[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 105 (Thursday, July 15, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5951-S5953]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             TRAVEL TO CUBA

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, sometimes on the floor of the Senate, good 
friends disagree--perhaps not as often as some would think, but on 
occasion that is the case, and it is the case today, when I observed 
and listened to a presentation by my colleague from New Jersey on the 
subject of Cuba. I am sure we do not disagree about some parts of this 
subject; that is, I do not like the Cuban Government. I want freedom 
for the Cuban people. We, I assume, both believe that and believe the 
imprisonment of political prisoners in Cuba--who languish in Cuban 
jails for exercising their right of free speech and who are doing that 
in dark cells--is wholly unfair and we should as a country do 
everything we can to try to bring the vestige of freedom to the Cuban 
people. I understand all that. I support that strongly.
  I have been to Cuba. I have spoken to Cuban Government leaders. I 
have spoken to dissidents. I have spoken to people on the streets of 
Cuba. And I want Cuba, an island 90 miles off the shore of our country, 
to be a free country.
  Let me describe how long Cuba has had Communist rule and, by the way, 
how many Presidents we have had during that Communist rule and, 
therefore, the embargo that has been leveled against Cuba all these 
years. Let me describe how many Presidencies that embargo has existed 
through. The Presidencies begin with John F. Kennedy and go through 
this administration. That is 10 Presidencies.
  We slapped an embargo on the country of Cuba and punished the 
American people in the process by saying: We are going to limit your 
right to travel to Cuba. And we were going to shut off all commerce to 
Cuba, including, by the way, most of these years, a restriction on 
sending food and medicine to Cuba.
  The embargo has not seemed to work very well. It is now 50 years old, 
and it still exists. Well, what has happened as a result of the 
embargo? We have now a debate about what should happen with respect to 
our relationship with Cuba at this point. My colleagues say: Well, 
don't do anything that would reward the Cuban Government. Far from it. 
I have no interest in rewarding a government that I substantially 
disagree with, a government that I believe throws innocent people in 
jail. I have no interest, nor do the people who support the bill 
Senator Enzi and I have now offered in the Senate, with 40 Senators 
cosponsoring it--we have no interest in rewarding the Cuban Government. 
That is not the issue. But we do believe the restriction on the 
American people's rights--the decision by a government that says: We 
are going to tell the American people where they can and cannot 
travel--we believe that is inappropriate. We do believe that ought to 
change.
  So what I would like to do is talk about a couple things, including, 
No. 1, lifting the travel ban to Cuba and making it easier to sell food 
to Cuba.
  I was the person who changed the law 10 years ago that allowed for 
the first time just a crack in this embargo that allows us to sell food 
into Cuba if it is paid for with cash. I think it is immoral for a 
countty to use food as a foreign policy weapon. I do not think food 
ought to be part of any embargo. I think that is immoral.
  By the way, using food as a part of an embargo just hurts poor, sick, 
and hungry people. Do you think the Castro brothers have missed 
breakfast or lunch or dinner because we had an embargo on food 
shipments to Cuba? Hardly. So 10 years ago, I got the law changed. In 
fact, it was the Dorgan-Ashcroft amendment. I got the law changed. That 
allowed us to begin selling food into the country of Cuba. That was the 
first opportunity to make any changes at all in this embargo.
  Now the question is travel to Cuba by the American people. Should we 
continue to say to the American people: You have no right to travel to 
Cuba. We do not like the Cuban Government, so what we are going to do 
is restrict the rights of the American people? We have been doing that 
for 50 years, and it is time--long past the time--for it to change.
  Let me describe a letter that came recently to the House of 
Representatives.
  By the way, the reason this issue has now come to the forefront is 
the Agriculture Committee of the House of Representatives just passed a 
bill that lifts the travel restrictions on the American people to 
travel to Cuba. It also makes some changes in the conditions under 
which agricultural goods can be sold to Cuba, which is very important 
to do as well because even though 10 years ago I got the provision 
enacted into law that allows the sale of farm products for cash into 
Cuba, in 2003, as a runup to the 2004 election, President Bush 
tightened all of those provisions and actually changed a rule so that 
in order for Cuba to purchase goods from our country; that is, 
agricultural commodities, they had to pay in cash before the 
commodities were even shipped. Well, that never happens in a 
transaction. You pay cash when you get the goods. But President Bush 
was attempting to restrict the sale of agricultural products to Cuba. 
So we need to fix that as well.
  But the House of Representatives Agriculture Committee has now passed 
a bill lifting the travel ban. That means this issue is going to be 
front and center here in the Senate. Senator Enzi and I have the bill--
it is bipartisan--that would lift the travel ban to Cuba, and we have 
40 Senators who are cosponsors.
  Let me read to you a letter that was sent to the U.S. House of 
Representatives by 74 Cuban human rights leaders, dated May 30, 2010, 
just a month and a half ago. They said:

