[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]








                         FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP

=======================================================================

                                 MARKUP

                               BEFORE THE

                      COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                             March 28, 2023

                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-10

                               __________

        Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs





[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]








       Available:  http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/, http://
                            docs.house.gov, 
                       or http://www.govinfo.gov  
                       
                       
                       
                             _________
                              
                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
                 
 51-597 PDF               WASHINGTON : 2023

                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       

                      COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS

                   MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas, Chairman

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey     GREGORY MEEKS, New Yok, Ranking 
JOE WILSON, South Carolina               Member
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania
DARRELL ISSA, California
ANN WAGNER, Missouri
BRIAN MAST, Florida
KEN BUCK, Colorado
TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee
MARK E. GREEN, Tennessee
ANDY BARR, Kentucky
RONNY JACKSON, Texas
YOUNG KIM, California
MARIA ELVIRA SALAZAR, Florida
BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan
AMATA COLEMAN-RADEWAGEN, American 
    Samoa
FRENCH HILL, Arkansas
WARREN DAVIDSON, Ohio
JIM BAIRD, Indiana
MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
TOM KEAN, JR., New Jersey
MIKE LAWLER, New York
CORY MILLS, Florida
RICH MCCORMICK, Georgia
NATHANIEL MORAN, Texas
JOHN JAMES, Michigan
KEITH SELF, Texas

                                     BRAD SHERMAN, California
                                     GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
                                     WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
                                     DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
                                     AMI BERA, California
                                     JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
                                     DINA TITUS, Nevada
                                     TED LIEU, California
                                     SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania
                                     DEAN PHILLIPS, Minnesota
                                     COLIN ALLRED, Texas
                                     ANDY KIM, New Jersey
                                     SARA JACOBS, California
                                     KATHY MANNING, North Carolina
                                     SHEILA CHERFILUS-MCCORMICK, 
                                         Florida
                                     GREG STANTON, Arizona
                                     MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania
                                     JARED MOSKOWITZ, Florida
                                     JONATHAN JACOBS, Illinois
                                     SYDNEY KAMLAGER-DOVE, California
                                     JIM COSTA, California
                                     JASON CROW, Colorado
                                     BRAD SCHNEIDER. Illinois

                    Brendan Shields, Staff Director

                    Sophia Lafargue, Staff Director




























                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

                       BILLS, AMENDMENTS EN BLOC

H.R. 314.........................................................     2
Amendment to H.R. 314 offered by Mr. Meeks.......................    16
Amendment to H.R. 314 offered by Ms. Kamlager-Dove...............    19
Amendment to H.R. 314 offered by Mr. Jackson.....................    23
H.R. 1684........................................................    26

                                APPENDIX

Hearing Notice...................................................    54
Hearing Attendance...............................................    56
Hearing Minutes..................................................    57

                                 VOTES

Votes submitted for the record...................................    58

    STATEMENT SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD FROM REPRESENTATIVE CONNOLLY

Statement submitted for the record from Representative Connolly..    62

                             MARKUP SUMMARY

Markup summary...................................................    64

 
                         FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP

                        Tuesday, March 28, 2023

                          House of Representatives,
                      Committee on Foreign Affairs,
                                                    Washington, DC.

    The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:10 a.m., in 
room 210, House Visitor Center, Hon. Michael McCaul (chairman 
of the committee) presiding.
    Chairman McCaul. A quorum being present, the Committee on 
Foreign Affairs will come to order. The committee is meeting 
today for consideration of H.R. 314, the Fighting Oppression 
Until the Reign of Castro Ends Act; and H.R. 1684, the Haiti 
Criminal Collusion Transparency Act of 2023.
    The chair announces that any requests for recorded votes 
may be rolled and he may recess the committee at any point, 
without objection, so ordered.
    Pursuant to House rules, I request that members have the 
opportunity to submit views for any committee report that may 
be produced on any of today's measures. Without objection, so 
ordered.
    Pursuant to notice, I now call H.R. 314, the Fighting 
Oppression Until the Reign of Castro Ends Act. The bill was 
circulated in advance and the clerk shall designate the bill.
    [The Bill H.R. 314 follows:]

