[House Report 111-653]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
111th Congress } { Rept. 111-653
2d Session } HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES { Part 1
=======================================================================
TRAVEL RESTRICTION REFORM AND EXPORT ENHANCEMENT ACT
_______
September 29, 2010.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Peterson, from the Committee on Agriculture, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 4645]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Agriculture, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 4645) to remove obstacles to legal sales of United States
agricultural commodities to Cuba and to end travel restrictions
on all Americans to Cuba, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill
do pass.
Brief Explanation
The Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act
prohibits the President from: (1) regulating or prohibiting
travel to or from Cuba by U.S. citizens or lawful permanent
residents or any transactions incident to such travel; and (2)
restricting direct transfers from a Cuban financial institution
to a U.S. financial institution executed in payment for a
product authorized for sale under the Trade Sanctions Reform
and Export Enhancement Act of 2000.
The bill also amends the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export
Enhancement Act of 2000 to define ``payment of cash in
advance'' as the payment by the purchaser of an agricultural
commodity or product and the receipt of such payment by the
seller prior to: (1) the transfer of title of such commodity or
product to the purchaser; and (2) the release of control of
such commodity or product to the purchaser.
Purpose and Need
Cuba relies on imports for most of its food needs and,
between 2000 and 2006, Cuba's food and agricultural imports
nearly doubled. In 2008, Cuba imported about $1.8 billion in
agricultural products, compared to $550 million in 2000, with
the U.S. share of these imports averaging about 35 percent
annually. In 2008, due to higher food prices and natural
disasters in Cuba, U.S. agricultural sales to Cuba reached $708
million, consisting mostly of wheat, corn, poultry, and animal
feed. In the first 10 months of 2009, however, U.S. exports to
Cuba were valued at $449 million, 25% lower than the same time
period in 2008.
Other trading partners have dramatically increased their
exports to Cuba. Brazil's exports to Cuba have tripled since
2005. Exports from Canada and New Zealand have each doubled.
Agricultural producers in the United States are well positioned
to benefit from additional trade in Cuba--U.S. suppliers can
reach the three major Cuban ports in a matter of one day or
less, compared to 25 days from Brazil. However, even though
U.S. firms offer reliable trading partners, quality products,
and competitive prices, current U.S. policy hampers their
ability to supply the Cuban market.
U.S. agricultural exports to Cuba are allowed, but with
numerous restrictions and licensing requirements. In 2000,
Congress passed the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export
Enhancement Act of 2000 (TSRA--PL 106-387), which allows for
one-year export licenses for selling agricultural commodities.
TSRA denies exporters access to U.S. private commercial
financing or credit; all transactions must be conducted in cash
in advance of shipment or with financing from third countries.
In 2005, the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets
Control (OFAC) clarified that TSRA's term of ``payment of cash
in advance'' means that the payment is received by the seller
or the seller's agent prior to the shipment of the goods from
the port at which they are loaded. Since then, producers have
been able to export agricultural products to Cuba so long as
they received cash payment in advance of shipment and went
through a third party country's bank to complete the
transaction. According to the International Trade Commission,
following this decision, the value of Cuban agricultural
imports from the United States dropped by 10% in 2005 and a
further 4% in 2006.
U.S. regulations, such as those requiring the Cuban
government to pay for U.S. agriculture products in cash or
through letters of credit drawn on third-country banks, raise
the cost of U.S. goods for Cubans and appear to limit U.S.
sales.
In December 2009, language was included in the FY2010
Omnibus (PL 111-117) to clarify that ``payment in advance''
means payment prior to the transfer of title to the Cuban
purchaser. However, this provision is a single-year provision
and will expire at the end of the fiscal year.
During a hearing held by this Committee in March 2010,
agricultural producers testified as to the effect of removing
both these restrictions and lifting the ban on travel. Rice
producers in the United States have been the most negatively
affected by the regulatory restrictions. In 2004, Cuba
purchased approximately $64 million in U.S. rice. However,
since that time, exports of U.S. rice to Cuba fell to zero in
2009. National Association of Wheat Growers president Jerry
McReynolds stated that the U.S. should have close to an 85%
share of the Cuban market similar to the U.S. share of the rest
of the Caribbean market. Unfortunately, due to our export
restrictions, that share is down to 38%. If H.R. 4645 were to
pass, U.S. wheat producers could gain close to $100 million.
With regard to dairy, it was estimated that eliminating all
of the financing and travel restrictions on U.S. agricultural
exports to Cuba would have boosted 2008 dairy sales to Cuba
from $13 million to between $39 and $87 million and increased
U.S. market share that year from 6 percent to 18 to 42 percent.