       The supportive presence of American citizens, their direct 
     help, and the many opportunities for exchange, used 
     effectively and in the desired direction, would not be an 
     abandonment of Cuban civil society but rather a force to 
     strengthen it. Similarly, to further facilitate the sale of 
     agricultural products would help alleviate the food shortages 
     we now suffer.
       The current Cuban government has always violated this right 
     [to travel] and in recent years has justified its actions 
     with the fact that the government of the United States

[[Page S5952]]

     also restricts its citizens' freedom to travel. The passage 
     of this bill would remove this spurious justification.

  This is not from me or the cosponsors of my bill; this is from 74 
Cuban human rights leaders.
  As to the issue of lifting the travel ban--the one we have slapped on 
the American people in order to punish somebody else; we have punished 
the American citizens because we are upset with somebody else--here are 
people who support lifting the travel ban: a political prisoner, 
Marcelo Rodriquez from Cuba; Guillermo Farinas, a hunger striker in 
Cuba; Yoani Sanchez, one of the leading political bloggers in Cuba; 
Oscar Chepe, a former political prisoner; and Miriam Leiva, founder of 
the Ladies in White.
  One of my colleagues recently had a poster I saw about the Ladies in 
White. The founder of the Ladies in White supports lifting this travel 
ban. They are not soft on Castro or soft on a Communist government. 
They just believe this travel ban should be lifted because it will be 
beneficial to their interests as leaders in human rights in the country 
of Cuba.
  The sacrifices of those whom I have shown here in photographs, the 
sacrifices they have made in Cuba--sitting in dark prison cells, hunger 
strikes, and more--I think give them great credibility when they speak 
out on what is the best way to promote democracy in Cuba.
  I indicated that I got a law passed that allowed us to sell some food 
into Cuba for cash. Since that time, U.S. farmers have sold $3.2 
billion worth of food to Cuba. I mentioned that in 2003 the Bush 
administration decided to dramatically change that to try to restrict 
the sale of agricultural products to Cuba, and they succeeded in some 
respects. We need to change that as well. It makes no sense to do what 
they did in 2003.
  But let me try to describe what was done in 2003 so that everybody 
understands what happened. The President, trying to get tough in 2003, 
eliminated the people-to-people visits program with Cuba; eliminated 
secondary school education travel with Cuba; restricted family travel 
to Cuba by Cuban Americans; restricted amateur athletic travel; 
prohibited gift parcels with clothing, personal hygiene items, soap-
making equipment, and so on; restricted religious travel; and then also 
imposed the cash-before-shipment rule in order to restrict the sale of 
agricultural commodities to Cuba. So that is where we have been with 
respect to what happened in the previous administration.
  President Obama has taken some unilateral actions since taking 
office. He has removed the restrictions on Cuban Americans who want to 
visit Cuba for family visits, and he has authorized U.S. 
telecommunications companies to sell their services in Cuba. I think he 
should go further immediately, and I think he has the capability to do 
that by restoring people-to-people visits to Cuba, permanently 
restoring the original definition of the term ``payment of cash in 
advance'' so that farmers can continue to sell agricultural products to 
Cuba. And especially, we need here in the Congress to pass S. 428, 
which is the Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act.
  The American people have the right to travel almost anywhere they 
wish. They could travel to Russia in the middle of the Cold War. In 
fact, we sent our philharmonic orchestra, in 1959, right at the height 
of the Cold War, to play music in Communist Russia. They were not 
restricted. There is no travel restriction with respect to Russia.
  The New York Philharmonic, in 2008, went to North Korea. And if you 
want to get a lump in your throat and feel really proud, go get the 
recording, the DVD, watching the New York Philharmonic play a concert 
in North Korea. It is extraordinary. But they were not prohibited from 
traveling to North Korea because you can travel to North Korea.
  You can travel to the country of Iran. This picture is from the 
Office of Foreign Assets Control, which is the office down in the 
bowels of the Treasury Department that determines how they are going to 
enforce the travel ban to Cuba. They say:

       All transactions ordinarily incident to travel to or from 
     Iran . . . are permitted.

  So let's review. You could travel to Russia in the middle of the Cold 
War. You can travel to Iran right now. You can travel to North Korea 
right now. North Korea is a Communist country. You can travel to China 
right now. China is a Communist country. You can travel to Vietnam 
right now. Vietnam is a Communist country. By the way, with respect to 
China, I am cochair of the Congressional Executive Commission on China. 
We have the world's most complete database of political prisoners held 
in China. There are very serious problems in China with respect to 
imprisonment of innocent people who are now sitting in the dark corners 
of cells in the farthest reaches of China, political prisoners, and we 
don't decide because of that we are not going to allow travel or trade 
with China or Vietnam. We have decided that engagement through travel 
and trade is the most productive way to move those countries toward 
greater human rights. It is only with Cuba that our country has decided 
it is not a strategy that works at all. What works is punishing the 
American people.

  So what we have done is decided we are going to punish the American 
people who wish to travel to Cuba by tracking them down--by diverting 
somewhere around 25 percent of the resources in the Office of Foreign 
Assets Control, which is a little office in the Treasury Department 
that is supposed to be working on tracking financing by terrorists. 
Instead, about a quarter of their time, I am told, is used to try to 
track American tourists who are being suspected of vacationing in Cuba. 
When they track them down, they get after them. They want to levy a big 
fine.
  I have described previously, and I will again, because my colleague 
who presented used a lot of posters to show what the circumstances are, 
but here is what the Office of Foreign Assets Control says with respect 
to travel to Cuba by an American citizen:

       Unless otherwise authorized, any person subject to U.S. 
     jurisdiction who engages in any travel-related transaction in 
     Cuba violates the regulations.

  So what does that mean? What are the consequences? Well, it means we 
are punishing the American people saying: We restrict your right to 
travel. So Carlos Lazo, a man whom I have met and who went to Iraq to 
fight for his country and who won a Bronze Star because he was brave 
and was a great soldier, came back to this country after having served 
his country in uniform, was awarded with great fanfare a Bronze Medal 
for bravery, and then was told, when he was informed--he had two sons 
living in Cuba and his older son was sick--you have no right to travel 
to Cuba to see your sick child. Unbelievable. In fact, I even forced a 
vote in the Senate on this question.
  Sergeant Lazo, back from Iraq, with a sick son in Cuba was told: You 
have no right to travel. Unbelievable. Yet that was the case.
  I have shown this photograph many times, but it is useful to describe 
how unbelievably foolish these policies are. This is Joan Scott. The 
Presiding Officer knows Joan Scott as well. She went to Havana to 
distribute free Bibles on the streets of Havana. For that, her 
government tracked her down and tried to fine her $10,000. For going to 
Cuba to distribute free Bibles, this government is going to track its 
citizens down to try to fine them $10,000.
  I have met Joan Slote as well. She was riding bicycles in Cuba. She 
joined a Canadian bicycle tour and took a bicycle trip to Cuba. This 
government of ours tracked her down and tried to fine her $10,000. By 
the way, this woman, I think, made $1,100 a month in Social Security, 
and her government decided to try to attach her Social Security 
payments. What was her transgression? What was her crime? She took a 
bicycle trip to Cuba as an American citizen.
  I don't think there needs to be said very much more about this. This 
is the most unbelievable policy with respect to Cuba. I have been to 
Vietnam, I have been to China--both Communist countries. We decided 
engagement through trade and travel is constructive. It works. It is 
why I assume the legislation Senator Enzi and I have offered is 
cosponsored by Senator Lugar, the ranking member of the Senate Foreign 
Relations Committee; Senator Dodd, the chairman of the Banking 
Committee and chairman of the Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere 
Affairs. They are part of the 40 Senators who have cosponsored 
legislation saying to our government: Would you stop