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Clerk. H.R. 314, to prohibit the removal of Cuba from 
the list of State sponsors of terrorism until Cuba satisfies 
certain conditions and for other purposes.
    Chairman McCaul. Without objection, the first reading is 
suspensed with and the bill is considered read and open to 
amendment at any point. And I will now recognize myself for a 
Statement on the bill.
    Cuba remains on the State sponsor of terrorism list because 
the communist regime continues to support acts of terror. In 
addition to harboring terrorists from Latin America, Cuba is 
allied with America's adversaries including Russia and China. 
The Cuban Government remains in lockstep with these malign 
actors seeking to upend the global balance of power. And Cuba 
continues to support Venezuela's brutal dictatorship, the very 
same government whose leadership is wanted in the U.S. on 
narcoterrorism charges.
    Representative Salazar's FORCE Act will prohibit the Biden 
administration from removing Cuba from the SSOT list until they 
meet a basic set of requirements. These are the same 
requirements that a bipartisan majority in Congress and 
President Bill Clinton agreed were necessary for lifting the 
U.S. embargo on Cuba's regime, that is, legalizing political 
parties, labor unions, and free political prisons, committing 
to holding free and fair elections.
    President Biden caved to the Cuban regime's request for 
U.S. foreign assistance, permitting the regime to re-allocate 
funds toward its oppressive institutions. We cannot allow the 
Biden administration to continue to project weakness on the 
global stage by providing relief for the communist regime in 
Havana.
    I was in Miami. I have been there many times. I met first 
hand with victims of the Castro regime and I know many Cuban 
exiles who long to return to their home that was stolen from 
them. It is time to stop rewarding the Western Hemisphere's 
longest-ruling communist dictatorship. I am proud to support 
this critical piece of legislation and I commend my friend and 
colleague, Representative Salazar, for her tireless efforts on 
behalf of the Cuban people.
    Is there any further discussion on the bill?
    Mr. Meeks is recognized.
    Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me say I oppose 
this bill. And while I appreciate the sponsor's passion on 
these issues and in fact, share her goals for a more free, 
prosperous, and democratic Cuba, I break with her on the best 
way to bring about these changes.
    My views on U.S. engagement with Cuba are clear. I have 
been against policies which seek to further isolate and 
alienate the people of Cuba and I have seen the impact of what 
establishing relationships with the people of Cuba can do in 
just a short time.
    During the Obama Administration, the warming relations with 
Cuba inspired Cuban people to build private businesses, explore 
new opportunities, and organizing using social media and their 
own voices to do so. As an added benefit, engagement also 
strengthened the United States' credibility in the entire 
region.
    I oppose this bill on a number of other grounds. Most 
importantly, I believe it would deepen the wedge between the 
people of Cuba and the people of the United States on issues of 
mutual and global concern.
    Our partners in the region are also focused on these issues 
such as access to humanitarian support in times of crises, 
economic development, and the ability to recover from crises 
especially in the wake of COVID-19 pandemic and the barrage of 
natural disasters which have caused the people of Cuba great 
hardship in recent months.
    I also oppose this bill because intelligence reviews have 
found no, and I repeat, no indication that the Cuban Government 
provided weapons or paramilitary training to terrorist groups, 
contrary to what some believe. Failing to be a democracy is not 
criteria for remaining on the list. It is not a democracy, but 
that does not mean that it is a terrorist country.
    Cuba was put back on the list by the Trump administration 
to intentionally complicate the United States and Cuba 
relations. This State Department's findings on Cuba in its 
annual report to Congress have failed to meet the standard for 
designation as a State-sponsor of terror. The country simply 
does not meet the definition of State sponsor of terrorism, so 
putting Cuba on the list with North Korea, Iran, and Syria 
weakens the impact of what the list is intended to do and that 
is to thwart the activities of those who have repeatedly 
provided support for acts of international terrorism.
    There are many countries around the world that fall short 
of the democratic and human rights requirements imposed by this 
legislation for Cuba to escape the State sponsor of terrorism 
list. But we do not place them on the State sponsor of 
terrorism list for these shortcomings. There are many other 
tools in our foreign policy tool kit to demonstrate our 
disapproval including assistance cutoffs, travel restrictions, 
trade controls, financial sanctions. We do not need to impose 
an inaccurate terror designation to signal our disapproval.
    Now if we are serious about supporting the Cuban people and 
Cuba's aspiring entrepreneurs and facilitating the flow of 
information and communication, we need to remove barriers to 
engagement. The State sponsor of terrorism designation for Cuba 
impacts us all. Whether direct or indirect, it gets in the way 
of the type of change we all want to see happen on the island, 
while also diminishing hope for a better day.
    Open relationships are a more powerful change agent than 
isolation. How do we know? We have isolated Cuba for over 60 
years and nothing has changed. We saw the biggest change when 
we tried to improve the relations which gave that 
communications that were important, what we saw taking the 
Cuban people to the streets. It is time for a more carrots-
based approach to the challenges being faced on the island. We 
know the incentive can work.
    Unfortunately, the Cuban people have bore the brunt when 
U.S. policy uses its sticks-only approach. Removing Cuba from 
the list and resuming normalized relations which we have 
already seen, had and would improve the atmosphere for 
bilateral and multilateral dialog on a wide range of issues of 
mutual interest. And with that, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields. Any further 
discussion on the bill? The author of the bill, Ms. Salazar, is 
recognized.
    Ms. Salazar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you--very 
brave on your part to having brought this bill to be considered 
in front of the committee, so that is why I am proud this 
committee is considering H.R. 314, the FORCE Act, a bill I 
introduced to keep Cuba on the State sponsor of terrorism list 
until the Cuban regime is democratically reformed.
    Last week, here in this hall, I pressed Secretary Blinken 
to answer whether Cuba had reached the high bar, high bar that 
it takes to be taken off that list and he admitted clearly that 
it has not. So I am assuming that the Secretary of State is in 
full support of keeping Cuba on the list of State sponsors of 
terrorism.
    And why is that? Because him and I and the whole world 
knows the truth, that Cuba belongs on that list and let me 
explain just a few of the details why it still belongs on that 
list.
    Cuba's regime bankrolls foreign terrorist groups like the 
ELN in Colombia, like Maduro in Venezuela, in Bolivia, and 
Nicaragua, and every other dictator it could find in the 
hemisphere or in Africa.
    In 2019, this group attacked a police academy. I am talking 
about the ELN in Colombia. It attacked a police academy 
injuring 68 cadets and killing 22 others. In 2020, they carried 
out 76 massacres, 82 massacres the next year, and Cuba was 
there helping them.
    Just last month, it was reported that the ELN was planning 
more of these terror attacks. But Cuba just doesn't pay for 
terrorists or helps them. Cuba also hides them. Best example, 
the most important example is an American fugitive called 
Joanne Chesimard from New Jersey. She was serving time for 
shooting a New Jersey police officer at point blank range, 
execution style. But for almost 40 years, 40, she has lived 
peacefully in Cuba. The FBI has asked the Cuban regime, 
specifically, Fidel Castro, to send her back. Never. It never 
happened.
    Then we have William Morales, a bomb maker from Puerto 
Rico. He was implicated in over 50 bombings in the 1970's and 
in one of those bombings he killed 4 people and maimed another 
50 in the fire. When police went to arrest him, Morales said 
very happily, they are not going to hold me forever. And he was 
right. Cuba was there to welcome him with open arms and he has 
lived in Cuba ever since.
    We cannot give the Castro regime an inch and we are one bad 
decision away from Russia reopening the Lourdes spy base in 
Cuba, only 90 miles off the coast of the United States.
    Therefore, taking Cuba off this list would be the beginning 
of the end of Latin America. Our hemisphere is already poisoned 
by the spies in Venezuela and Bolivia. The FORCE Act will put 
this decision back in the hands of Congress who will ensure the 
LIBERTAD Act is obeyed.
    And just to say a few more words, when President Obama 
established relations with the Cuban regime, specifically with 
the Castro brothers, it was the perfect moment for that regime 
as my colleague, Congressman Meeks, just pointed out, it was 
the perfect moment for the Castro regime to prove to the world 
that they really wanted to engage in the international economic 
community. President Obama gave everything in exchange of 
nothing and 3 years later, the Cuba regime did not open up, not 
even one inch, what we were expecting on the economic front 
what Obama had expected. So it was a major disappointment for 
the foreign policy for the Obama Administration to have given 
everything in good faith and received nothing back.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentlelady yields. Does any other 
member seek recognition?
    Mr. Sherman is recognized.
    Mr. Sherman. This bill does not say that Cuba stays on the 
list until it stops supporting international terrorism. It says 
that Cuba stays on the list until it becomes a liberal 
democracy. That is bad anti-terrorism policy writ large and 
worldwide. If we turn to the world and say if you are not a 
liberal democracy, we are putting you on the terrorist list and 
we are keeping you there, then why--then a country has nothing 
to lose unless it has decided to become a liberal democracy and 
at least 100 countries haven't. So we turn to these 100 
countries that we have yet to convince to adopt democracy, 
freedom, and liberty and say well, since you are not going to 
be a democracy, you are on the international terrorist list. At 
that point, there are no further consequences to them actually 
supporting international terrorism.
    I think we should stick with the policy that has guided us 
in our international terrorism policy for at least two decades, 
the terrorism list is for those countries that engage 
international terrorism on a substantial scale. Whether Cuba 
does or does not fit into that category is a reasonable debate 
and if this resolution said keep Cuba on the list until 
Congress determines that it is no longer engaged in 
international terrorism that would be a reasonable approach. 
But instead, it says keep Cuba on the list until it becomes a 
liberal democracy with full freedom. I don't think that we can 
have a policy of saying--once you do that, you create a 
precedent that logic would require you apply to the rest of the 
world.
    So the terrorism list is for terrorist States. If Cuba is a 
terrorist State, it should be on the list. If Cuba is no longer 
at some point a terrorist State, it should be off the list even 
if it doesn't become a democracy. That doesn't mean that we 
don't do many, many things to try to bring democracy to Cuba, 
but the terrorism list is not something that we should apply to 
any one of 100 countries in the world that is not a democracy, 
but does not support terrorism. And with that, I yield back.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields. Any further 
discussion on the bill?
    Mr. Perry is recognized.
    Mr. Perry. I thank the chairman. Wishful thinking. Wishful 
thinking, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. We all wish 
that Cuba wouldn't do the things it does, but relaxing the 
standard is just going to encourage more. We have seen it. We 
have already seen this. We don't have to try it again to see 
that no good deed will go unpunished. We have tried with Cuba.
    So I support the gentlelady from Florida, Ms. Salazar's 
bill, and she has clearly articulated, if you didn't listen to 
her, why Cuba remains a terrorist State. She has articulated 
it.
    But included in that, even though she didn't articulate it 
is the fact that Cuba hosts Lourdes, the largest listening post 
on the planet, operated by the Communist Party of China pointed 
at the United States of America. And if that is not enough, co-
located there is Torrens, where Moscow maintains their largest 
signals intelligence facility outside of their geographic 
bounds of their country.
    Cuba does not have an army that we are concerned about, but 
they do have a biological warfare threat that exists and is 
real. And I will remind everybody it is 90 miles off the coast.
    Cuba enables the repressive systems in Venezuela and 
Nicaragua. It hijacks legitimate protests in Colombia and Chile 
that are striving to become communist nations.
    Listen, folks, a block of the United Socialist Republics in 
our hemisphere would be completely, completely 
counterproductive. The soft on crime, let's all put a Che 
Guevara t-shirt on, and act like he was some kind of freedom-
fighting hero, quite honestly is absurd and ridiculous.
    It would be awesome if the members of this committee could 
agree that Cuba does not work in the best interest of the 
United States. Quite honestly, it does not work in the best 
interest of humanity. And while we all agree, we all agree with 
the people of Cuba, the people of Cuba. When I was growing up 
in Miami, our neighbors, Cubans, where not only just our 
neighbors, they were close, family friends. Their freedom, 
their livelihood, their property, their heritage, stolen from 
them by Fidel Castro. That vision exists today in the 
leadership of Cuba and to believe anything otherwise I am not 
sure what that is. I am really not sure what that is. I hope it 
is just ignorance.
    We are not doing this to Cuba by the way. I have heard, oh, 
we have punished Cuba and we have sanctioned Cuba and this is 
all the United States' fault. No, this is Cuba's fault. This is 
the leadership of Cuba, it is not the people of Cuba, but they 
are never going to get out of it if we continue to help the 
leadership of Cuba which by the way when we send them anything, 
we relax anything, they use it to their benefit, not to the 
people of Cuba's benefit, to their benefit.
    Understand how totalitarian regimes work. They are not 
waking up in the morning and say, how can we get the United 
States to help us so we can help our people? They are figuring 
out how can they get the international community help them stay 
in power and oppress their people. Let's not be part of that, 
ladies and gentlemen. I urge you to support and vote for the 
bill and I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from 
California, Mr. Issa.
    Mr. Issa. I thank the gentleman and I don't want to make 
this go any longer than necessary because I believe that there 
are not just enough votes, but there is an overwhelming 
majority in support of this.
    I might just comment, my good friend, Mr. Sherman noted, 
the details of what this bill does and doesn't do, and he is 
technically correct and I am not going to disagree with him. 
But what I would say is that Congress, in my 23 years, we are 
perfectly capable of passing a law that says do this, don't do 
this until they do that, and if they make even the smallest 
move toward freedom, toward not oppressing their people, toward 
not destabilizing the region, toward not exporting terrorism 
throughout South and Central America, just the slightest move, 
I would be happy and I hope that we are both still here in that 
time and that it is soon, but I would be happy to join the 
gentleman, my fellow gentleman from California, in passing 
another bill that says we are going to have an outreach and we 
are going to support an administration's outreach. But while we 
still have people who have permanent damage from having been 
bombarded through a somewhat unknown brain injuring event 
because we went there and opened our arms to the Cuban 
Government, we cannot do less than what we are doing today, so 
I am a cosponsor. Support it. And I thank the gentleman for 
yielding. I yield back.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields. Any further 
discussion?
    Mr. Cicilline is recognized.
    Mr. Cicilline. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am proud to 
represent a vibrant Cuban community in the State of Rhode 
Island. Cuban Americans represent some of the hardest working 
and brightest minds, not just from Rhode Island, but across our 
country. In 2016, I traveled with then President Obama on his 
historic trip to Cuba, as his administration charted a new 
course on U.S. policy toward Cuba.
    After 50 years of isolating Cuba, it was clear that U.S. 
foreign policy was not working. But through the Obama 
Administration's actions, we began to see positive developments 
between our countries, including expanded cooperation on 
counterterrorism, counternarcotics, coastal and marine 
protection and more. While there remain many unresolved issues 
in the relationship between our two nations, these changes gave 
the United States more tools to promote positive changes for 
the Cuban people.
    The Biden administration has made it clear that standing up 
for democracy and human rights will remain at the center of 