Soy producers pointed out that the inherent advantages due
to the United States' proximity to Cuba mean that U.S.
producers should be able to expand beyond the current 282,000
metric tons of soybeans, soybean meal, and soybean oil that
they shipped to Cuba in 2008.
In addition to these direct benefits for bulk commodities,
some commodities will also benefit from the increased demand
expected for meat and value-added products. The National Corn
Growers expect that U.S. chicken exports would double with the
trade and travel restrictions eased. These additional 277,000
metric tons of poultry would require almost 22 million bushels
of corn to grow.
Almost all sectors of U.S. agriculture have benefited and
could benefit more from increased trade with Cuba. The United
States has exported pork, cattle, dried beans and peas, fresh
and dry fruits including apples, grapes, and pears to Cuba.
The Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act
(H.R. 4645) would expand agricultural trade to Cuba by
addressing some of the trade restrictions put in place on
agricultural sales. The legislation would do the following:
(1) Eliminate the need to go through banks in other
countries to conduct agricultural trades, along with
the accompanying fees those banks charge. (Direct
payment provision);
(2) Require agricultural exports to Cuba to meet the
same payment requirements as exports to other countries
by requiring payment when the title of the shipment
changes hands. (Payment in advance provision); and
(3) Allow U.S. citizens to travel to Cuba, reducing
the bureaucratic red tape currently required for
agricultural associations, agribusinesses, and others
to make agricultural sales in the country and creating
increased demand for agricultural exports to feed the
increased number of American visitors.
The U.S. International Trade Commission reports that if
these restrictions were lifted, agricultural exports could
increase by $216-478 million annually. Additionally, a study by
Texas A&M University found that with passage of this
legislation, the United States could export over $350 million
worth of commodities more than currently and create over 6,000
new jobs.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1 provides the short title of the bill.
Section 2 provides that the President may not regulate or
prohibit travel to or from Cuba by lawful U.S. citizens or
permanent residents. The President currently has authority to
license travel in 12 broad categories set forth in the Cuban
Assets Control Regulations, but may not permit licensing for
tourist activities.
Section 3 of the bill clarifies current law provisions
governing payment terms for sales of agricultural commodities
or products to Cuba. Under the Omnibus Appropriations Act 2010,
vessels carrying U.S. agricultural products to Cuba can leave
U.S. ports before payment is confirmed, so long as payment is
confirmed before title and control are given to the buyer. The
appropriations provision is valid only for fiscal year 2010.
Section 3 of the bill would make the policy in the
appropriations language permanent. Under prior law, vessels
could leave U.S. ports only after payment was confirmed, and it
was unclear whether the goods would be vulnerable to seizure
for unrelated claims while still at the U.S. port.
Section 4 authorizes direct transfers from Cuban to U.S.
banks in payment for agricultural and medical products under
the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000.
Committee Consideration
I. HEARINGS
The Committee on Agriculture held a hearing on March 20,
2010 to review U.S. Agricultural sales to Cuba. Testimony was
received from several individuals representing commodities,
including the American Farm Bureau and the National Farmers
Union.
II. FULL COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
On June 30, 2010 the Committee on Agriculture met, pursuant
to notice, with a quorum present to consider H.R. 4645 and
other pending business. Mr. Peterson offered an opening
statement, as did Ranking Member Lucas.
The bill, H.R. 4645 was placed before the Committee for
consideration and without objection a first reading of the bill
was waived and it was opened for amendment at any point.
Counsel was recognized for a brief explanation of the bill.
Mr. Baca and Mr. Rooney offered a joint amendment that
would strike Section 2 which pertains to Cuba travel. Mr.
Holden raised a point of order to the amendment stating that
the section proposed to be stricken contains subject matter
within the Rule X jurisdiction of another committee and
striking such section would violate the terms of the Speaker's
referral, pursuant to clause 2 of Rule XII. Chairman Peterson
ruled that the amendment was not in order. Mr. Rooney appealed
the ruling of the Chair. The Chairman moved to table the motion
to appeal the ruling of the Chair. By voice vote, the motion to
table the appeal was agreed to. Mr. Lucas asked for a recorded
vote on the motion to table the appeal to the point of order on
the Rooney/Baca amendment. The results of the recorded vote
were: 28 yeas, 17 nays, 1 not voting. The motion to table the
appeal was adopted and the ruling of the Chair was sustained.
(See Roll Call #1).
