    [House Report 114-496]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

    114th Congress    }                                       {     Report
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
     2d Session       }                                       {    114-496

    ======================================================================

          UNITED STATES NAVAL STATION GUANTANAMO BAY PRESERVATION ACT

                                    _______

     April 15, 2016.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
                  State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                    _______

        Mr. Royce, from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, submitted the
                                   following

                                  R E P O R T

                                 together with

                                DISSENTING VIEWS

                            [To accompany H.R. 4678]

          [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

        The Committee on Foreign Affairs, to whom was referred the
    bill (H.R. 4678) to prohibit modification, abrogation,
    abandonment, or other related actions with respect to United
    States jurisdiction and control over United States Naval
    Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, without congressional action,
    having considered the same, reports favorably thereon without
    amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

                               TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                       Page
    Background and Purpose...........................................     2
    Hearings.........................................................     7
    Committee Consideration..........................................     7
    Committee Oversight Findings.....................................     7
    New Budget Authority, Tax Expenditures, and Federal Mandates.....     8
    Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................     8
    Directed Rule Making.............................................     9
    Non-Duplication of Federal Programs..............................     9
    Performance Goals and Objectives.................................     9
    Congressional Accountability Act.................................     9
    New Advisory Committees..........................................     9
    Earmark Identification...........................................     9
    Presidential Signature Page of the 1903 Lease to the United
      States by the Government of Cuba...............................    10
    Dissenting Views.................................................    11

                             Background and Purpose

        For over a century, the United States Naval Station at
    Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, has been a critical asset for the defense
    of the United States and our promotion of stability and
    humanitarian welfare in the Western Hemisphere. The legal
    history of the base has its origins in acts of Congress. United
    States jurisdiction and control over the base is derived not
    from a treaty, but from 1903 lease agreements with Cuba that
    were both authorized and required by Congress, a fact that was
    expressly recognized by the President who signed them.
        For decades, the repressive Castro regime has publicly
    demanded that the United States return the Guantanamo base to
    Cuba, a demand most recently reiterated by President Raul
    Castro during a March 21, 2016, press conference with President
    Obama in Havana. During that meeting, President Castro again
    demanded the return of Guantanamo as a ``necessary''
    prerequisite to the normalization of relations with the United
    States.
        Although U.S. officials have stated that the United States
    ``has no plans'' to alter any of the arrangements regarding the
    base, that is not the same thing as categorically pledging that
    the United States will not do so. The Obama administration has
    previously made dramatic shifts in U.S. policy toward Cuba
    without prior consultation with Congress. For example, when
    then-Deputy National Security Advisor Tony Blinken was asked in
    November 2014 whether any policy changes toward Cuba were under
    consideration, he assured Congress that ``anything that in the
    future might be done on Cuba would be done in full
    consultation'' with Congress, ``with the real meaning of the
    word consultation.''\1\ Yet less than a month later, without
    any such consultation, the administration announced the
    reestablishment of U.S. diplomatic relations with Cuba and the
    release of convicted Cuban spies, which apparently had resulted
    from more than a year of secret administration negotiations
    with the Castro regime.
        H.R. 4678 does not categorically prohibit the return of the
    Guantanamo base or the renegotiation of the lease, but makes
    clear that Congress must affirmatively authorize any action
    that would affect or impair the jurisdiction or control that
    the United States has exercised over the Naval Station for more
    than 112 years.
    U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay Remains Indispensable
        Senior United States military leaders have consistently
    voiced strong support for maintaining U.S. Naval Station
    Guantanamo Bay, calling it ``indispensable'' and ``essential,''
    and noting its strategic value for military basing and
    logistics, disaster relief, humanitarian work, terrorist
    detention, and counter-narcotics purposes.
        On February 29, 2016, Secretary of Defense Ashton B.
    Carter, discussing the base, stated that ``it's a strategic
    location, we've had it for a long time, it's important to us,
    and we intend to hold on to it.''
        On March 12, 2015, Commander of United States Southern
    Command, General John Kelly, testified that the United States
    facilities at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay ``are indispensable
    to the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, and State's
    operational and contingency plans.'' General Kelly noted that,
    ``As the only permanent U.S. military base in Latin America and
    the Caribbean, its location provides persistent U.S. presence
    and immediate access to the region, as well as supporting a
    layered defense to secure the air and maritime approaches to
    the United States.''
        In testimony before Congress in 2012, then-Commander of
    United States Southern Command, General Douglas Fraser, stated
    that ``the strategic capability provided by U.S. Naval Station
    Guantanamo Bay remains essential for executing national
    priorities throughout the Caribbean, Latin America, and South
    America.''
        The utility of the base is not merely military, but also
    humanitarian. Following a 1991 coup in Haiti that prompted a
    mass exodus of people by boat, U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo
    Bay provided a location for temporary housing and the orderly
    adjudication of asylum claims outside of the continental United
    States. In 2010, the base was a critical hub for the provision
    of humanitarian disaster relief following the devastating
    earthquakes in Haiti.
    U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay is Rooted in Acts of Congress
        The complex legal history of U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo
    Bay is uniquely rooted in acts of Congress in the period
    leading up to and following the 1898 Spanish-American War,
    which freed Cuba from colonial domination by Spain. In
    assessing that history, it is useful to recall the express
    constitutional powers of Congress:

