[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 161 (Wednesday, October 18, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S15277]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     CUBAN LIBERTY AND DEMOCRATIC SOLIDARITY [LIBERTAD] ACT OF 1995

  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, before the Senate proceeds to vote on the 
cloture motion on the substitute to H.R. 927, the Cuban Liberty and 
Democratic Solidarity Act, I state for the record that if cloture is 
invoked, it is my intention to seek recognition and to lay before the 
Senate amendment No. 2936, the Libertad Act, with titles I and II only.
  I thank the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, if I could use a little bit of my leader 
time?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                            the cloture vote

  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I understand why the chairman made the 
decision to delete title III from the Cuban Liberty and Democratic 
Solidarity Act. A determined minority--at the urging of the White 
House--was able to prevent action on the legislation. Mr. President, 94 
percent of Republicans voted to invoke cloture, and 17 percent of 
Democrats voted for cloture. I commend the Members of both sides of the 
aisle willing to bring debate on this measure to a close. I know for 
the Democrats it is not easy to stand up to the kind of White House 
blitz that has occurred.
  Once again, the White House says one thing and does another. The 
White House talks about toughening the embargo on Cuba, and then works 
to undermine the sanction Castro fears most. The White House says it 
wants bipartisanship in foreign policy--in fact they are pleading with 
us on Bosnia--and then uses partisan arguments to derail this 
legislation. Policy toward Castro's Cuba has been a perfect example of 
three decades of bipartisan cooperation. In the House, 67 Democrats 
supported a tougher version of this legislation. Nine Senate Democrats 
support cloture, and I expect many more would without the kind of 
pressure coming from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Let there be no 
mistake--White House inflexibility has forced the change made today.

  As I said last week, the Dole-Helms amendment--we already made 10 
changes to address administration concerns. We were willing to make 
more to address issues raised in this debate--raising the threshold for 
legal action from $50,000 to $100,000 for example, or extending the 
effective date from 6 months to 2 years after enactment. These are 
changes that will presumably be considered in conference on H.R. 927.
  I supported title III as drafted in the Dole-Helms substitute. Yes, 
it does give a new right of legal action that could bring more suits 
before American courts. But if clogging up the court system is a 
concern of the White House or of opponents of this bill, I call on them 
to join with me to enact comprehensive tort reform. Opponents of this 
bill say title III would create a right for Cuban-Americans not enjoyed 
by Polish-Americans. They are right. And there is one critical 
distinction--today, Poland is free while Cuba suffers under the boot of 
Castro's repression.
  That is what it really comes down to--the Cuban people continue to 
suffer while Castro searches for ways to finance his dictatorship. 
There are legitimate differences over the best way to bring democratic 
change to Cuba but we should be very clear about one thing: It is the 
chilling effect on investment in Cuba caused by the provisions of title 
III that worries Fidel Castro the most.
  I expect the Senate to conclude action relatively quickly on this 
legislation. The international embargo on Cuba will be strengthened, 
and important provisions for the eventual transition to democracy will 
be enacted. I remain hopeful--and I say this in a spirit of 
bipartisanship; we had it work in some other areas, not as many as we 
should--that we can continue to work out a solution to the issue of 
property stolen by Fidel Castro so that is acceptable to at least 60 
Senators.
  Again, I commend my colleagues on this side and the others on the 
other side, and I hope, now that title III has been deleted, we could 
have an overwhelming vote for cloture, let us go to conference, let us 
work in a reasonable way--with the White House, if they would like to. 
I am certain the Senator from North Carolina would be willing to do 
that.
  Mr. HELMS. Hear, hear.
  Mr. DODD. I ask unanimous consent I be able to address Senate for 1 
minute.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from North Carolina. I 
intend to vote for cloture as a result of the amendments he has made.
  Let me say to my colleagues, this title III had virtually nothing to 
do with Cuba and an awful lot to do with our own claims process in this 
country. While Poland may be free today, Vietnam and the Peoples 
Republic of China are not. That would create unique distinctions for 
those of Cuban nationality. While I have great sympathy for them, in 
terms of their right to bring actions for expropriated property, this 
would create an egregious raid on the Treasury, in my view.
  My hope would be the House would adopt the Senate language, in the 
absence of title III and other provisions, so that we would be able to 
move forward and send this bill to the President for his signature.
  So I support cloture and urge my colleagues to do so, that we then 
might consider other amendments on this legislation and move forward 
with the bill.
  But our objections, those of us who did object to this, had little or 
nothing to do with White House pressure, but rather our own examination 
of the bill and our recognizing the problems associated with title 
III--as I said a moment ago, an egregious raid on the Treasury of the 
United States.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired.

                          ____________________