U.S. foreign policy, but we can still engage with the Cuban 
Government as we do with a number of other countries around the 
world that we have significant differences with. And that is 
why I was so disappointed to see President Trump and his 
administration roll back President Obama's actions on Cuba. 
This included the re-listing of Cuba as a State sponsor of 
terrorism with the likes of Iran, Syria, and North Korea, 
despite an intelligence review conducted in 2015 under 
President Obama showing that Cuba did not meet the statutory 
definition to be on that list.
    The classification of a country as a State sponsor of 
terrorism should always be led by the facts, not politics. The 
actions carried out by the Trump administration less than 10 
days before the 2021 inauguration of a new President, weakens 
our credibility and really delegitimizes the State sponsor of 
terrorism list.
    And so as my colleague, Mr. Sherman, made clear, this is 
not a list of countries that aren't democracies. That would be 
a very long list. We have very robust relationships with many 
countries that are not democracies and we should always 
continue to promote democracy in every part of the world that 
we can, but this a very different designation. This is a State 
sponsor of terrorism. There is a definition for that. And there 
are three countries on it that have been repeatedly engaged in 
acts of terrorism around the world, Iran, Syria, and North 
Korea. We ought to take that seriously. We ought not undermine 
and delegitimize those classifications which mean something 
very, very specific, just because we have a long-standing 
disagreement with Cuba about their governance.
    The requirements that are contained in this proposal are 
very specific. It requires the development and sustaining of a 
very strong, liberal democracy. There are many countries that 
we deal with on a very regular basis that would not meet this 
definition, maybe as many as a hundred, but there is value in 
ongoing diplomatic relationships and work that we can do to 
improve the lives of the residents of those respective 
countries.
    So I think this is a very, very dangerous precedent. If we 
are going to lump on a list of State sponsors of terrorism 
countries that, in fact, are not meeting the statutory 
definition, countries that don't meet it as Iran has, Syria 
has, and North Korea, I think it makes a mockery of that very 
serious designation and is very counterproductive and will 
prevent us from continuing to engage with countries like Cuba 
in an effort to promote democracy and free speech and free and 
fair elections, et cetera.
    So I think this is a terrible idea. I have tremendous 
respect for the sponsor of this, but I urge my colleagues to 
vote no and I yield back.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields. Any further 
discussion?
    Mr. Huizenga.
    Mr. Huizenga. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will make a couple 
of comments and then yield to my colleague from Florida. My 
colleague from Rhode Island just had said this is about a 
``disagreement about their governance.'' This is far more than 
a disagreement about their governance.
    Last week, we had a hearing regarding the oppression of the 
Ortega regime in Nicaragua where they are literally throwing 
church leaders and political opponents in jail. Who are they 
supported by? Cuba.
    It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that is a definition of a 
State sponsor of terrorism. And to me, if it walks like a duck, 
quacks like a duck, and supports terrorism, it is a State 
sponsor of terror. So why would we not say that?
    And I ask this question somewhat rhetorically. When has the 
Castro regime ever actually helped battle terrorism? They are 
there supporting the terrorists, both economically, as well as 
through encouragement and work through various agencies around 
the world.
    So I couldn't help and I will finish with this and pass it 
off to my colleague, I couldn't help but notice our next bill 
is dealing with Haiti, rightfully so. We are going to try to 
root out corruption and illegal activity and we are going to 
put sanctions on those folks and that bill would require that 
and a report to Congress. And we are talking about rolling that 
back for Cuba. And I simply don't understand it. I am 
supporting Cuba because of those Cuban families that came to 
West Michigan supported by my Dutch Reformed Church after the 
revolution, the Lugo
    [phonetic] family, the Cortina
    [phonetic] family, the Flores
    [phonetic] family, the Carro
    [phonetic] family. That is why we cannot forget. And I 
would like to yield to my colleague from Florida.
    Ms. Salazar. Thank you, my colleague, Mr. Huizenga.
    You know, it's the Cuba issue is dear to me because I 
represent the city of Miami, where you have 2 million Cuban 
Americans who escaped probably the worst revolution that the 
Americas has seen since the arrival of Christopher Columbus in 
1492. We're talking about the Cuba that Fidel Castro was able 
to elevate repressive methods to scientific levels. We're 
talking about a revolution that has been able to take away the 
spirituality, the human fiber from the average Cuban.
    So, I speak from the heart because I represent them, and 
respectfully, I disagree with the chairman and with other 
colleagues on the other side that do not agree with this 
amendment. It is that Cuba is a very bad actor. And if we give 
them 1 inch, they will take the whole body.
    If we allow--if we send the message to the Chinese and to 
the Russians that the Lourdes spy base is going to be up and 
open for business, we're going to have not one Chinese balloon, 
we could have many Russian balloons and Chinese balloons, 
because Cuba is dying to harm the United States in any way, 
shape, or form--not only the United States, through being 
proxy, like my colleague said, in Nicaragua, in Honduras, in 
Central America, in the Sandinistas, with Maduro, in Bolivia. 
Any way Cuba could find to harm the United States and to spread 
communism, it will be there. It will be there.
    But, even more so, they terrorize their own people. Like 
I'm not sure if you guys know, but, for instance, Cuba is in 
the business of human trafficking. You send doctors to the 
different missions. The doctors get paid $10,000 a month, and 
the country that receives those doctors needs to pay that 
salary back to the Cuban regime. And the doctor makes $200 out 
of $10,000. That is called human trafficking. And that's one of 
my causes right now with Mexico, saying to the President of 
Mexico, ``You cannot have on your soil human slaves.''
    There are 55 minors who are in jail, kids that are 16, 17 
years old. And what was their crime? To scream ``Freedom'' on 
the streets of Havana.
    The average Cuban makes 12 cents--12 cents--a day. They're 
only 90 miles away from the most important economic power in 
the world. Cuba had the per capita income of Italy in 1960. So, 
we're talking about that we're dealing with a very evil, 
pernicious regime, and we should not reward them to take them 
off that list.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentlelady yields.
    Any further discussion on the bill?
    Mr. Lawler is recognized.
    Mr. Lawler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman McCaul. I'm sorry, if the gentleman will yield, 
Ms. Kamlager-Dove.
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    I would like to speak to H.R. 314. I represent a small, but 
vibrant Cuban community in my district, and I must strongly 
oppose this bill. It reflects a failed performative policy 
toward Cuba that does nothing to advance U.S. interests and 
actively harms the very Cuban people we've been talking about.
    Codifying Cuba as a State sponsor of terrorism--a criteria 
satisfied only by the most malign actors--that it, objectively, 
does not meet, indicates that U.S. policy toward Cuba isn't 
about liberalism or the protection of human rights. It's about 
politically driven punishment.
    For one, this designation actively thwarts the 
liberalization that the United States is seeking, as my 
colleague from the Valley so eloquently Stated. It restricts 
the financial transactions that would allow everyday Cubans to 
open businesses and engage in trade and investment, stifling 
the private sector growth that could promote greater freedom in 
the country; impeding travel and academic exchanges that would 
enable U.S. institutions to support activists, artists, 
scholars, and journalists opposed to the regime. And 
critically, it is a major barrier for humanitarian and faith-
based organizations to provide much-needed aid for the 
compounding crisis the Cuban people are facing.
    As it relates to the acts of terrorism, evidence has not 
really been provided by us to even support this designation. 
And if we are going to put countries on the list that harbor 
fugitives or terrorists, we have a very long list of countries 
we could add. In fact, many of them have been listed today. You 
could add Columbia or Venezuela or Nicaragua. You could add 
France for harboring Roman Polanski or even England or Ecuador 
for Julian Assange. But we are not doing that.
    So, anyone who cares about supporting the Cuban people and 
promoting a path to liberalization and normalization in the 
country should oppose this measure. And I urge my colleagues to 
vote against this bill.
    And with that, I yield back.
    Mr. Sherman. Will the gentlelady yield? Will the gentlelady 
from California yield the remaining part of her time?
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Yes, I will.
    Mr. Sherman. Thank you.
    I just want to quickly make the point, we're saying Cuba 
should be on the Terrorist List because it cooperates with bad 
governments, evil governments, in Nicaragua, China, Venezuela, 
and Russia. You know who's not on the Terrorist List? The 
governments of Nicaragua, China, Venezuela, and Russia. So, to 
say that Cuba should be on the list for hosting a Chinese 
listening post, when China isn't on the list for operating that 
post, seems a little selective.
    And with that, I will yield the time back to the lady, the 
gentlelady from California.
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Thank you so much, and I yield back the 
balance of my time. You said it most eloquently.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentlelady yields.
    Any further discussion?
    Mr. Lawler is recognized.
    Mr. Lawler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    In response to my colleague, I would just say, then, maybe 
we should have that discussion about those other countries.
    But my wife comes from Moldova, a former satellite Soviet 
State that has been corrupted by Russian influence for years, 
since the collapse of the Soviet Union. This body took action 
recently, applying sanctions on individuals for financial 
corruption and other associated crimes. Because we, as the 
leader of the free world, have an obligation to root out 
corruption and to take on bad actors.
    This body, and my colleague who puts this bill forward, put 
a resolution on the floor condemning socialism and the horrors 
of it. Eighty-six Democrats voted against that. Fourteen of 
them couldn't find their way to the House floor to vote. A 
hundred people on the other side of the aisle couldn't be 
bothered to condemn socialism.
    There are bad actors in the world--Russia, China, Iran, 
North Korea, and, yes, Cuba. The Castro regime and the Cuban 
government have been oppressing the Cuban people for 
generations. They have engaged in ill-advised conduct and been 
party, going back to the beginnings of the cold war, to acts of 
aggression against the United States. They continue to 
cooperate with bad actors and terrorist regimes throughout the 
world.
    And this bill is simply saying that the President should 
not remove them from the list until such time that the Cuban 
government has become more democratic. We are a democracy, a 
democratic republic. We should act like it. We should embrace 
it, and we should not continue to allow bad actors to get away 
with whatever they want.
    This administration has been pathetically weak when it 
comes to taking on bad actors. China can fly a spy balloon 
across the entire continental United States without any 
repercussion. Russia can shoot down one of our drones without 
any repercussion.
    And my colleagues on the other side of the aisle twist 
themselves into knots trying to explain away socialism, 
communism, dictatorships, and it's embarrassingly pathetic.
    So, I encourage all of my colleagues to support this bill 
and continue to hold Cuba accountable for their bad acts until 
such time as they can finally see the light and treat their own 
residents, their own citizens, with the dignity and the decency 
that they deserve.
    I yield back.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
    Any further discussion?
    Mr. Self is recognized.
    Mr. Self. I have heard the distinction here between, across 
the aisle, the people of Cuba, and on this side, the regime of 
Cuba. ``Convincing them to adopt democracy'' was a phrase I 
heard from one of my colleagues across the aisle. You do not 
convince autocratic regimes to adopt democracy. Evil stalks the 
world. It continues to stalk the world, and dictators do not 
change simply because we want to convince them to adopt 
democracy.
    I also heard the phrase ``warming relations with Cuba'' 
during the Obama Administration. I will remind people that the 
Obama Administration also had ``warming relations'' with Iran 
through the JCPOA. And I understand it was not just the United 
States, but it was led by the United States to return at least 
$50 billion to Iran. And Iran is certainly on this list and 
should remain on this list, and Cuba should remain on this list 
as well because it is a dictatorship and it does support 
terrorism. And we're not talking about a terrorist State, which 
I also heard; it is a State-sponsoring nation.
    So, I am firmly committed to this bill. I yield back.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
    Any further discussion?
    Mr. Mills is recognized.
    Mr. Mills. I want to point out a couple of things that we 
keep talking about here, and the same countries that continue 
to get notified, which is Iran, North Korea, China, Russia--the 
geopolitical alignment that we already know has formed and who 
is actually one of the biggest advocates of malign activities, 
whether that be from a kinetic response, as we're seeing with 
Russia in Ukraine; whether that be with China's continual 
aggression from an economic and resource perspective. But one 
thing is very clear. Chairman Xi has continued to try outreach 
to expand his global mechanism to strangle the American people.
    And it is a target on the West and our hemisphere. We have 
seen this, as my colleague has properly pointed out, with 
regard to the expansion of Chavez of Venezuela or Petro in 
Columbia, or in Honduras, who just separated their ties with 
Taiwan, at China's behest.
    We are seeing a continuation of the stronghold to cutoff 
the Western Hemisphere supply chain, whether that be through 
the Eurasian expansion, Asia, and Africa--or, sorry--Oceania 
and Africa takeover for the Road and Belt Initiative, or the 
increased taxation and tariffs in control of the Panama Canal. 
Or, what about the 500 football-field-sized satellite that is 
sitting in our own hemisphere, as my colleague, Ms. Salazar, 
has pointed out multiple times, that the State Department and 
others do not even recognize?
    We keep talking about terrorism as if it has to only be in 
a kinetic element, but we have to understand that terrorism can 
also be through cyberterrorism. It can also be through the 
threats and the terroristic capabilities of trying to cutoff 
food supply, as we're seeing, or supply chains to the West--the 
economic coercion that is undermining the United States 
continually.
    And we have seen time and time again, as my colleague from 
Texas pointed out with the failed Resolution 2231 or JCPOA, 
where we reward people, thinking it's going to take them off of 
the State sponsor of terrorism, when, in fact, they were in 
continual violations--``they'' being Iran--when it came to 
small and midrange ballistic missile capabilities being 
shuttled across into Yemen, utilized by the Houthis, and 
sponsoring terrorism there.
    So, my point in all of this is to say, we are continuing to 
see the malign activities building up more and more and more at 
the behest of China and Russia, who is a very solid partnership 
with Cuba and has been for 50 and 60-plus years.
    And for my colleagues to continually ignore this, and try 
to say that we need Cuba to act as if it's an individual malign 
actor, is nonsense. I stand in strong support of Ms. Salazar's 
bill to fight the oppression until the reign of Castro ends. I 
support a democratic process for a free Cuba, which is what the 
Cuban people have been fighting for and who have been 
dissidents as a result of this.
    But the reality is this, and I will correct one thing that 
one of my colleagues said: America is unique not because we are 
a democracy. We are not a democracy. We are a constitutional 
republic that protects our people.
    And until Cuba can do this and separate itself from the 
malign actors, they should remain on this list until anyone can 
prove to me otherwise.
    With that, I yield back.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
    Any further discussion?
    There being no further discussion of the bill, the 
committee will move to consideration of amendments.
    Does any member wish to offer an amendment?
    The ranking member is recognized.
    Mr. Meeks. I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman McCaul. The clerk shall distribute the amendment.
    The clerk shall report the amendment.
    The Clerk. ``Amendment to H.R. 314 offered by Mr. Meeks of 
New York.
    Page 2, after line 8, insert the following:
    Waiver. The''----
    Chairman McCaul. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [The amendment offered by Mr. Meeks follows:]