Mr. Conaway offered an amendment that would not allow
section 2 to take effect until a transition government in Cuba
is in power. Mr. Holden raised a point of order to the
amendment because it related to subject matter within the Rule
X jurisdiction of another committee and amending such section
would violate the terms of the Speaker's referral, pursuant to
clause 2 of Rule XII. Chairman Peterson ruled that the
amendment was not in order. Mr. Conaway appealed the ruling of
the Chair. Mr. Holden moved to table the motion to appeal the
ruling of the Chair. By voice vote, the motion to table the
appeal was agreed to. Mr. Conaway asked for a recorded vote on
the motion to table the appeal to the point of order on the
Conaway amendment. The results of the recorded vote were: 29
yeas, 16 nays, 1 not voting. The motion to table the appeal was
adopted and the ruling of the Chair was sustained. (See Roll
Call #2).
Mr. Conaway was then recognized to offer and explain
another amendment that was a sense of Congress expressing that
U.S. government should immediately implement both the U.S.-
Columbia and U.S.-Panama Free Trade Agreements. Mr. Holden
raised a point of order to the amendment as the section of bill
proposed to be amended contains subject matter within the Rule
X jurisdiction of another committee and amending such section
would violate the terms of the Speaker's referral, pursuant to
clause 2 of Rule X. Chairman Peterson ruled that the amendment
was not in order. Mr. Conaway appealed the ruling of the Chair.
Mr. Holden moved to table the motion to appeal the ruling of
the Chair. By voice vote, the motion to table the appeal was
agreed to. Mrs. Schmidt asked for a recorded vote on the motion
to table the appeal to the point of order on the Conaway
amendment. The results of the recorded vote were: 26 yeas, 19
nays, 1 not voting. The motion to table the appeal was adopted
and the ruling of the Chair was sustained. (See Roll Call #3).
Mr. Lucas was recognized to offer and explain an amendment
that would add Section 5 to the bill that would delay
implementation until the pending free trade agreements with
Columbia, Panama, and Korea are implemented. Mr. Holden raised
a point of order to the amendment as it is not germane because
it conditions the effectiveness on further legislative action
that is unrelated to the provisions of the bill and also
conditions the effectiveness of provisions that are within the
Rule X jurisdiction of another committee. Chairman Peterson
ruled that the amendment was not in order. Mr. Lucas appealed
the ruling of the Chair. Mr. Holden moved to table the motion
to appeal the ruling of the Chair. By voice vote, the motion to
table the appeal was agreed to. Mrs. Schmidt asked for a
recorded vote on the motion to table the appeal to the point of
order on the Lucas amendment. The results of the recorded vote
were: 28 yeas, 17 nays, 1 not voting. The motion to table the
appeal was adopted and the ruling of the Chair was sustained.
(See Roll Call #4).
Mr. Rooney was recognized to offer and explain an amendment
that would delay the enactment of this act until the pre-Castro
property rights of individuals in Cuba have been reinstituted.
Mr. Holden raised a point of order that the amendment is not
germane because it conditions the effectiveness on further
legislative action that is unrelated to the provisions of the
bill and also conditions the effectiveness of provisions that
are within the Rule X jurisdiction of another committee.
Chairman Peterson ruled that the amendment was not in order.
Mr. Goodlatte was recognized to make a motion to report the
bill favorably as to sections 1, 3, and 4 and report it
unfavorably as to section 2. Discussion occurred and the
Chairman ruled that the motion was out of order as the bill can
either be reported favorably, unfavorably, or without
recommendation. Discussion occurred and Mr. Goodlatte then
moved that the bill be reported without recommendation. Mr.
Costa moved to table the motion. By voice vote, the Chairman
ruled that the Costa motion to table the Goodlatte motion to
report the bill without recommendation passed. Mr. Goodlatte
asked for a recorded vote. The results of the recorded vote
were: 21 yeas, 24 nays, 1 not voting. (See Roll Call #5).
The motion to table the motion failed. Mr. Conaway further
pressed the Goodlatte motion. The Chairman recommended that the
Committee not support the Goodlatte motion. By voice vote, the
Goodlatte motion failed. A recorded vote was requested. The
results of the recorded vote were: 3 yeas, 42 nays, 1 not
voting. The motion to report H.R. 4645 without recommendation
failed. (See Roll Call Vote #6).
Mr. Kratovil offered a draft of dissenting views that other
Members of the Committee could sign on to, and that he would
like to be filed with the report.
Mr. Holden moved that the bill, H.R. 4645, be reported
favorably to the House with recommendation that it do pass. By
voice vote, the motion to report the bill favorably passed. Mr.
Goodlatte requested a recorded vote. The results of the
recorded vote were: 25 yeas, 20 nays, 1 not voting. (See Roll
Call Vote #7).
