning now to end.
And meanwhile, those that are legitimately and truly
politically threatening to the regime are on this blacklist.
They are not even allowed to go back. So it is perfect for
them. It is a perfect situation.
Mr. Ross. Now, the State Department has considered them,
has considered Cuba to be a state sponsor of terrorism along
with Iran and Syria and the Sudan, and yet if an Iranian over
here under asylum were to go back they could not come back to
the U.S., but Cubans under the CRA can come back and come back
and come back. Why should we treat the Cuban refugee any
differently than we are treating the Iranian refugee as well?
Mr. Claver-Carone. I think, Congressman, I mean you hit
this nail on the head, and what this bill seeks to do is to
bring parity for non-refugees and for refugees. It makes no
sense that someone that flees from Iran, Sudan, Syria, or other
source countries of refugees has to--until 2004 sometimes they
have to wait 14 years to become permanent residents. Now they
just have to go through the processing times which might be
even 5 years to become a permanent resident, not to mention to
become a citizen. So it is nonsensical, frankly. Cubans still
have a----
Mr. Ross. And doesn't the current state of affairs pose a
security threat to the United States with Cuba?
Mr. Claver-Carone. Absolutely, because the system is gamed
from beginning to end. So in addition to you not only have that
these are refugees and people that are fleeing, but they are
also from a state sponsor of terrorism country and they have
the most lax rules of any country in the world.
Mr. Ross. Thank you. I see my time has expired. I yield
back.
Mr. Gallegly. I thank the gentleman. The gentlelady from
Texas, Ms. Jackson Lee.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you. I am in between two hearings,
and I thank the witnesses for their kindness. And with having
astute staff, Ranking Member Lofgren and I was able to get an
assessment, a very moving story, of David's grandmother. And I
think I have lived on the Immigration Subcommittee now for a
decade plus and have been filled with such stories and such
stories of humanity.
The mover of this legislation is a good friend, and I thank
him for the sincerity in which he offers this legislation, but
I am baffled and I think I have difficulty in comprehending
that when you write legislation of this type, with all good
intentions, Mr. Bilbao, you wind up passing a large fishnet and
before you know it you have gotten people who simply want to be
reunited with family members, people who are going to see sick
loved ones, dying loved ones.
So as I understand the legislation coming on the Cuban
Adjustment Act, it is to prevent individuals who return to Cuba
from becoming a legal permanent resident. I want you to give me
a global perspective about--I want you to take your imagination
because imagination turns out to be truth, of how far reaching
could this be. What innocent person could be caught up in this
fishnet, this web, and be prohibited from doing an honest,
sincere, needed visit, and then why are we preempting with
punishment for someone who is going that simply wants to visit
and they have--and you might clarify for me, is this someone
that has a political agenda as a former elected official or
terrorist that we are talking about? My understanding is it is
the average person that comes, is under the, potentially could
be under the Cuban Adjustment Act that has to return to Cuba.
Mr. Bilbao, would you answer those questions for me,
please?
Mr. Bilbao. Thank you, Congresswoman Lee. I can do better
than use my imagination. I can give you a concrete example. In
2004, after the Bush administration imposed the new family
restrictions on travel, a gentleman by the name of Sergeant
Carlos Lazo, who is an army medic serving in Iraq, wanted to go
visit his son who was in Cuba and who is ill during his 2-week
R&R from the battle in Iraq, but because of the changes in the
regulations he was unable to do so. Today Cuban Americans serve
in the armed forces as residents before becoming naturalized
citizens, and in this case if this legislation were passed we
could have a situation as someone like a Sergeant Carlos Lazo,
who is a bronze star recipient and whose commitment to freedom
is unquestionable, be deported or become an illegal immigrant
in this country just because of the fact that during his 2-week
R&R from the war in Iraq from saving American soldiers as a
medic he wanted to go visit his ill son in Cuba. And that along
with a number of other potential unforeseen circumstances are
the result of the type of legislation that casts such a wide
net in an effort to basically just restrict the rights of
Cubans to be able to visit their family in the island.
Ms. Jackson Lee. What do you say, I know that we have had
long testimony of other witnesses and I am going to pursue the
line of questioning with you because I want you to be balanced,
what do you say to the advocates of this that we are stemming
the tide of fraudulent persons, persons who would wreak havoc
on the Adjustment Act and may be affiliating and fraternizing
with the government?
Mr. Bilbao. Well, the best that I can do and the best
effort to be unbiased I will just read directly from a letter
submitted to Congress by 74 of Cuba's leading democracy
advocates almost 2 years ago exactly today. And in that letter
they say, quote, the support or presence of American citizens,
their direct help and the many opportunities for exchange used
effectively in the desired direction would not be an
abandonment of Cuban civil society but rather a force to
strengthen it. They go on to say, we believe that defending
each and every human right for people must be an absolute
priority ahead of any political or economic consideration and
that no restriction of these rights can be justified on
economic, political or social grounds. We believe that rights
are protected with rights.
And this hearing, Congresswoman, is about a bill that would
restrict the rights of Cuban Americans. And the question then
is why would Cuban Americans advocate for a bill that restricts
the rights of their constituents or their fellow Cuban
Americans. And I believe that it is quite clear that what H.R.