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes 
on his amendment.
    Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And I have a very simple amendment that I think that all of 
my colleagues should be able to support. And that's simply 
adding a waiver to this legislation.
    As I Stated at our first markup last month, there will not 
be bipartisan sanctions legislation in this committee without a 
waiver of some sort included within the legislation. And I hold 
myself to this same standard.
    For example, I want a more aggressive sanctioning of 
corrupt leaders of Haiti and the criminal gangs that lead to 
anarchy and violence in the streets of Port-au-Prince. And my 
legislation on the markup would impose mandatory sanctions on 
such individuals.
    But I can imagine times where we will need to work with 
unsavory characters to make sure Haitians can access food and 
basic humanitarian assistance. And that's why in my bill, which 
we'll talk about later, there is a waiver. And that's why this 
bill needs one also.
    My amendment here applies, basically, the same standard 
that Chairman McCaul applied to his bill in the DATA Act. So, 
it is something that I believe everyone on both sides of the 
aisle should be able to say yes to, because in that one we did.
    It simply would allow the President to waive the provisions 
of this legislation, should doing so be vital--if we waive it 
and there's a vital interest to America's national security 
interest. And on this, I genuinely hope that my amendment is 
something that we can look at and say we care about the Cuban 
people. So, we should waive certain things in these crises to 
help the Cuban people. So, this is really about the Cuban 
people. I would hope that everyone would be able to support 
this amendment.
    And I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
    Any other members seek recognition?
    The gentlelady, the author of the bill, Ms. Salazar, is 
recognized.
    Ms. Salazar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And respectfully, I disagree with Ranking Member Meeks 
because this amendment undermines the bill that I am 
introducing, because it prevents the law, which is the Libertad 
Act, or better known as the Helms-Burton law, from being 
followed.
    And basically, all that law says is that Cuba has to follow 
some of the democratic rules--free speech, basic freedoms, 
political activity, release political prisoners, free and fair 
elections, independent judiciary, trade unions and associations 
to be independent--simple stuff, what we have as a democracy 
and as a constitutional democracy, as my colleague mentioned.
    So, if we adopt or if we agree with your proposed amendment 
to H.R. 314, that will, then, do away with what we're 
presenting in this law, H.R. 314.
    Mr. Meeks. Will the gentlelady yield?
    Ms. Salazar. And it allows the national security interests 
to keep a communistic dictatorship 90 miles away from the 
United States on the list. So, I think it should be in the 
hands of Congress, just like the Helms-Burton is, and not in 
the hands of the President, because he could be swayed--not 
only this President, but any other, he could be swayed by 
political interests.
    And unfortunately, it's been 63 years of the Cuban people 
are in the hands of the most evil dictator that the Americas 
have seen. And so, for that reason, I believe that your 
amendment should not be considered.
    Thank you. I yield back.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentlelady yields back.
    Any further discussion?
    There being no further discussion, the question now occurs 
on the amendment offered by Representative Meeks, the ranking 
member.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, signify by saying no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not----
    Mr. Meeks. Mr. Chairman, on that, I ask for a roll call 
vote.
    Chairman McCaul. A roll call vote has been requested.
    Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote 
will be postponed.
    Are there any further amendments?
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove is recognized.
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman McCaul. The clerk shall distribute the amendment.
    The clerk shall report the amendment.
    The Clerk. ``Amendment to H.R. 314 offered by Ms. Kamlager-
Dove of California.
    Page 2, beginning on line 5''
    Chairman McCaul. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [The amendment offered by Ms. Kamlager-Dove follows:]