Chairman Peterson informed Committee Members who wish to
file supplemental, minority, or additional views to any of the
measures before the Committee to transmit them to the Counsel's
Office.
Without objection, staff was given permission to make any
necessary clerical, technical or conforming changes to reflect
the intent of the Committee.
Chairman Peterson thanked all the Members and adjourned the
meeting subject to the call of the chair.
Reporting the Bill--Roll Call Votes
In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the Committee sets forth the
record of the following roll call votes taken with respect to
H.R. 4645.
Roll Call #1
Summary: Holden motion to table the appeal to the point of
order on the Rooney/Baca amendment.
Results: 28 yeas, 17 nays, 1 not voting.
YEAS
1. Mr. Holden 15. Mrs. Halvorson
2. Mr. McIntyre 16. Mrs. Dahlkemper
3. Mr. Boswell 17. Mr. Bright
4. Mr. Baca 18. Ms. Markey
5. Mr. Cardoza 19. Mr. Kratovil
6. Mr. Scott 20. Mr. Boccieri
7. Mr. Marshall 21. Mr. Murphy
8. Ms. Herseth Sandlin 22. Mr. Owens
9. Mr. Cuellar 23. Mr. Pomeroy
10. Mr. Costa 24. Mr. Childers
11. Mr. Ellsworth 25. Mr. Minnick
12. Mr. Walz 26. Mr. Moran
13. Mr. Kagen 27. Mr. Johnson
14. Mr. Schrader 28. Mr. Peterson
NAYS
1. Mr. Schauer 10. Mrs. Schmidt
2. Mr. Lucas 11. Mr. Smith
3. Mr. Goodlatte 12. Mr. Roe
4. Mr. Graves 13. Mr. Luetkemeyer
5. Mr. Rogers 14. Mr. Thompson
6. Mr. King 15. Mr. Cassidy
7. Mr. Neugebauer 16. Mrs. Lummis
8. Mr. Conaway 17. Mr. Rooney
9. Mr. Fortenberry
NOT VOTING
1. Mr. Kissell
Roll Call #2
Summary: Holden motion to table the appeal to the point of
order on the Conaway #1 amendment.
Results: 29 yeas, 16 nays, 1 not voting.
YEAS
1. Mr. Holden 16. Mrs. Dahlkemper
2. Mr. McIntyre 17. Mr. Bright
3. Mr. Boswell 18. Ms. Markey
4. Mr. Baca 19. Mr. Kratovil
5. Mr. Cardoza 20. Mr. Schauer
6. Mr. Scott 21. Mr. Boccieri
7. Mr. Marshall 22. Mr. Murphy
8. Ms. Herseth Sandlin 23. Mr. Owens
9. Mr. Cuellar 24. Mr. Pomeroy
10. Mr. Costa 25. Mr. Childers
11. Mr. Ellsworth 26. Mr. Minnick
12. Mr. Walz 27. Mr. Moran
13. Mr. Kagen 28. Mr. Johnson
14. Mr. Schrader 29. Mr. Peterson
15. Mrs. Halvorson
NAYS
1. Mr. Lucas 9. Mrs. Schmidt
2. Mr. Goodlatte 10. Mr. Smith
3. Mr. Graves 11. Mr. Roe
4. Mr. Rogers 12. Mr. Luetkemeyer
5. Mr. King 13. Mr. Thompson
6. Mr. Neugebauer 14. Mr. Cassidy
7. Mr. Conaway 15. Mrs. Lummis
8. Mr. Fortenberry 16. Mr. Rooney
NOT VOTING
1. Mr. Kissell
Roll Call #3
Summary: Holden motion to table the appeal to the point of
order on the Conaway #2 amendment.
Results: 26 yeas, 19 nays, 1 not voting.
YEAS
1. Mr. Holden 14. Mr. Schrader
2. Mr. McIntyre 15. Mrs. Halvorson
3. Mr. Boswell 16. Mrs. Dahlkemper
4. Mr. Baca 17. Ms. Markey
5. Mr. Cardoza 18. Mr. Kratovil
6. Mr. Scott 19. Mr. Schauer
7. Mr. Marshall 20. Mr. Boccieri
8. Ms. Herseth Sandlin 21. Mr. Murphy
9. Mr. Cuellar 22. Mr. Owens
10. Mr. Costa 23. Mr. Pomeroy
11. Mr. Ellsworth 24. Mr. Childers
12. Mr. Walz 25. Mr. Minnick
13. Mr. Kagen 26. Mr. Peterson
NAYS
1. Mr. Bright 11. Mr. Fortenberry
2. Mr. Lucas 12. Mrs. Schmidt
3. Mr. Goodlatte 13. Mr. Smith
4. Mr. Moran 14. Mr. Roe
5. Mr. Johnson 15. Mr. Luetkemeyer
6. Mr. Graves 16. Mr. Thompson
7. Mr. Rogers 17. Mr. Cassidy
8. Mr. King 18. Mrs. Lummis
9. Mr. Neugebauer 19. Mr. Rooney
10. Mr. Conaway
NOT VOTING
1. Mr. Kissell
Roll Call #4
Summary: Holden motion to table the appeal to the point of
order on the Lucas amendment.
