[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 67 (Tuesday, May 20, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H2928-H2929]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      IT IS TIME TO ENFORCE HELMS-BURTON AGAINST THE CASTRO REGIME

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 21, 1997, the gentleman from Florida [Mr. McCollum] is 
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to 
discuss an important issue: How do we rid Castro, or Cuba I guess, of 
the despot Castro, is what I should say? Today is May 20. This is known 
as Cuban Independence Day, when Cuba was granted independence from 
Spain as a result of the Spanish-American War. However, the Cuba of 
today is looking for a new independence, one that grants them freedom 
from the hideous dictatorship of Fidel Castro.
  Cuba has been under a dictatorship for about 38 years now. It is no 
secret that Fidel Castro is still exercising his power in a manner 
contradictory to the most basic human rights held by all people. This 
is an absolute disgrace that such a regime exists only 90 miles from my 
home State of Florida. We, as a Nation, must work to correct this. We 
should have a long time ago.
  Sometimes the only way to undermine a dictatorship short of some 
direct military force is through the pocketbook. In the past, Cuba 
could rely heavily on Soviet assistance for propping up its economy. 
Now that the Soviet Union no longer exists, Cuba must find benefit from 
a great deal of foreign investment and trading. It has done just that. 
According to the Cuban Government, 260 joint ventures were concluded by 
the end of 1996, with more than $2.1 billion in foreign capital.
  Madam Speaker, we obviously cannot block all trade with Cuba without 
a little blockade of the island. However, we can work for a free Cuba 
that respects human rights in another manner. To that end Congress did 
its job in 1996 and passed the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity 
Act, otherwise known as Libertad or Helms-Burton. This legislation 
tightened the screws on Castro and had a solid chance for significant 
impact in bringing down the Castro dictatorship. It would have done so 
through three significant provisions. It codified all existing Cuban 
embargo Executive orders and regulations, it denied admission to the 
United States to aliens involved in the confiscation of United States 
property in Cuba or the trafficking of confiscated property in Cuba, 
and it allowed U.S. nationals to sue for money damages in U.S. Federal 
court those persons that traffic in United States property confiscated 
in Cuba when Castro took over.
  The first of these provisions may not be waived by the President, but 
the President was granted authority to waive title III in Helms-Burton, 
in part allowing U.S. nationals to sue in Federal court, if he 
determines that such a delay would be in the national interest

[[Page H2929]]

and would expedite a transition to democracy in Cuba. It is unfortunate 
that President Clinton, on January 3, 1997, decided to waive title III 
of Helms-Burton for the second time and has indicated that come the 
early part of July he will probably waive it for the third time. It was 
an outrageous move that kowtowed to our allies and to the business 
interests abroad rather than to the American national security 
interests.
  It is outrageous because the biggest problem facing us is seeing the 
demise of the Castro dictatorship in Cuba is not a mystery at all. It 
is our allies in Europe, Canada, and Mexico who trade with Castro, 
sustaining his illegitimate regime. What is most disturbing is that 
some foreign firms not only work with Castro, but do so using stolen 
U.S. property.
  When Castro took power in Cuba, he confiscated private property of 
countless United States firms and interests. Not only did he rob these 
Americans of their rightfully owned property, he then continued to use 
these assets, retaining the profits to sustain his regime. This 
continues to this day.
  Furthermore, there are private foreign interests taking advantage of 
the confiscated property, making money in Cuba on stolen United States 
property. Practices such as this should not be tolerated anywhere in 
the world regardless of the circumstances. This unjust enrichment is 
taking place in Castro's Cuba despite the fact that title III of the 
Helms-Burton Act would have stopped that from happening.

                              {time}  1045

  It would have placed a significant disincentive to deal in 
confiscated U.S. property, making foreign firms benefiting from unjust 
enrichment in Cuba subject to United States lawsuits, United States 
courts, if they do business in the United States.
  Even though President Clinton succumbed to the interest of foreign 
businesses and waived title III, just the threat of sanctions resulted 
in several foreign companies reconsidering their investments in Cuba. 
If the current administration would actually follow through and 
implement all of Helms-Burton, we would see a great number of foreign 
interests reconsidering their Cuban involvement, thereby cutting off 
critical cash to the Castro regime.
  Unfortunately, President Clinton has made a horrible decision, 
knowing that the business interests of our neighbors are putting 
pressure on those governments, and those governments on our 
governments. Instead, he has thwarted the national interests of our 
people in bringing democracy and respect of human rights to Cuba and of 
our private citizens and businesses who would have the right to recover 
their lost profits from foreign profiteers dealing in property stolen 
by Castro if they could just sue in United States courts.
  Is the administration going to continue to look the other way, or 
will the United States actually work for democracy in Cuba? When are 
the tough decisions going to be made that will actually bring Castro 
down?
  What has happened is a picture of hypocrisy. The law was signed with 
much fanfare and praise that Cuba would finally see some measures, only 
to have those tough measures immediately waived after enactment, and 
then again in January of this year, and probably again in July. Is that 
responsible? Is that honest? Madam Speaker, it is not.
  I urge the enforcement of the Helms-Burton Act and will submit a bill 
in July to make sure that that waiver provision no longer exists if Mr. 
Clinton continues to waive that provision.

                          ____________________