[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 7]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 9071]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     UNITED STATES EMBARGO ON CUBA

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. RON PAUL

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, April 9, 2003

  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise again in this Congress to introduce a 
bill to lift the harmful and counterproductive United States Embargo on 
Cuba.
  On June 29, 2001, the Texas state legislature adopted a resolution 
calling for an end to U.S. economic sanctions against Cuba. Lawmakers 
emphasized the failure of sanctions to remove Castro from power, and 
the unwillingness of other nations to respect the embargo. One Texas 
Representative stated:
  ``We have a lot of rice and agricultural products, as well as high-
tech products, that would be much cheaper for Cuba to purchase from 
Texas. All that could come through the ports of Houston and Corpus 
Christi.'' I wholeheartedly support this resolution, and I have 
introduced similar federal legislation in past years to lift all trade, 
travel, and telecommunications restrictions with Cuba. I only wish 
Congress understood the simple wisdom expressed in Austin, so that we 
could end the harmful and ineffective trade sanctions that serve no 
national purpose.
  I oppose economic sanctions for two very simple reasons. First, they 
don't work as effective foreign policy. Time after time, from Cuba to 
China to Iraq, we have failed to unseat despotic leaders by refusing to 
trade with the people of those nations. If anything, the anti-American 
sentiment aroused by sanctions often strengthens the popularity of such 
leaders, who use America as a convenient scapegoat to divert attention 
from their own tyranny. History clearly shows that free and open trade 
does far more to liberalize oppressive governments than trade wars. 
Economic freedom and political freedom are inextricably linked--when 
people get a taste of goods and information from abroad, they are less 
likely to tolerate a closed society at home. So while sanctions may 
serve our patriotic fervor, they mostly harm innocent citizens and do 
nothing to displace the governments we claim as enemies.
  Second, sanctions simply hurt American industries, particularly 
agriculture. Every market we close to our nation's farmers is a market 
exploited by foreign farmers. China, Russia, the middle east, North 
Korea, and Cuba all represent huge markets for our farm products, yet 
many in Congress favor current or proposed trade restrictions that 
prevent our farmers from selling to the billions of people in these 
countries. The Department of Agriculture estimates that Iraq alone 
represents a $1 billion market for American farm goods. Given our 
status as one of the world's largest agricultural producers, why would 
we ever choose to restrict our exports? The only beneficiaries of our 
sanctions policies are our foreign competitors.
  I certainly understand the emotional feelings many Americans have 
toward nations such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, and Cuba. Yet we must not let 
our emotions overwhelm our judgment in foreign policy matters, because 
ultimately human lives are at stake. Economic common sense, self-
interested foreign policy goals, and humanitarian ideals all point to 
the same conclusion: Congress should work to end economic sanctions 
against all nations immediately.
  The legislation I introduce today is representative of true free 
trade in that while it opens trade, it prohibits the U.S. Taxpayer from 
being compelled to subsidize the United States government, the Cuban 
government or individuals or entities that choose to trade with Cuban 
citizens.

                          ____________________