Results: 28 yeas, 17 nays, 1 not voting.
YEAS
1. Mr. Holden 15. Mrs. Halvorson
2. Mr. McIntyre 16. Mrs. Dahlkemper
3. Mr. Boswell 17. Mr. Bright
4. Mr. Baca 18. Ms. Markey
5. Mr. Cardoza 19. Mr. Kratovil
6. Mr. Scott 20. Mr. Schauer
7. Mr. Marshall 21. Mr. Boccieri
8. Ms. Herseth Sandlin 22. Mr. Murphy
9. Mr. Cuellar 23. Mr. Owens
10. Mr. Costa 24. Mr. Pomeroy
11. Mr. Ellsworth 25. Mr. Childers
12. Mr. Walz 26. Mr. Minnick
13. Mr. Kagen 27. Mr. Johnson
14. Mr. Schrader 28. Mr. Peterson
NAYS
1. Mr. Lucas 10. Mrs. Schmidt
2. Mr. Goodlatte 11. Mr. Smith
3. Mr. Moran 12. Mr. Roe
4. Mr. Graves 13. Mr. Luetkemeyer
5. Mr. Rogers 14. Mr. Thompson
6. Mr. King 15. Mr. Cassidy
7. Mr. Neugebauer 16. Mrs. Lummis
8. Mr. Conaway 17. Mr. Rooney
9. Mr. Fortenberry
NOT VOTING
1. Mr. Kissell
Roll Call #5
Summary: Costa motion to table the Goodlatte motion to
report the bill without recommendation.
Results: 21 yeas, 24 nays, 1 not voting.
YEAS
1. Mr. Holden 12. Mr. Kagen
2. Mr. McIntyre 13. Mrs. Halvorson
3. Mr. Boswell 14. Mr. Bright
4. Mr. Baca 15. Ms. Markey
5. Mr. Cardoza 16. Mr. Owens
6. Mr. Scott 17. Mr. Pomeroy
7. Ms. Herseth Sandlin 18. Mr. Childers
8. Mr. Cuellar 19. Mr. Minnick
9. Mr. Costa 20. Mr. Johnson
10. Mr. Ellsworth 21. Mr. Peterson
11. Mr. Walz
NAYS
1. Mr. Marshall 13. Mr. King
2. Mr. Schrader 14. Mr. Neugebauer
3. Mrs. Dahlkemper 15. Mr. Conaway
4. Mr. Kratovil 16. Mr. Fortenberry
5. Mr. Schauer 17. Mrs. Schmidt
6. Mr. Boccieri 18. Mr. Smith
7. Mr. Murphy 19. Mr. Roe
8. Mr. Lucas 20. Mr. Luetkemeyer
9. Mr. Goodlatte 21. Mr. Thompson
10. Mr. Moran 22. Mr. Cassidy
11. Mr. Graves 23. Mrs. Lummis
12. Mr. Rogers 24. Mr. Rooney
NOT VOTING
1. Mr. Kissell
Roll Call #6
Summary: Goodlatte motion to report H.R. 4645 to the House
without recommendation.
Results: 3 yeas, 42 nays, 1 not voting.
YEAS
1. Mr. Marshall 3. Mrs. Dahlkemper
2. Mr. Schrader
NAYS
1. Mr. Holden 22. Mr. Childers
2. Mr. McIntyre 23. Mr. Minnick
3. Mr. Boswell 24. Mr. Lucas
4. Mr. Baca 25. Mr. Goodlatte
5. Mr. Cardoza 26. Mr. Moran
6. Mr. Scott 27. Mr. Johnson
7. Ms. Herseth Sandlin 28. Mr. Graves
8. Mr. Cuellar 29. Mr. Rogers
9. Mr. Costa 30. Mr. King
10. Mr. Ellsworth 31. Mr. Neugebauer
11. Mr. Walz 32. Mr. Conaway
12. Mr. Kagen 33. Mr. Fortenberry
13. Mrs. Halvorson 34. Mrs. Schmidt
14. Mr. Bright 35. Mr. Smith
15. Ms. Markey 36. Mr. Roe
16. Mr. Kratovil 37. Mr. Luetkemeyer
17. Mr. Schauer 38. Mr. Thompson
18. Mr. Boccieri 39. Mr. Cassidy
19. Mr. Murphy 40. Mrs. Lummis
20. Mr. Owens 41. Mr. Rooney
21. Mr. Pomeroy 42. Mr. Peterson
NOT VOTING
1. Mr. Kissell
Roll Call #7
Summary: Holden motion to report H.R. 4645 favorably to the
House.