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Chairman McCaul. The gentlelady is recognized for 5 minutes 
on her amendment.
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    As we have discussed, H.R. 13--314 ties the removal of Cuba 
State sponsor of terrorism designation to conditions that have 
nothing to do with the support for terrorism. This would 
evidently weaken any incentive to change alleged terrorism-
related behavior because doing so would not result in the 
lifting of the SSOT sanctions. My amendment would simply strike 
these counterproductive requirements and make the designation 
conditioned solely on meeting SSOT criteria.
    Anyone who believes that Cuba would legitimately qualify 
for this classification should support my amendment. I have 
made it easy. Given that an exhaustive review by the 
intelligence community in 2015 concluded that Cuba was not in 
fact an actor similar to North Korea, Iran, or Syria. This 
amendment highlights the attempted weaponization of the SSOT 
for punitive politically driven purposes. I urge all of my 
colleagues to support this commonsense amendment and I yield 
back.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentlelady yields back.
    I oppose this amendment. Any other members seek 
recognition?
    Ms. Salazar is recognized.
    Ms. Salazar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Once again this new amendment undermines the bill that we 
just introduced, H.R. 314. Why? Because it eliminates the 
reference to the LIBERTAD Act. The LIBERTAD Act is law right 
now, which is the one that codifies the United States' embargo 
against Cuba. And that law--all it says is that Cuba could join 
the international community if it were to behave like a 
responsible actor, a Democratic constitutional democracy. Once 
again, free speech, basic human rights, political activities, 
release political prisoners; 55 of them are less than 18 years 
old, allow and accept and assure the right to private property, 
make commitments to free and fair elections, establish an 
independent judiciary, simple things what we have that we 
aspire for Cubans to have and for the rest of the hemisphere to 
enjoy as well.
    So by this amendment that was just introduced eliminates 
that reference to the LIBERTAD Act which enumerates what I just 
presented and allows the President to unilaterally remove Cuba 
from the list. And once again it should be in the hands of the 
legislature, in the hands of the U.S. Congress, not in the 
hands of the Executive because he could--he or she in the 
future could be motivated by political interests. Thank you. I 
yield back.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentlelady yields back.
    Do any other members seek recognition?
    The ranking member is recognized.
    Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I support this amendment. A State sponsor of terror 
designation should not depend on your status on a well-
respected human rights poll. It should not depend on your World 
Bank ease of doing business ranking. It should not depend on 
whether your country has good relations with the United States, 
but it should depend on whether you are a sponsor of 
international terrorism.
    Cuba was removed from the State Sponsor of Terrorism list 
in 2015 after an exhaustive review by experts at the State 
Department and in the intelligence community. It was the Trump 
administration. And they did not cite any new facts to justify 
its decision to relist Cuba in the waning days of his 
administration.
    By the way, it was during the same time this country's 
attention was still glued to the events of January the 6th. By 
the way, it is the same president that had in Mar-a-Lago Orban 
from Hungary. It is the same president that had a bromance with 
someone who is on the State Terrorist list, Kim Jong-un. It is 
the same president who had and said that Russia's intelligence 
was better than ours and accepted Russia's Statements against 
the United States. Same guy. But he said nothing different in 
regards talking about Cuba.
    It sounds simple because it is simple. A State sponsor of 
terror designation should be about a State sponsoring what? 
Terrorism.
    I support this amendment. All of the States, as Mr. Sherman 
talked about earlier, that they say that Cuba supports et 
cetera in--on the Western Hemisphere, none of them are on the 
State Sponsor of Terrorism list. So I support this amendment 
and I urge everyone to do the same.
    Mr. Sherman. Will the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Meeks [continuing]. Back.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
    Any other members seek recognition?
    Mr. Self? I am sorry, Mr. Mast recognized.
    Mr. Mast. Thank you, Chairman.
    I just wonder if the ranking member will define the word 
bromance for us? I am happy to yield.
    Mr. Meeks. Yes. Bromance is when someone says I talk to him 
a lot. I got to know him very well. He was very smart, very 
cunning, very streetwise and we spoke a lot. Actually we spoke 
a lot and I think we had a really, you know, a great 
relationship. I don't know if you remember when we started that 
relationship. It was very, very nasty then, but now we get 
along. That is a----
    Mr. Mast. Are you describing a bromance or is that the 
definition of a bromance?
    Mr. Meeks. That is a bromance.
    Mr. Mast. Could you give me the definition of----
    Mr. Meeks. I call that a bromance. That is----
    Mr. Mast. Give me the definition of a bromance.
    Mr. Meeks [continuing]. President--from the former 
president of the United States.
    Mr. Mast. Thanks.
    Mr. Meeks. That is a bromance.
    Mr. Mast. This is definitely not a bromance, but thank you 
for your attempt.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
    Mr. Mast. I yield.
    Chairman McCaul. And thanks for that enlighting definition.
    The chair recognizes Mr. Self.
    Mr. Self. For once I agree with the ranking member. This is 
very simple. The year 2015 tells you everything you need to 
know about this amendment. 2015 is also the year that the JCPOA 
was instituted. And he said that President Trump introduced no 
facts. We didn't need to introduce any new facts because they 
were already known. So once I agree with the ranking member, 
but everything he argued argues against this amendment. Thank 
you very much. I yield back.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
    Any further discussion?
    Let me just say I oppose this amendment. The definition of 
a State sponsor of terrorism is a country that has repeatedly 
supported acts of terrorism. I believe the Cuban regime 
embodies this definition.
    With that, there being no further discussion, the question 
now occurs on the amendment offered by Ms. Kamlager-Dove.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, signify by saying no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it; the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Meeks. Mr. Chairman, with that I would ask for a roll 
call vote.
    Chairman McCaul. Roll call vote has been requested. 
Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote will 
be postponed.
    Are there any further amendments?
    Mr. Jackson is recognized.
    Mr. Jackson of Illinois. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Chairman McCaul. The clerk shall distribute----
    Mr. Johnson of Louisiana. I have an amendment at the desk. 
I have major concern with the----
    Chairman McCaul. Mr. Jackson will pause while your 
amendment is being circulated and then I will recognize you to 
speak on your amendment.
    Mr. Jackson of Illinois. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman McCaul. Thank you.
    The clerk shall report the amendment.
    The. Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 314 offered by Mr. Jackson of 
Illinois. At the end of the bill add the following: Section 3--
--
    Chairman McCaul. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with. The gentleman is recognized for 5 
minutes on his amendment.
    [The amendment offered by Mr. Jackson of Illinois follows:]

