[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 122 (Thursday, July 19, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5094-S5095]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                                  Cuba

  Mr. CRUZ. Madam President, I rise today to give tribute to the spirit 
of the Cuban people--the people of my forefathers, who still live under 
a corrupt and violent Communist regime--and to honor the memory of 
Oswaldo Paya. Oswaldo was a champion for freedom. He died 6 years ago 
this Sunday, on July 22, 2012, in a car crash that is widely believed 
to have been orchestrated by the Castro regime.
  The plight of the brave people of Cuba has been marked by terrible 
suffering under both the Castro regime and the brutal dictatorship of 
Fulgencio Batista before it. The Castros and their revolutionary 
terrorist lackeys, like Che Guevara, are responsible for the suffering 
and murder of countless innocent Cubans. It is because of these 
oppressors that my family fled their beloved home in Cuba for a better 
life in the United States.
  My father, born and raised in Cuba, fought in the revolution, 
initially believing that the principles of freedom were what the 
revolution was all about. He fought against Batista, a cruel dictator, 
and he was imprisoned and tortured by Batista's thugs.
  Then my aunt, his younger sister, my tia Sonia--who was there after 
the revolution succeeded, who discovered along with the rest of the 
world that Fidel Castro was a Communist, who saw the torture and the 
murder--my aunt fought in the counterrevolution against Fidel Castro, 
and she, too, like her brother, was imprisoned and tortured, except 
this time by Castro's thugs.
  Both my father and my aunt were kids. They were kids who believed 
they were fighting for freedom, and they discovered they went from one 
tyrant to an even worse tyrant, a Communist dictator who would line up 
dissidents and shoot them.
  The betrayal, the brutality, and the violence experienced by my 
father and by my aunt were all too typical of the millions of Cubans 
who have suffered under the Castro regime of the last six decades. 
Fidel may be dead, Raul may be retired, but the evil of the Castros 
persists. It still molds the Cuban regime's fundamental opposition to 
truth, to freedom, and to human rights.
  But the malice and menace of communism cannot break down the will of 
the Cuban people. Instead, it has strengthened their resolve. It has 
further united them to fight for freedom and build a better future for 
their country, to establish a free Cuba--a Cuba not streaked by the 
ashes of dissident literature or littered with the corpses of 
defenseless teenagers; a Cuba built on human decency and individual 
liberty, where citizens are heard, not murdered, and speech is 
protected, not silenced. It is the Cuba envisioned by Oswaldo Paya 
Sardinas, his Christian Liberation Movement, and their fellow activists 
who continue to stand against the Castro regime. It is the Cuba of the 
young bloggers who expose the regime's crimes and corruption at the 
risk of arrest, deportation, torture, or worse.
  With time, the oppressions of the Castro regime gave rise to 
remarkable leaders like Oswaldo Paya, whose life's work was the 
peaceful overthrow of communism and whose legacy we honor today. 
Oswaldo dedicated his life to promoting democratic freedoms and human 
rights in Cuba. His memory continues to inspire dissidents in Cuba and 
in other countries under tyrannical rule, countries like Venezuela, 
where Nicolas Maduro routinely imprisons and murders those who dare 
speak out against him, or Nicaragua, where the corrupt Ortega regime 
desperately clings to power by persecuting journalists and violently 
putting down protesters.
  Last year, I introduced legislation to commemorate Oswaldo's legacy 
by naming the street in front of the Embassy of Cuba, located right 
here in Washington, as ``Oswaldo Paya Way.'' It would send a powerful 
statement that here in the United States of America, we stand with 
freedom fighters

[[Page S5095]]