Results: 25 yeas, 20 nays, 1 not voting
YEAS
1. Mr. Holden 14. Mr. Kratovil
2. Mr. Boswell 15. Mr. Boccieri
3. Mr. Cardoza 16. Mr. Murphy
4. Mr. Scott 17. Mr. Owens
5. Ms. Herseth Sandlin 18. Mr. Pomeroy
6. Mr. Cuellar 19. Mr. Childers
7. Mr. Costa 20. Mr. Minnick
8. Mr. Ellsworth 21. Mr. Moran
9. Mr. Walz 22. Mr. Johnson
10. Mr. Kagen 23. Mr. Cassidy
11. Mrs. Halvorson 24. Mrs. Lummis
12. Mr. Bright 25. Mr. Peterson
13. Ms. Markey
NAYS
1. Mr. McIntyre 11. Mr. King
2. Mr. Baca 12. Mr. Neugebauer
3. Mr. Marshall 13. Mr. Conaway
4. Mr. Schrader 14. Mr. Fortenberry
5. Mrs. Dahlkemper 15. Mrs. Schmidt
6. Mr. Schauer 16. Mr. Smith
7. Mr. Lucas 17. Mr. Roe
8. Mr. Goodlatte 18. Mr. Luetkemeyer
9. Mr. Graves 19. Mr. Thompson
10. Mr. Rogers 20. Mr. Rooney
NOT VOTING
1. Mr. Kissell
Committee Oversight Findings
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee on Agriculture's
oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in the
body of this report.
Budget Act Compliance (Sections 308, 402, and 423)
The provisions of clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives and section 308(a)(1) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (relating to estimates of new
budget authority, new spending authority, new credit authority,
or increased or decreased revenues or tax expenditures) are not
considered applicable. The estimate and comparison required to
be prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office
under clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives and sections 402 and 423 of the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974 submitted to the Committee prior to the
filing of this report are as follows:
July 12, 2010.
Hon. Collin C. Peterson,
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4645, the Travel
Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew
Pickford.
Sincerely,
Robert A. Sunshine
(For Douglas W. Elmendorf).
Enclosure.
H.R. 4645--Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act
H.R. 4645 would prohibit, with a few specific exemptions,
the federal government from regulating or restricting travel-
related tranactions between the United States and Cuba. (Travel
to Cuba is currently regulated by the Department of the
Treasury's Office of Foreign Asset Control.) The legislation
also would amend restrictions on financial transactions between
the United States and Cuba related to the sale of specified
goods. CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 4645 would reduce
revenues by insignificant amounts each year.
The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 establishes budget-
reporting and enforcement procedures for legislation affecting
direct spending or revenues. Violations of the current travel
restrictions to Cuba can result in civil and criminal fines.
Hence, enacting H.R. 4645 would reduce the amount of fines
currently collected. Collections of civil fines are recorded in
the budget as revenues and deposited into the general fund of
the Treasury. Criminal fines are also recorded in the budget as
revenues, deposited in the Crime Victims Fund, and spent in
subsequent years. Based on information from the Department of
the Treasury, CBO estimates that allowing travel and travel-
related transactions to Cuba would reduce the amount of fines
collected by less than $500,000 each year and in total over the
2010-2020 period.
H.R. 4645 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and
would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal
governments.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Matthew
Pickford. This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine,
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
Performance Goals and Objectives
With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
performance goals and objections of this legislation are to
remove obstacles to legal sales of United States agricultural
commodities to Cuba and to end travel restrictions on all
Americans to Cuba.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee finds the
Constitutional authority for this legislation in Article I,
clause 8, section 18, that grants Congress the power to make
all laws necessary and proper for carrying out the powers
vested by Congress in the Constitution of the United States or
in any department or officer thereof.