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Jackson of Illinois. Mr. Chair, I have major concerns 
with the FORCE Act because I do not believe that Cuba meets the 
requirements for a State sponsor of terror. I am also concerned 
that we are trying to issue--we are tying issues unrelated to 
terrorism to a State sponsor of terror designation. This is not 
how our foreign policy should work.
    I share the sponsor's interest in helping the people of 
Cuba, a country that I have traveled to several times, but do 
not believe this legislation is the way to bring about change 
on the island.
    My amendment is simple. It would sunset the legislation 
after 2 years. It has been long the policy of my friends across 
the aisle to support sunset on legislation. The very 
legislative protocol on the majority leader's website 
emphasizes the importance of sunsets and sanctions legislations 
put forward by Chairman McCaul last markup also had a sunset.
    Even if we disagree on the underlying legislation, I feel 
that we should all agree that it is important not to lack--to 
lock in a permanent policy that would be difficult to change 
when circumstances change or alter. I urge all of my colleagues 
to support my amendment.
    And for a point of record I would like to note that 
President Castro, or however you call him, died 7 years ago. So 
when we talk about his regime, he has not been dead longer than 
the statute of limitations. Thank you.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
    Any further discussion on the amendment?
    Mr. Lawler is recognized.
    Mr. Lawler. Thank you.
    I would just note last week Secretary of State Blinken 
said, quote/unquote, ``We are not planning to remove Cuba from 
the list.'' So for my colleagues who say that they don't meet 
the definition, that they are not a State sponsor of terrorism, 
that we on this side of the aisle are wrong about this, then 
you should pick up the phone and talk to the Secretary of State 
because he agrees with us that they clearly meet the 
definition, which is why the administration is not making any 
efforts to remove them from the list.
    So this bill would simply make it clear that the President 
and the Secretary of State, who have agreed with us that they 
are not removing Cuba from the list, cannot do so until such 
time as Cuba complies with the LIBERTAD Act. So I yield back.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
    Any further discussion?
    The ranking member is recognized.
    Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I support this amendment. It would sunset the legislation 
after 2 years and would give Congress and the executive branch 
more flexibility should circumstances on the ground change in 
the years to come. The majority leaders have a legislative 
protocol on sunsetting legislation precisely because it allows 
Congress the flexibility to do its job. And that is what this 
will do. If circumstances change, Congress can move quickly 
because we have sunsetted and we had the opportunity to look at 
it.
    And with that I yield back the balance of my time and ask 
everyone to support it.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
    Any further discussion on the amendment?
    Let me say that I opposed this amendment. I believe it 
would be irresponsible to remove Cuba from the State Sponsor of 
Terrorist list based on an arbitrary timeline. So we must focus 
on their dangerous behavior until it stops.
    There being no further discussion, the question now occurs 
on the amendment offered by Mr. Jackson.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, signify by saying no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. The 
amendment is not agreed to.
    The ranking member is recognized.
    Mr. Meeks. I request the yeas and nays.
    Chairman McCaul. Roll call vote has been requested. 
Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement this vote will be 
postponed.
    Are there any further amendments?
    Pursuant to notice I now call up H.R. 1684, the Haiti 
Criminal Collusion Transparency Act of 2023.
    [The Bill H.R. 1684 follows:]