2031 seeks to do is to punish Cuban Americans who disagree with
the policy of isolating the Cuban Government at all costs.
Ms. Lofgren. Would the gentlelady yield?
Ms. Jackson Lee. I would be happy to yield.
Ms. Lofgren. For just 15 seconds. Our colleague Congressman
Rivera indicated that in his view we need to adjust the Cuban
Adjustment Act in order to save the Cuban Adjustment Act. And I
just want to state because several reporters came up to me that
I am totally opposed to repealing the Cuban Adjustment Act. And
I think I speak for the Democrats in this House that we will
fight repeal of the Cuban Adjustment Act.
And with that I would yield back.
Mr. Gallegly. I thank the gentlelady.
Ms. Jackson Lee. I want to thank the Chairman if I could
and just thank Mr. Bilbao for giving us the real story on why
we should balance our response to this issue. Thank you. I
yield back.
Mr. Gallegly. Before I conclude I do have one unanimous
consent request that we enter into the record a background
document provided by Rep. Rivera which includes quotes by
Democrat members of the House during the debate in the original
Cuban Adjustment Act. The quotes note that the justification
for the CAA is that Cubans already in the U.S. could not go
back to Cuba as would have been required under the immigration
law in order to gain lawful permanent residence.
And without objection, that will be entered into the
record.
[The information referred to follows:]
__________
__________
__________
Mr. Gallegly. With that, I want to thank each and every one
of you for your testimony today. And all Members will have----
Mr. Claver-Carone. Mr. Chairman, is it possible to also
submit a letter from 500 Cuban pro democracy leaders that
actually contradicted the letter of the 74, that disagreed with
the letter of the 74, so 500 pro democracy leaders.
Mr. Gallegly. Is that a request to have those letters----
Mr. Claver-Carone. Yes. I ask it be submitted also for the
record.
Mr. Gallegly. Without objection, that will be made a part
of the record of the hearing.
[The information referred to follows:]
__________
Mr. Rivera. Also, Mr. Chairman, our colleague Albio Sires
wanted to ask that his testimony be also submitted for the
record.
Mr. Gallegly. Without objection.
[The information referred to follows:]
Prepared Statement of the Honorable Albio Sires, a Representative in
Congress from the State of New Jersey
Mr. Chairman, Thank you for holding today's hearing on H.R. 2831,
legislation aimed at reducing the abuse of the privileges given to
Cuban immigrants in this country. As a Cuban immigrant, a
representative of a large Cuban-American population, and a strong
advocate for immigrant rights, I am pleased to have the opportunity to
submit a statement on this topic. H.R. 2831 highlights the need to
reform the current system to ensure that all help offered under the
Cuban Adjustment Act (CAA) continues to be available for those who
desperately need it.
I want to be clear; it is not my intention to attack immigrants. I
support reforming the broken immigration system in the United States to
benefit our economy, encourage family unity, and provide refuge to
persecuted peoples. I also support providing federal assistance to
immigrants in need. Because of these priorities, I believe we must
uphold the CAA to protect Cubans seeking refuge while bringing parity
to a system that has gotten out of control.
No other immigrants receive the advantages that Cuban immigrants
receive under the CAA. Under current law, all Cuban immigrants have
ability to adjust to permanent legal resident status after one year in
the United States and obtain financial assistance from the United
States under such programs as the Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families program and the Supplemental Security Income program. The CAA
was specifically designed to help Cuban refugees unable to return to
Cuba, and those who need help should get it. However, presently all
Cuban immigrants, refugees or not, fall under the CAA.
This law was not designed for those Cubans who wish to live in the
United States and vacation in Cuba. Non-refugees are abusing the
benefits offered under the CAA. This is the only case when refugee
benefits are given to non-refugees. Under the CAA system and newly
relaxed travel regulations, non-refugees can receive expedited
permanent status and then simply return to Cuba whenever they like. If
they qualify, these immigrants can even receive U.S. benefits that they
may spend in Cuba. The Cuban Adjustment Act was designed to help Cubans
safely and efficiently escape the Cuban regime. The law was not
designed to aid U.S. dollars flowing to the Cuban Communist Party.
These abuses need to be addressed. Congress should consider
legislation that differentiates between asylum seekers from Cuba and
other types of Cuban immigrants. The United States should maintain its
commitment to Cubans who rely on the protection of the United States by
allowing threatened Cubans to receive the benefits under the CAA. All
other Cuban immigrants should be treated the same as immigrants from
other countries.
__________
Ms. Lofgren. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if Mr. Bilbao's letter
that he referenced might also be included in the record.
Mr. Gallegly. If Mr. Bilbao would like to add that, without
objection, that will be made a part of the record of the
hearing.
Mr. Bilbao. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The information referred to follows:]
__________
__________
__________
Mr. Gallegly. With that, that concludes the testimony.
Again, I want to thank all the witnesses today. Without
objection, all Members will have 5 legislative days to submit
to the Chair additional written questions for the witnesses
which will be forwarded and asked of the witnesses to respond
in as timely a fashion as possible so we can make their
comments a record of the hearing. Without objection, all
Members will have 5 legislative days to submit any additional
materials for inclusion in the record. And with that I again
want to thank the witnesses. The Subcommittee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:07 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]