Committee Cost Estimate
Pursuant to clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee report incorporates the
cost estimate prepared by the Director of the Congressional
Budget Office pursuant to sections 402 and 423 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
Advisory Committee Statement
No advisory committee within the meaning of section 5(b) of
the Federal Advisory Committee Act was created by this
legislation.
Applicability to the Legislative Branch
The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public
services or accommodations within the meaning of section
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law
104-1).
Federal Mandates Statement
The Committee adopted as its own the estimate of Federal
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act (Public Law 104-4).
Earmark Statement Required by Clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives
H.R. 4645 does not contain any congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in
clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italics, existing law in which no change
is proposed is shown in roman):
TRADE SANCTIONS REFORM AND EXPORT ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2000
TITLE IX--TRADE SANCTIONS REFORM AND EXPORT ENHANCEMENT
SEC. 901. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Trade Sanctions Reform and
Export Enhancement Act of 2000''.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 908. PROHIBITION ON UNITED STATES ASSISTANCE AND FINANCING.
(a) * * *
(b) Prohibition on Financing of Agricultural Sales to
Cuba.--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) Definitions.--In this subsection--
(A) * * *
(B) the term ``United States depository
institution'' means any entity (including its
foreign branches or subsidiaries) organized
under the laws of any jurisdiction within the
United States, or any agency, office or branch
located in the United States of a foreign
entity, that is engaged primarily in the
business of banking (including a bank, savings
bank, savings association, credit union, trust
company, or United States bank holding
company); [and]
(C) the term ``United States person'' means
the Federal Government, any State or local
government, or any private person or entity of
the United States [.]; and
(D) the term ``payment of cash in advance''
means, notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the payment by the purchaser of an
agricultural commodity or product and the
receipt of such payment by the seller prior
to--
(i) the transfer of title of such
commodity or product to the purchaser;
and
(ii) the release of control of such
commodity or product to the purchaser.
* * * * * * *
DISSENTING VIEWS
I strongly support all reasonable efforts to expand U.S.
agricultural exports and open up new markets to our domestic
producers. Consequently, I am supportive of sections 3 and 4 of
H.R. 4645, which will help increase agricultural exports to
Cuba and generate new revenue for Michigan's family farmers.
However, I strongly disapprove of section 2 of the legislation,
which would lift the restrictions on Americans traveling to
Cuba and put dollars in the pockets of the repressive Castro
regime.
For nearly five decades, the Cuban government has committed
countless human rights abuses, repressed free speech and
political association among its own citizens, and wrongly
detained thousands of political prisoners. Unfortunately, the
regime's human rights record is showing no signs of
improvement.
Lifting the travel restrictions will result in an economic
windfall to the Cuban government, increasing their revenue by
an estimated $2 billion in the first year alone. While Congress
can and should continue to debate the broader question of U.S.
policy toward Cuba, any legislation in this area must be
considered within the context of our overall foreign policy
goals and with a full understanding of the entirety of our
relationship with Cuba. It would be irresponsible and unwise
for Congress to grant a major concession to the Cuban
government by lifting the travel restrictions without first
demanding meaningful and measurable improvements in the Castro
government's human rights record.
While it was not within the Agriculture Committee's
jurisdiction to remove the travel provisions from H.R. 4645
during the Committee's consideration of the bill, I am
nonetheless displeased that these travel provisions remain
included in what is otherwise an important agricultural bill. I
want to clearly indicate to the Committee and to my colleagues
that I do not believe that the travel provisions should be
included in H.R. 4645, and I hope that this section will be
struck or modified by the Foreign Affairs Committee in a manner
that is consistent with our nation's respect for human rights
and our foreign policy goals.
My objective is to pass a bill to help Michigan
agriculture, not to see legislation die or not come up for a
vote in the House. It is my opinion that a version of H.R. 4645
that includes lifting the travel ban to Cuba will not be
enacted. That is why I will continue to work to amend H.R. 4645
so that it can pass and help Michigan farmers, Michigan jobs,
and Michigan's economy.
Mark H. Schauer.
DISSENTING VIEWS
We strongly support all reasonable efforts to expand U.S.
agricultural exports and open up new markets to our domestic
producers. Consequently, we are supportive of the intent of
H.R. 4645, to help increase agricultural exports to Cuba and
generate new revenue for America's family farmers. However, we
strongly oppose section 2 of the legislation, which would lift
the restrictions on Americans traveling to Cuba.