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Chairman McCaul. The bill was circulated in advance and the 
clerk shall designate the bill.
    The. Clerk. H.R. 1684, a bill to require the Secretary of 
State to submit an annual report to Congress regarding the ties 
between criminal gangs and political and economic elites in 
Haiti and impose sanctions on political and economic elites 
involved in such criminal activities.
    Chairman McCaul. Without objection, the first reading is 
dispensed with. The bill is considered read and open to 
amendment at any point.
    I now recognize myself for a Statement on the bill.
    Ranking Member Meeks and Congresswoman Cherfilus-McCormick, 
I want to thank you both for introducing this measure to 
address the lawlessness and corruption in Haiti.
    We had a hearing on this very issue and it is astounding 
how organized crime and gangs have taken over, like these 
warlords almost similar to Somalia in Haiti. And that is why I 
strongly support this measure.
    I think the rising levels of gang violence, political 
instability, kidnappings of Haitian and American citizens, 
poverty remains exceptionally high making Haiti the poorest 
country in the region and one of the most dangerous. To make 
matters worse Haiti has been experiencing a resurgence of 
cholera since last October after no cases were documented for 
over 3 years.
    I remain deeply troubled by the deteriorating health 
conditions as well as the violent warfare being waged by these 
warlords making it impossible for Haiti to find any stable form 
of governance. As I said, it is very reminiscent of Somalia and 
the situation there.
    I think these corrupt oligarchs, political elites use these 
gangs as brokers to advance their own personal interest and 
economic financial at the expense of the people. The absent 
government combined with the total lack of law and order is a 
primary driver of illegal immigration against the United 
States. So this measure is welcome, a welcome step in shining a 
light on the criminal activity in Haiti and to look at--to 
sanction those who are engaged in it.
    Specifically it will require the State Department to 
examine and report on times between gangs and the political and 
economic elites, establish visa restrictions, targeted 
sanctions against gangs, and Haiti's political and economic 
elite. While Haiti's challenges are difficult, the United 
States must remain committed to stopping this. And I was 
actually quite shocked when we had our hearing to hear that our 
international law enforcement is virtually absent from Haiti, 
and the Caribbean for that matter.
    And, Mr. Chairman, I look forward--not only do I support 
this measure, but I look forward to working with you on future 
legislation to address this rising problem.
    And with that, I yield back and I yield to you, Ranking 
Member Meeks.
    Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And thank you for those words and thank you for joining 
with us.
    And I want to thank Congresswoman Cherfilus-McCormick for 
her hard word and--on this bill also.
    There are as many as 200 gangs in Haiti who now control at 
least 60 percent of Port-au-Prince. The number of reported 
homicides for 2022 increased by 35.2 percent. Without a doubt 
Haiti is in a dire situation. The United Nations Office on 
Drugs and Crime report released in 2023 report that 
increasingly sophisticated and high-caliber firearms and 
ammunition are trafficked to--into Haiti amid an unprecedented 
and rapidly deteriorating security situation.
    Haiti also remains a trans-shipment country for drugs, 
primarily cocaine and cannabis, which mostly enter the country 
via boat or plane arriving through public and private and 
informal ports, as well as clandestine runways.
    Haiti's borders are porous and the challenges of patrolling 
1,100 miles of coastline and a 243-mile land border with the 
Dominican Republic are overwhelming the capacities of Haiti's 
national police, customs, border patrols, and coast guard who 
are severely understaffed and under-resourced and increasingly 
targeted by gangs.
    And while I have seen some forward movement recently with 
vital support from the Biden administration on police training 
this January and the announcement and roll out of sanctions 
last October, heavily armed criminal gangs are targeting ports, 
highways, critical infrastructure, custom officers, police 
stations, courthouses, prisons, businesses, and neighborhoods. 
And we need to continue to apply pressure.
    The ongoing political paralysis has led to further de-
stabilization which is being felt by Haitians across the 
country and those living in the diaspora. The United States 
should not and cannot be in the business of appointing leaders 
in sovereign nations. Last Congress I made it clear that the 
pathway toward stability must be by coordinated and led--must 
be coordinated and led by the Haitian people.
    Our job is to listen to the people of Haiti, work with our 
regional partners to add a semblance of stability in the 
country. This means continuing to investigate those involved in 
illegal trafficking of firearms from the United States to 
Haitian gangs. It means holding corrupt officials accountable 
by ensuring that these actors are not allowed to travel freely 
to the United States or own houses and other assets in our 
country. It also means assisting Haiti in finding closure and 
moving past the horrific assassination of Former President 
Moise.
    This is why I introduced this bill along with Chairman 
McCaul and of course subcommittee Chairwoman Salazar and 
Representative Cherfilus-McCormick in a bipartisan effort to 
ensure that Congress receives regular reports on the role that 
Haitian economic and political elite play in masterminding and 
providing support for Haitian gangs. We must ensure that we do 
not repeat previous United States mistakes in Haiti.
    In order to move away from the political paralysis that has 
gripped Haiti over the last few years the Haitian people need 
to believe that their voices matter, that their government is 
there to help. We know that these conditions are causing the 
rise in migration out of Haiti as people seek safety at any 
cost.
    We have a duty to make sure that we identify and hold 
accountable those who relish in the chaos caused by supporting 
gang activity using kidnappings and rape to control and silence 
communities and use coercion to bring youth in and around the 
Port-au-Prince into the disservice of criminal activity. We 
cannot allow them to walk around--the gang leaders and those 
that are supporting them to walk around with impunity. We must 
show the people of Haiti that they have the opportunity to take 
this and control themselves and not allow the gangs to rule and 
dictate and that the United States will hold accountable those 
that try to travel back and forth from Haiti and commit these 
committal--these terrible acts and criminal activity.
    So I ask--and again thank the chairman. I support this 
measure and I ask everyone else to do the same. I yield back 
the balance of my time.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
    Any further discussion on the bill?
    Let me say also the women impacted in Haiti is probably the 
most egregious and disturbing out of all of this, but Ms. 
Kamlager-Dove is recognized.
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    I want to express my support for H.R. 1684, the Haiti 
Criminal Transparency Collusion Act, and I am so excited that 
this is bipartisan.
    The deteriorating humanitarian and security crisis in Haiti 
is unprecedented in the Western Hemisphere. One of our closest 
neighbors is experiencing what the U.N. High Commissioner on 
Human Rights describes as a living nightmare with sexual 
violence, kidnappings, displacement, and indiscriminate killing 
as part of an everyday life for so many there.
    The situation in Haiti is not receiving the urgent 
spotlight that it deserves. It rarely does. It rarely does. The 
Haitian people have a long history of resilience and grit in 
the face of relentless manmade and natural disasters. This is a 
country born out of the fight for dignity and human rights 
against colonialism, systemic racism, and slavery. Haiti can 
and it will persevere.
    This bill says that we should not write the situation off 
as hopeless and insurmountable. We must continue to support the 
Haitian people with intentional policies and concerted 
international action. I am glad that this bill takes a strong 
step in holding accountable those who are perpetuating and 
benefiting from the country's chronic insecurity. I hope that 
this is the first step and not an only step.
    I have to say I was at the U.N. yesterday and we can do 
more, we should do more, we need to do more. That was what I 
heard at every meeting.
    And, Mr. Chair, I am not surprised that the international 
community has been absent in Haiti. Haiti has always gotten a 
salty side-eye from the international community because of its 
history of really fighting and winning against the French long, 
long ago. And we have an obligation, we have an obligation to 
stay with Haiti, to go to Haiti, and to be supportive of a 
country that needs us and that needs us to help in the right 
way. We cannot in good conscience stand by as a humanitarian 
catastrophe unfolds miles from our shores against folks with 
African descent who need to see us. And I urge my colleagues to 
support this bill. I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentlelady yields back.
    Any further discussion on the bill?
    Mrs. Cherfilus-McCormick. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, 
for supporting this bill.
    And thank you so much, Ranking Member Meeks, for your 
leadership, especially when it comes to the Haitian people.
    This bill is extremely important to the Haitian community 
and America, especially since we see many of these political 
elites are living in South Florida, are living throughout the 
United States, and are buying homes, shipping weapons every 
single day.
    It impacts us even more when we have a couple who--33-
years-old living in my district who has been kidnapped. They 
were on their way in Haiti doing mission work to try and help 
the Haitian people and they got on the bus and they asked for 
the Americans and kidnapped them. This is our first attempt in 
actually trying to resolve this issue and I hope that we can 
work bipartisan-ly to make sure we have more initiatives so we 
can help the Haitian people, but also the Haitian Americans who 
are suffering from this situation. Thank you so much.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentlelady yields back.
    Any further discussion on the bill?
    Mr. Lawler is recognized.
    Mr. Lawler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I want to thank the ranking member for introducing this 
legislation.
    I have one of the largest Haitian diaspora in my district, 
primarily in Spring Valley, New York. And the concerns about 
the political and economic crises in Haiti are significant. And 
obviously when we look at what occurred with respect to the 
assassination of the president and the fallout from that, as 
well as the continued gang activity and the links between the 
Haitian political class and the economic elites with the 
country and the impact that that is having on the residents of 
Haiti and on the diaspora, I think this legislation is 
critically important.
    I think as we discussed with the previous legislation, it 
is important for the United States to take a leadership role in 
our hemisphere and to be working with our allies, but to also 
crack down where there is corruption, where there are 
challenges in our region of the world. And I think Haiti is a 
perfect example of that. We have a vested interest in it and we 
need to be doing more to help root out the political 
corruption, the gang activity, and the economic corruption 
which has had a devastating impact on the people of hearing.
    So I am fully in support of this legislation and I thank 
the ranking member for bringing it forward.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
    Any further discussion on the bill?
    Mr. Jackson is recognized.
    Mr. Jackson of Illinois. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I would like to also recognize on behalf of the Haitian 
community--we have to keep in perspective, if you will, the 
United States this is a debtor to Haiti. Haiti has long been an 
ally of the United States. Haiti was the first country of 
Africans to have thrown off the yoke of colonialism and 
enslavement and they were punished. Haiti didn't finish paying 
reparations back to its colonial powers until 1940's in the 
United States. And since then we have had a no-trade/no 
development policy with them.
    So Haiti doesn't come here begging. Haiti comes here 
looking for assistance. They are a dignified people and, 
frankly, we lose credibility in the world and our standing when 
we have the poorest country off of our coast because we have 
been ambivalent and indifferent toward giving them assistance. 
They are also a people of tremendous integrity having 
recognized Taiwan. They don't sidestep the need for Taiwanese 
recognition. They have had the courage to do so and to peril 
themselves by not getting any assistance from us or them. So I 
strongly encourage that we support our Haitian colleagues and 
comrades.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
    Any further discussion on the bill?
    Mr. McCormick?
    Mr. McCormick. Thank you, sir. This is very pertinent to a 
discussion I had just last night from a guy who was actually my 
translator during the Haitian earthquake in which lots of 
people died. We did fasciotomies. We had a whole mission field 
go over there and help them out. And we still see the same 
problems since before and after the earthquake a decade later. 
Just a quick interaction.
    This is a guy who has been back and forth. He does his own 
church there. He is literally in fear of his life. When he 
comes over here to raise money for his mission--one of the 
interesting things just happened just last night when he was 
texting me he said I reapply for the visa today. I pray they 
renew it. The worst case scenario is if they call me to come to 
the embassy for an interview in person. I would hate taking the 
risk to go to Port-au-Prince. I pray that everything happens 
online. In other words, he fears for his life just to go into 
the capital to apply for a visa at an embassy.
    Furthermore, when I said that, look, we need to go out, we 
need to make sure we have better security in this country 
that's right next door to us. He literally said; and this is 
the--one of the poorest people I know, ``That would be amazing 
thing. That's what we need. We do not need money as much as we 
need security and peace.'' In other words, poverty is one thing 
you can deal with, but you cannot deal with a scenario where 
you may be kidnapped or robbed at any given time, where your 
wife who just gave birth can't get food because you are worked 
to even go to the store. The fact that we have gone in there 
with Marines before and we had the same problem later is 
egregious.
    I was just talking to my fellow Congressman and freshman 
Ronny Jackson last night about how we have a United Nations for 
a reason. I am not sure what--the reason other than a lot of 
times they speak against the United States and against Israel, 
but besides that I have yet to see them step up and actually do 
something in this very, very impoverished country that needs to 
peace as much as it needs money. And with that I yield.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
    Any further discussion on the bill?
    There being no further discussion, the committee will move 
to consideration of amendments. Does any member wish to offer 
an amendment?
    Mr. Perry is recognized.
    Mr. Perry. Mr. Chairman, I have got an amendment at the 
desk.
    Chairman McCaul. The clerk shall distribute the amendment.
    Mr. Cicilline. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman McCaul. Point of order is recognized.
    The clerk shall report the amendment.
    The. Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 1684 offered by Mr. Perry of 
Pennsylvania. Page 6, after line 18. Insert the following: 
Including a list of each criminal organization assessed to be 
trafficking Haitians and other individuals to the United States 
border.
    Chairman McCaul. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is 
recognized for 5 minutes on his amendment.
    Mr. Perry. I thank the chairman.
    This amendment simply requires reporting, reporting on the 
rampant human trafficking coming from these criminal 
organizations to our already overwhelmed southern border.
    Having a better understanding to what extent these groups 
continue to traffic humans to our southern border is crucial to 
solving the issues we face at the southern border, and quite 
honestly, any one of our borders.
    Criminal organizations commit heinous crimes against those 
they traffic and they literally have no regard for life, for it 
is not humane to operate an open border that encourages all the 
violence and dehumanization associated with human trafficking. 
And it is why it is crucial that we specifically have reporting 
language regarding human trafficking because not only is it 
crucial to the region's security, but it is crucial to the 
United States' national security.
    In closing this amendment simply helps us understand the 
scope and severity of how Haitian criminal organizations are 
trafficking populations to our borders and informs Congress so 
that we can make more informed and better decisions regarding 
solutions to those problems.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption and I yield the 
balance.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
    Let me say I support this amendment.
    Any other members seek recognition?
    The ranking member is recognized.
    Mr. Meeks. Mr. Chairman, the people of Haiti and the entire 
region impacted by the crises Haiti faces deserve to know which 
organizations and individuals support de-stabilizing criminal 
activity including those who take advantage of desperate people 
who are already extremely vulnerable and traffic them 
throughout the region making financial gains at every stop 
along the way.
    So I strongly support this amendment and ask my colleagues 
to do the same. I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
    Any further discussion on the amendment?
    There being no further discussion, does the gentleman, Mr. 
Cicilline, insist on his point of order?
    Mr. Cicilline. I do not, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman McCaul. The gentleman withdraws his point of 
order.
    The question now occurs on the amendment offered by Mr. 
Perry.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, signify by saying no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the 
amendment is agreed to.
    There being no further amendments, I move that the 
committee report H.R. 1684, as amended, to the House with a 
favorable recommendation.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, signify by saying no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the 
motion is agreed to.
    Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the 
table. Staff is authorized to make any technical and conforming 
change.
    Committee will recess for about 10 minutes subject to the 
call of the chair. The clerk will send out a notice when we 
reconvene to vote.
    [Recess.]
    Chairman McCaul. The committee will come to order.
    The committee postponed further proceedings on the recorded 
vote on amendment No. 8 offered by Representative Meeks on 
which the noes had prevailed by voice vote.