like Oswaldo Paya who are working to bring hope and liberty to 
oppressed nations, who are working to make a better Cuba, free of the 
horrors of Communist rule.
  I have never been to my father's homeland. I have never been to Cuba. 
My father has not returned to Cuba in over 60 years. I look forward to 
one day visiting Cuba, hopefully with my dad, with my tia Sonia, my 
cousin Bibi, with my whole family, my two girls, and seeing a free 
Cuba--where people can live according to their beliefs without fear of 
imprisonment, violence, or oppression, but today is not that day.
  There are many, like Oswaldo, who have fought for this vision for a 
free Cuba, who are no longer with us, but their struggle will endure, 
and their spirits will shine a light through the darkest nights. We 
will never forget them, nor cease fighting to bring about the free Cuba 
they died for. Today, and on July 22, and each day thereafter, they 
will be remembered, ``Viva Cuba libre.''
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, soon, the Senate will vote on the Ryan 
Bounds nomination, and I want to make sure each Member of the Senate is 
aware of two important issues as they prepare to cast their votes on 
the Bounds nomination to serve on the Ninth Circuit.
  First, Mr. Bounds flagrantly misrepresented his background to our 
bipartisan Oregon judicial selection committee. This is the committee 
that was tasked with vetting his nomination--a process I have worked on 
with Republicans for literally two decades. I was pleased to work with 
our former colleague Senator Smith on this. I worked with the late Mark 
Hatfield on this. Now it is a pleasure to work with Senator Merkley, 
and the bipartisan efforts we have had produced this selection, a 
process. Mr. Bounds misrepresented--in my view, really lied--as he 
covered up disturbing, intolerant writings from his past.
  Among many hateful matters he wrote about, he defended homophobic 
vandals who damaged a gay pride monument. He argued against efforts to 
protect the survivors of sexual assault on college campuses because, he 
wrote, he didn't think that would guarantee absolute safety.
  As I indicated earlier, what outraged me, and shocked me, was his 
comparison of organizations that promote multiculturalism and tolerance 
in America to Nazi rallies. I am the child of Jewish parents who fled 
Nazi terror in Germany. Not all of our family got out. My great Uncle 
Max was among the last to be gassed at Auschwitz. For Mr. Bounds to 
compare groups that lift up minorities in America to Nazis is an 
extraordinary and dark stain on his character. For him to have 
concealed these writings from Oregon's bipartisan selection committee 
is disqualifying.
  He never acknowledged these writings until they were uncovered and 
then posed a threat to his nomination. To this day, he has not fully 
recanted the abhorrent views that are reflected in that content. Five 
of the seven members of the bipartisan judicial selection committee, 
including the Chair, said recently they would not have included Mr. 
Bounds among their recommended candidates had they known about the 
writings as he was vetted.
  Our bipartisan committee forwarded Mr. Bounds' name, along with 
others, as part of this process, and they said if Mr. Bounds had been 
straight with them, he would have told them about these offensive 
writings, but he misled them by keeping that secret.
  The second issue, this is the first time in the 101-year history of 
what is called the blue-slip process where a nomination moved forward 
without a blue slip from either home State Senator. Senator Merkley and 
I withheld our blue slips specifically because of what I described, 
these lies about omission. We didn't consent to a hearing, a debate on 
the floor, but Chairman Grassley and Majority Leader McConnell barreled 
right ahead.
  Leader McConnell even told the New York Times that blue slips ought 
to be viewed as nothing more than an indication of how Senators might 
vote on a given nominee. That was not the tune Republicans were singing 
in 2009. Democrats then occupied the Oval Office, held the gavel of the 
Judiciary Committee, and every Member--every Member--of this body who 
sat on that side of the Chamber in the Republican conference sent a 
letter to President Obama and then-Chairman Leahy saying that the 
nomination's process was ``needlessly acrimonious.'' They wanted to 
return to an era of bipartisanship. Then, they said:

       We hope your Administration will consult with us as it 
     considers possible nominations to the federal courts from our 
     states. Regretfully, if we are not consulted on, and approve 
     of, a nomination from our states, the Republican Conference 
     will be unable to support moving forward to that nominee.

  In 2009, while in the minority, everyone who sat on that side of the 
Chamber rushed to defend blue slips as a statement of senatorial 
courtesy and collegiality. What a difference a few years makes.
  What is happening now cheapens the advice and consent role of the 
Senate, something delegated to us by the Founding Fathers. The White 
House wants the Senate to act as a rubberstamp on whatever nominees are 
sent our way. The majority seems perfectly willing to go along with 
that.
  My colleagues on the other side need to be aware of the new reality--
this new reality where the blue slips don't matter--they are creating. 
This is going to be the end of the blue-slip process as it has worked 
in the Senate to promote good government on both sides of the aisle. 
This breach of a century of bipartisan protocol is going to further 
drive the judiciary to the partisan extremes.
  As we consider this nomination in a few minutes, this means lights-
out--lights-out--for this important bipartisan tradition. The nominee 
we will be voting on concealed disturbing, intolerant writings from his 
past, misleading the bipartisan committee that reviewed his candidacy. 
Moving his nomination forward, in the face of that information and 
without the blue slips from Senator Merkley and myself, destroys more 
than a century of bipartisan tradition and certainly expands the power 
of the executive branch of the President.
  What we learned earlier this week is it would take only one U.S. 
Senator on the other side--of all the people sitting over there, it 
would take only one to stop this abomination of a process. I hope one 
of my colleagues will be swayed by the horrendous writings Mr. Bounds 
lied to conceal.
  This has been a sad moment for the Senate and a rejection of the kind 
of bipartisanship this body ought to bring to judicial nominations, the 
kind of bipartisanship I have been honored to be part of in Oregon for 
two decades. I urge my colleagues to vote no on the Bounds nomination.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sasse). The Senator from Michigan.