For nearly five decades, the Cuban government has committed
countless human rights abuses, wrongfully denied private
property rights, repressed free speech and political
association among its own citizens, and wrongly detained
thousands of political prisoners. Unfortunately, the regime's
human rights record is showing no signs of improvement. In
February, political activist Orlando Zapata Tamayo died in a
Cuban prison after an 86-day hunger strike. Furthermore, the
Cuban regime has been detaining an American citizen, Alan
Gross, in a maximum security prison since December without
charges or trial. Mr. Gross, a 60-year-old international
development worker, was in Cuba on a USAID project helping to
provide communications equipment and assistance to nonprofit
Jewish community organizations on the island.
Lifting the travel restrictions would result in an economic
windfall to the Cuban government, increasing their revenue by
an estimated $2 billion in the first year alone. While Congress
can and should continue to debate the broader question of U.S.
policy toward Cuba, any legislation in this area must be
considered within the context of our overall foreign policy
goals and with a full understanding of the entirety of our
relationship with Cuba. It would be irresponsible and unwise
for Congress to grant a major concession to the Cuban
government by lifting the travel restrictions without first
demanding meaningful and measurable improvements in the Castro
government's human rights record, beginning with the release of
Alan Gross.
Although Representatives Baca (D-CA) and Rooney (R-FL)
offered an amendment to strike section 2, this amendment was
ruled out of order. Consequently, Members did not have an
opportunity to vote on this amendment and voice their
displeasure with the inclusion of these travel provisions in
what is otherwise an important agricultural bill. We want to
clearly indicate to the Committee and to our colleagues that we
do not believe that the travel provisions should be included in
H.R. 4645, and we hope that this section will be struck or
modified by the Foreign Affairs Committee in a manner that is
consistent with our nation's respect for human rights and our
foreign policy goals.
Frank Kratovil, Jr.
Kathleen A. Dahlkemper.
Frank D. Lucas.
K. Michael Conaway.
Kurt Schrader.
Glenn Thompson.
Henry Cuellar.
Steve King.
Thomas J. Rooney.
Brad Ellsworth.
Larry Kissell.
Jean Schmidt.
Blaine Luetkemeyer.
Adrian Smith.
Bob Goodlatte.
Sam Graves.
Joe Baca.
Deborah L. Halvorson.
Mike McIntyre.
Mark H. Schauer.
David P. Roe.
Randy Neugebauer.
Mike Rogers.
John A. Boccieri.
DISSENTING VIEWS
H.R. 4645 has two main themes included in its four
sections. One is to increase American agriculture exports to
Cuba. The other is to lift travel restrictions on Americans
traveling to Cuba. We support increasing agriculture exports
but strongly oppose the easing of travel restrictions. Because
the travel provisions remained in the legislation and members
were denied the opportunity to vote on amendments to improve
the bill, the Committee's consideration of this legislation was
contentious and H.R. 4645 was reported by a vote of 25-20. This
did not have to be the case as legislation without the travel
provisions likely would have passed the Committee by voice
vote.
We believe we should continue to facilitate the shipment of
food to Cuba, and streamlining that process is important.
Section 2 of H.R. 4645, however, effectively repeals the
embargo that the U.S. has had in place to prevent the
enrichment of Castor's regime. Removing travel restrictions for
tourism has nothing to do with removing technical barriers to
exports.
Unfortunately, during the Committee's consideration of H.R.
4645, members were denied the opportunity to vote on a bi-
partisan amendment to strike the travel provisions. Rep. Joe
Baca (D-CA) and Rep. Tom Rooney (R-FL) offered an amendment to
strike Section 2. This amendment was ruled out of order and the
appeal of the Chair's ruling was tabled. This was a most
unfortunate outcome, as it was clear a bi-partisan majority of
the Committee supported the Baca-Rooney amendment.
Subsequent amendments to delay the implementation H.R. 4645
until Cuba moved toward a democratic government, made
significant progress on human-rights and private property
rights or until pending free trade agreements are implemented
were also ruled out of order and subsequent appeals of the
Chair's rulings tabled. Again, this was most unfortunate at
these amendments likely enjoyed broad support in the Committee.
We are also gravely concerned that the committee process is
being manipulated to move this legislation to the full-House
without proper consideration by other committees of
jurisdiction. Although H.R. 4645 was referred the Committee on
Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Financial Services, it is
unclear if either committee will act on the legislation. It is
therefore possible this Committee's consideration of this
legislation was the last opportunity to improve this bill by
striking Section 2 before it is considered by the full House.
Frank D. Lucas.
K. Michael Conaway.
Bob Goodlatte.
David P. Roe.
Jean Schmidt.
Thomas J. Rooney.
Jeff Fortenberry.
Randy Neugebauer.
Steve King.
Blaine Luetkemeyer.
Mike Rogers.
Sam Graves.
Glen Thompson.
Adrian Smith.