    The question occurs on agreeing to the amendment. The clerk 
will call the roll.
    The Clerk. Representative Smith?
    Smith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Wilson?
    Representative Wilson?
    Mr. Wilson. No.
    The Clerk. Wilson votes no.
    Representative Perry?
    Mr. Perry. No.
    The Clerk. Perry votes no.
    Representative Issa?
    Mr. Issa. No.
    The Clerk. Issa votes no.
    Representative Wagner?
    Wagner?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Mast?
    Mr. Mast. No.
    The Clerk. Mast votes no.
    Representative Buck?
    Buck?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Burchett?
    Mr. Burchett. No.
    The Clerk. Burchett votes no.
    Representative Green?
    Mr. Green. No.
    The Clerk. Green votes no.
    Representative Barr?
    Mr. Barr. No.
    The Clerk. Barr votes no.
    Representative Ronny Jackson?
    Jackson?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Young Kim?
    Mrs. Kim of California. No.
    The Clerk. Kim votes no.
    Representative Salazar?
    Ms. Salazar. Salazar votes no.
    The Clerk. Salazar votes no.
    Representative Huizenga?
    Mr. Huizenga. No.
    The Clerk. Huizenga votes no.
    Representative Radewagen?
    Mrs. Radewagen. Nay.
    The Clerk. Representative Radewagen votes no.
    Representative Hill?
    Mr. Hill. Hill no.
    The Clerk. Hill votes no.
    Representative Davidson?
    Mr. Davidson. No.
    The Clerk. Davidson votes no.
    Representative Baird?
    Mr. Baird. No.
    The Clerk. Baird votes no.
    Representative Waltz?
    Mr. Waltz. No.
    The Clerk. Waltz votes no.
    Representative Kean?
    Mr. Kean. No.
    The Clerk. Kean votes no.
    Representative Lawler?
    Mr. Lawler. No.
    The Clerk. Lawler votes no.
    Representative Mills?
    Mr. Mills. No.
    The Clerk. Mills votes no.
    Representative McCormick?
    Mr. McCormick. No.
    The Clerk. McCormick votes no.
    Representative Moran?
    Mr. Moran. No.
    The Clerk. Moran votes no.
    Representative James?
    Mr. James. No.
    The Clerk. James votes no.
    Representative Self?
    Mr. Self. No.
    The Clerk. Self votes no.
    Ranking Member Meeks?
    Mr. Meeks. Aye.
    The Clerk. Meeks votes aye.
    Representative Sherman?
    Mr. Sherman. Aye.
    The Clerk. Sherman votes aye.
    Representative Connolly?
    Mr. Connolly. Aye.
    The Clerk. Connolly votes aye.
    Representative Keating?
    Keating?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Cicilline?
    Mr. Cicilline. Aye.
    The Clerk. Cicilline votes aye.
    Representative Bera?
    Mr. Bera. Yes.
    The Clerk. Bera votes aye.
    Representative Castro?
    Castro?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Titus?
    Ms. Titus. Aye.
    The Clerk. Titus votes aye.
    Representative Lieu?
    Mr. Lieu. Aye.
    The Clerk. Lieu votes aye.
    Representative Wild?
    Ms. Wild. Aye.
    The Clerk. Wild votes aye.
    Representative Phillips?
    Mr. Phillips. Aye.
    The Clerk. Phillips votes aye.
    Representative Allred?
    Mr. Allred. Aye.
    The Clerk. Allred votes aye.
    Representative Andy Kim?
    Kim?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Jacobs?
    Ms. Jacobs. Aye.
    The Clerk. Jacobs votes aye.
    Representative Manning?
    Ms. Manning. Aye.
    The Clerk. Manning votes aye.
    Representative Cherfilus-McCormick?
    Mrs. Cherfilus-McCormick. Aye.
    The Clerk. Cherfilus-McCormick votes aye.
    Representative Stanton?
    Mr. Stanton. Aye.
    The Clerk. Stanton votes aye.
    Representative Dean?
    Ms. Dean. Aye.
    The Clerk. Dean votes aye.
    Representative Moskowitz?
    Mr. Moskowitz. Aye.
    The Clerk. Moskowitz votes aye.
    Representative Jonathan Jackson?
    Mr. Jackson of Illinois. Aye.
    The Clerk. Jackson votes aye.
    Representative Kamlager-Dove?
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Si.
    The Clerk. Kamlager-Dove votes aye.
    Representative Costa?
    Costa?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Crow?
    Mr. Crow. Aye.
    The Clerk. Crow votes aye.
    Representative Schneider?
    Mr. Schneider. Aye.
    The Clerk. Schneider votes aye.
    Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman McCaul. The chairman votes no.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman votes no.
    Chairman McCaul. Are there any other members in the room 
who wish to have their vote recorded?
    Are there any other members who wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. On this vote the ayes are 20 and the noes are 
23.
    Chairman McCaul. The noes have it. The amendment is not 
agreed to.
    The committee postponed further proceedings on the recorded 
vote on amendment No. 7 offered by Representative Kamlager-Dove 
on which the noes had prevailed by voice vote.
    The question now occurs on agreeing to the amendment. The 
clerk will call the roll.
    The Clerk. Representative Smith?
    Smith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Wilson?
    Mr. Wilson. No.
    The Clerk. Wilson votes no.
    Representative Perry?
    Mr. Perry. No.
    The Clerk. Perry votes no.
    Representative Issa?
    Mr. Issa. No.
    The Clerk. Issa votes no.
    Representative Wagner?
    Wagner?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Mast?
    Mr. Mast. No.
    The Clerk. Mast votes no.
    Representative Buck?
    Buck?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Burchett?
    Mr. Burchett. No.
    The Clerk. Burchett votes no.
    Representative Green?
    Mr. Green. No.
    The Clerk. Green votes no.
    Representative Barr?
    Mr. Barr. No.
    The Clerk. Barr votes no.
    Representative Ronny Jackson?
    Jackson?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Young Kim?
    Mrs. Kim of California. No.
    The Clerk. Kim votes no.
    Representative Salazar?
    Ms. Salazar. Salazar votes no.
    The Clerk. Salazar votes no.
    Representative Huizenga?
    Mr. Huizenga. No.
    The Clerk. Huizenga votes no.
    Representative Radewagen?
    Mrs. Radewagen. Nay.
    The Clerk. Representative Radewagen votes no.
    Representative Hill?
    Mr. Hill. No.
    The Clerk. Hill votes no.
    Representative Davidson?
    Mr. Davidson. No.
    The Clerk. Davidson votes no.
    Representative Baird?
    Mr. Baird. No.
    The Clerk. Baird votes no.
    Representative Waltz?
    Mr. Waltz. No.
    The Clerk. Waltz votes no.
    Representative Kean?
    Mr. Kean. No.
    The Clerk. Kean votes no.
    Representative Lawler?
    Mr. Lawler. No.
    The Clerk. Lawler votes no.
    Representative Mills?
    Mr. Mills. No.
    The Clerk. Mills votes no.
    Representative McCormick?
    Mr. McCormick. No.
    The Clerk. McCormick votes no.
    Representative Moran?
    Mr. Moran. No.
    The Clerk. Moran votes no.
    Representative James?
    Mr. James. No.
    The Clerk. James votes no.
    Representative Self?
    Mr. Self. No.
    The Clerk. Self votes no.
    Ranking Member Meeks?
    Mr. Meeks. Aye.
    The Clerk. Meeks votes aye.
    Representative Sherman?
    Mr. Sherman. Aye.
    The Clerk. Sherman votes aye.
    Representative Connolly?
    Mr. Connolly. Aye.
    The Clerk. Connolly votes aye.
    Representative Keating?
    Keating?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Cicilline?
    Mr. Cicilline. Aye.
    The Clerk. Cicilline votes aye.
    Representative Bera?
    Mr. Bera. Yes.
    The Clerk. Bera votes aye.
    Representative Castro?
    Castro?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Titus?
    Ms. Titus. Aye.
    The Clerk. Titus votes aye.
    Representative Lieu?
    Mr. Lieu. Aye.
    The Clerk. Lieu votes aye.
    Representative Wild?
    Ms. Wild. Aye.
    The Clerk. Wild votes aye.
    Representative Phillips?
    Mr. Phillips. Aye.
    The Clerk. Phillips votes aye.
    Representative Allred?
    Mr. Allred. Aye.
    The Clerk. Allred votes aye.
    Representative Andy Kim?
    Mr. Kim of New Jersey. Aye.
    The Clerk. Kim votes aye.
    Representative Jacobs?
    Ms. Jacobs. Aye.
    The Clerk. Jacobs votes aye.
    Representative Manning?
    Ms. Manning. Aye.
    The Clerk. Manning votes aye.
    Representative Cherfilus-McCormick?
    Mrs. Cherfilus-McCormick. Aye.
    The Clerk. Cherfilus-McCormick votes aye.
    Representative Stanton?
    Mr. Stanton. Aye.
    The Clerk. Stanton votes aye.
    Representative Dean?
    Ms. Dean. Aye.
    The Clerk. Dean votes aye.
    Representative Moskowitz?
    Mr. Moskowitz. No.
    The Clerk. Moskowitz votes no.
    Representative Jonathan Jackson?
    Mr. Jackson of Illinois. Aye.
    The Clerk. Representative Jackson votes no--aye.
    Representative Kamlager-Dove?
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Si.
    The Clerk. Kamlager-Dove votes aye.
    Representative Costa?
    Costa?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Crow?
    Mr. Crow. Aye.
    The Clerk. Crow votes aye.
    Representative Schneider?
    Mr. Schneider. Aye.
    The Clerk. Schneider votes aye.
    Chairman McCaul. The chair votes no.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman votes no.
    Chairman McCaul. Are there any members in the room who wish 
to have their vote recorded?
    Any members who wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    Mr. Smith is recognized.
    The Clerk. Representative Smith?
    Mr. Smith. I vote no.
    The Clerk. Representative Smith votes no.
    Chairman McCaul. Now the clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. On this vote the ayes are 20 and the noes are 
25.
    Chairman McCaul. The noes have it. The amendment is not 
agreed to.
    The committee postponed further proceedings on the recorded 
vote on amendment No. 6 offered by Representative Jackson on 
which the noes had prevailed by voice.
    The question now occurs on agreeing to the amendment. The 
clerk will call the roll.
    The Clerk. Representative Smith?
    Mr. Smith. No.
    The Clerk. Representative Smith votes no.
    Representative Wilson?
    Mr. Wilson. No.
    The Clerk. Wilson votes no.
    Representative Perry?
    Mr. Perry. No.
    The Clerk. Perry votes no.
    Representative Issa?
    Mr. Issa. No.
    The Clerk. Issa votes no.
    Representative Wagner?
    Wagner?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Mast?
    Mr. Mast. No.
    The Clerk. Mast votes no.
    Representative Buck?
    Buck?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Burchett?
    Mr. Burchett. No.
    The Clerk. Burchett votes no.
    Representative Green?
    Mr. Green. No.
    The Clerk. Green votes no.
    Representative Barr?
    Mr. Barr. No.
    The Clerk. Barr votes no.
    Representative Ronny Jackson?
    Jackson?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Young Kim?
    Mrs. Kim of California. No.
    The Clerk. Kim votes no.
    Representative Salazar?
    Ms. Salazar. No.
    The Clerk. Salazar votes no.
    Representative Huizenga?
    Mr. Huizenga. No.
    The Clerk. Huizenga votes no.
    Representative Radewagen?
    Mrs. Radewagen. Nay. Nay.
    The Clerk. Representative Radewagen votes no.
    Representative Hill?
    Mr. Hill. No.
    The Clerk. Hill votes no.
    Representative Davidson?
    Mr. Davidson. No.
    The Clerk. Davidson votes no.
    Representative Baird?
    Mr. Baird. No.
    The Clerk. Baird votes no.
    Representative Waltz?
    Mr. Waltz. No.
    The Clerk. Waltz votes no.
    Representative Kean?
    Mr. Kean. No.
    The Clerk. Kean votes no.
    Representative Lawler?
    Mr. Lawler. No.
    The Clerk. Lawler votes no.
    Representative Mills?
    Mr. Mills. No.
    The Clerk. Mills votes no.
    Representative McCormick?
    Mr. McCormick. No.
    The Clerk. McCormick votes no.
    Representative Moran?
    Mr. Moran. No.
    The Clerk. Moran votes no.
    Representative James?
    Mr. James. No.
    The Clerk. James votes no.
    Representative Self?
    Mr. Self. No.
    The Clerk. Self votes no.
    Ranking Member Meeks?
    Mr. Meeks. Aye.
    The Clerk. Meeks votes aye.
    Representative Sherman?
    Mr. Sherman. Aye.
    The Clerk. Sherman votes aye.
    Representative Connolly?
    Mr. Connolly. Aye.
    The Clerk. Connolly votes aye.
    Representative Keating?
    Keating?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Cicilline?
    Mr. Cicilline. Aye.
    The Clerk. Cicilline votes aye.
    Representative Bera?
    Mr. Bera. Yes.
    The Clerk. Bera votes aye.
    Representative Castro?
    Castro?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Titus?
    Ms. Titus. Aye.
    The Clerk. Titus votes aye.
    Representative Lieu?
    Mr. Lieu. Aye.
    The Clerk. Lieu votes aye.
    Representative Wild?
    Ms. Wild. Aye.
    The Clerk. Wild votes aye.
    Representative Phillips?
    Mr. Phillips. Aye.
    The Clerk. Phillips votes aye.
    Representative Allred?
    Mr. Allred. Aye.
    The Clerk. Allred votes aye.
    Representative Andy Kim?
    Mr. Kim of New Jersey. Aye.
    The Clerk. Kim votes aye.
    Representative Jacobs?
    Ms. Jacobs. Aye.
    The Clerk. Jacobs votes aye.
    Representative Manning?
    Ms. Manning. Aye.
    The Clerk. Manning votes aye.
    Representative Cherfilus-McCormick?
    Mrs. Cherfilus-McCormick. Aye.
    The Clerk. Cherfilus-McCormick votes aye.
    Representative Stanton?
    Mr. Stanton. Aye.
    The Clerk. Stanton votes aye.
    Representative Dean?
    Ms. Dean. Aye.
    The Clerk. Dean votes aye.
    Representative Moskowitz?
    Mr. Moskowitz. Aye.
    The Clerk. Moskowitz votes aye.
    Representative Jonathan Jackson?
    Mr. Jackson of Illinois. Aye.
    The Clerk. Jackson votes aye.
    Representative Kamlager-Dove?
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Aye.
    The Clerk. Kamlager-Dove votes aye.
    Representative Costa?
    Costa?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Crow?
    Mr. Crow. Aye.
    The Clerk. Crow votes aye.
    Representative Schneider?
    Mr. Schneider. Aye.
    The Clerk. Schneider votes aye.
    Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman McCaul. The chairman votes no.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman votes no.
    Chairman McCaul. Are there any other members in the room 
who wish to have their vote recorded?
    Any members who wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. On this vote the ayes are 21 and the noes are 
24.
    Chairman McCaul. The noes have it and the amendment is not 
agreed to.
    There being no further amendments to dispense with, I move 
that the committee report H.R. 314 to the House with a 
favorable recommendation.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, signify by saying no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the 
motion is agreed to.
    Mr. Meeks. Mr. Chairman, I've got ask for a roll call vote.
    Chairman McCaul. A recorded vote has been requested. The 
clerk will call the roll.
    The Clerk. Representative Smith?
    Mr. Smith. Aye.
    The Clerk. Smith votes aye.
    Representative Wilson?
    Mr. Wilson. Aye.
    The Clerk. Wilson votes aye.
    Representative Perry?
    Mr. Perry. Aye.
    The Clerk. Perry votes aye.
    Representative Issa?
    Mr. Issa. Aye.
    The Clerk. Issa votes aye.
    Representative Wagner?
    Wagner?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Mast?
    Mr. Mast. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mast votes aye.
    Representative Buck?
    Buck?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Burchett?
    Mr. Burchett. Aye.
    The Clerk. Burchett votes aye.
    Representative Green?
    Mr. Green. Aye.
    The Clerk. Green votes aye.
    Representative Barr?
    Mr. Barr. Aye.
    The Clerk. Barr votes aye.
    Representative Ronny Jackson?
    Jackson?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Young Kim?
    Mrs. Kim of California. Aye.
    The Clerk. Kim votes aye.
    Representative Salazar?
    Ms. Salazar. Aye.
    The Clerk. Salazar votes aye.
    Representative Huizenga?
    Mr. Huizenga. Aye.
    The Clerk. Huizenga votes aye.
    Representative Radewagen?
    Mrs. Radewagen. Aye.
    The Clerk. Representative Radewagen votes aye.
    Representative Hill?
    Mr. Hill. Aye.
    The Clerk. Hill votes aye.
    Representative Davidson?
    Davidson?
    Mr. Davidson. Aye.
    The Clerk. Davidson votes aye.
    Representative Baird?
    Mr. Baird. Aye.
    The Clerk. Baird votes aye.
    Representative Waltz?
    Mr. Waltz. Aye.
    The Clerk. Representative Waltz votes aye.
    Representative Kean?
    Mr. Kean. Yes.
    The Clerk. Kean votes aye.
    Representative Lawler?
    Mr. Lawler. Aye.
    The Clerk. Lawler votes aye.
    Representative Mills?
    Mr. Mills. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mills votes aye.
    Representative McCormick?
    Mr. McCormick. Aye.
    The Clerk. McCormick votes aye.
    Representative Moran?
    Mr. Moran. Aye.
    The Clerk. Moran votes aye.
    Representative James?
    Mr. James. Aye.
    The Clerk. James votes aye.
    Representative Self?
    Mr. Self. Aye.
    The Clerk. Self votes aye.
    Ranking Member Meeks?
    Mr. Meeks. No.
    The Clerk. Ranking Member Meeks votes no.
    Representative Sherman?
    Mr. Sherman. No.
    The Clerk. Sherman votes no.
    Representative Connolly?
    Mr. Connolly. Nay.
    The Clerk. Connolly votes no.
    Representative Keating?
    Keating?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Cicilline?
    Mr. Cicilline. No.
    The Clerk. Cicilline votes no.
    Representative Bera?
    Mr. Bera. No.
    The Clerk. Bera votes no.
    Representative Castro?
    Castro?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Titus?
    Ms. Titus. No.
    The Clerk. Titus votes no.
    Representative Lieu?
    Mr. Lieu. No.
    The Clerk. Lieu votes no.
    Representative Wild?
    Ms. Wild. No.
    The Clerk. Wild votes no.
    Representative Phillips?
    Mr. Phillips. No.
    The Clerk. Phillips votes no.
    Representative Allred?
    Mr. Allred. No.
    The Clerk. Allred votes no.
    Representative Kim?
    Mr. Kim of New Jersey. No.
    The Clerk. Kim votes no.
    Representative Jacobs?
    Ms. Jacobs. No.
    The Clerk. Jacobs votes no.
    Representative Manning?
    Ms. Manning. No.
    The Clerk. Manning votes no.
    Representative Cherfilus-McCormick?
    Mrs. Cherfilus-McCormick. No.
    The Clerk. Cherfilus-McCormick votes no.
    Representative Stanton?
    Mr. Stanton. No.
    The Clerk. Stanton votes no.
    Representative Dean?
    Ms. Dean. No.
    The Clerk. Dean votes no.
    Representative Moskowitz?
    Mr. Moskowitz. Yes.
    The Clerk. Moskowitz votes aye.
    Representative Jonathan Jackson?
    Mr. Jackson of Illinois. No.
    The Clerk. Jackson votes no.
    Representative Kamlager-Dove?
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. No.
    The Clerk. Kamlager-Dove votes no.
    Representative Costa?
    Costa?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Representative Crow?
    Mr. Crow. No.
    The Clerk. Crow votes no.
    Representative Schneider?
    Mr. Schneider. No.
    The Clerk. Schneider votes no.
    Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman McCaul. The chairman votes aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman votes aye.
    Chairman McCaul. Have all members voted?
    Does any member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. On this vote the ayes are 25 and the noes are 
20.
    Chairman McCaul. In the opinion of the chair the ayes have 
it and the motion is agreed to.
    Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the 
table and staff is authorized to make any technical and 
conforming changes.
    This concludes consideration of the measures noticed by the 
committee for today. I want to thank all the members.
    There being no further business to transact, the committee 
stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 12:26 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]



                                 [all]