[[Page S5953]]

punishing the American people because you are upset with somebody else, 
and would you stop being so unbelievably inconsistent?
  Don't tell us that trade and travel is a constructive way to deal 
with Communist countries and then tell us that dealing with Cuba 90 
miles off our shore requires us to punish the American people by 
restricting their right to travel.
  I say again: What right does this government have to tell an American 
citizen where they can travel? They can go to North Korea, Iran, China, 
Vietnam, but not travel to Cuba. That is obscene. It makes no sense to 
me. Aside from we ought to stop doing stupid things, aside from just 
that notion, we surely ought to decide that it is not in the interests 
of this country to have its government telling people how, when, and 
where they can travel.
  I wish to finish by just saying this again. I don't deny there are 
substantial human rights abuses in Cuba. I have been there. I have 
talked to the dissidents. I have talked to the Cuban people who have 
come to this country who know of, who have seen, who have watched the 
unbelievable lack of human rights that exist in that country. So that 
is not the point. The point isn't to deny the charts that people show 
on the floor of the Senate showing abuse. I could bring to the floor of 
the Senate, as chairman of the commission that deals with China, dozens 
of photographs of Chinese prisoners held in the darkest cells in the 
farthest reaches of China who have done nothing but are suffering. But 
we have not decided as a country that we will restrict the American 
people's right to go to China because that exists in China. We have set 
quite the opposite policy. We believe the best way to promote a march 
toward greater human rights in China and Vietnam and elsewhere is 
through trade and travel. That is the construction that this country 
has taken for a long while, except with respect to Cuba. In that 
circumstance, we say, no, we must, we must, we must prevent Americans 
from traveling to Cuba.
  I say, again, 74 leading Cuban human rights leaders have signed a 
letter sent to us from Havana, Cuba--74 of them--and have said: Lift 
this travel ban. This travel ban makes no sense. You want to help Cuba? 
You want to help the people of Cuba? Lift this travel ban.
  I also would say again, if I can find the chart that I had, the very 
brave citizens in Cuba who have spoken out and who are widely 
recognized, who have suffered: Marcelo Rodriquez, Yoani Sanchez, 
Guillermo Farinas, Oscar Chepe, and Miriam Leiva, all of them have 
suffered in Cuba. All of them believe this travel ban ought to be 
lifted.
  I hope this Senate pays some attention to that and finally sees we 
can't do two things at the same time: No. 1, stop punishing the 
American people because we disagree with another country's government 
and, No. 2, do smart things that allow us to find ways to push and move 
that government toward greater human rights for its citizens.
  Lifting the travel ban will accomplish both because there are 40 of 
us in the Senate who have sponsored and cosponsored legislation to lift 
that travel ban. When we have the opportunity for that vote in the 
Senate, I believe we will prevail at last--at long last--and we will 
prevail, and it will be constructive public policy for this country to 
have done so. Certainly, it will have lifted the yolk of oppression by 
a government that restricts the rights of its own citizens--I am 
talking about our government--that will lift the yolk of oppression 
that has existed for some 50 years by a government that tells its 
citizens where it can and cannot travel.
  I don't want to hear any more about a government that tracks down a 
guy from the State of Washington whose father was a minister in a small 
church in Cuba, who immigrated to this country, and his father died and 
his father's last wish was that his ashes would be strewn on the church 
property in Cuba where he was a minister. So his son carried out his 
father's wish. He went to Cuba and took his father's ashes to the 
church where he once served and deposited them on the lawn by that 
church. For that his government tracked him down and attempted to levy 
a very substantial fine on that young man from the State of Washington.
  I am tired of those stories. Those stories are an embarrassment about 
public policy gone wrong, and we need to fix it.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________