             Lto provide for the common defense (Art. I,
            Sec. 8, cl. 1);
             Lto provide and maintain a Navy (Art. I,
            Sec. 8, cl. 13);
             Lto declare war (Art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 11); and
             Lto make all necessary rules and regulations
            regarding U.S. territory or other property (Art. IV,
            Sec. 3, cl. 2).

        In 1895, Cuban forces led by Jose Marti resumed the fight
    for Cuban independence from Spain. The proximity of the violent
    conflict to the United States, the brutality of Spanish
    authorities toward the people of Cuba, and the distaste for
    European colonial involvement in the Western Hemisphere
    increased American sympathies for the Cuban cause. After the
    U.S. battleship Maine mysteriously exploded and sank in Havana
    harbor in February 1898, killing more than 260 U.S. sailors, a
    reluctant President McKinley was pushed to demand independence
    for Cuba.
        By joint resolution approved on April 20, 1898, Congress
    recognized the independence of the people of Cuba and
    ``directed and empowered'' the President ``to use the entire
    land and naval forces of the United States'' to ensure that the
    Government of Spain ``relinquish its authority and government
    in the island of Cuba, and withdraw its land and naval forces
    from Cuba and Cuban waters.'' A successful amendment offered by
    Senator Henry Teller of Colorado to that joint resolution
    (commonly known as the ``Teller Amendment'') disavowed any
    intention by the United States to exercise long-term
    sovereignty over Cuba, and expressed the determination that,
    after the island was pacified, the government of Cuba would be
    returned to its people.
        The Government of Spain rejected the U.S. call for Cuban
    independence, President McKinley instituted a naval blockade of
    Havana, and Spain severed diplomatic relations with the United
    States.
        On April 25, 1898, Congress declared war against Spain.
    After a decisive American victory in the months that followed,
    the United States and Spain signed the Treaty of Paris on
    December 10, 1898, which (upon ratification the following
    April) ended Spain's colonial empire in the Western Hemisphere.
    In that Treaty, Spain relinquished all claims of sovereignty
    over Cuba, and United States governance of Cuba was
    established.\2\
        Nearly three years later, in an Act approved on March 2,
    1901, Congress acted ``in fulfillment of'' the Teller Amendment
    by granting the President the authority to return ``the
    government and control of the island of Cuba to its people''
    subject to eight express preconditions, in a statutory text
    that was commonly known as the ``Platt Amendment.''\3\ Those
    preconditions included securing a commitment from Cuba to sell
    or lease to the United States lands necessary for naval
    stations ``to enable the United States to maintain the
    independence of Cuba, and to protect the people thereof, as
    well as for its own defense.''\4\ That 1901 Act of Congress was
    specifically cited, and its preconditions (including the naval
    station leasing requirement) were incorporated verbatim, in
    both the 1901 Constitution of the Republic of Cuba and the
    Treaty of Relations between the United States of America and
    the Republic of Cuba signed at Havana on May 22, 1903.
        According to the ``views of the Executive Department of our
    Government'' at the time, the Acts of Congress incorporating
    the Teller and Platt Amendments provided authority to the
    President that he did not otherwise possess, and also
    established ``limitations upon the power of the Executive'' in
    exercising that authority.\5\ The Teller Amendment ensured that
    United States could not annex Cuba, as it did Guam, Puerto Rico
    and the Philippines at the conclusion of the war that Congress
    had declared.\6\ The Platt Amendment established prerequisites
    (including securing a commitment from Cuba to sell or lease
    lands for a U.S. naval station) ``which Congress has made a
    condition precedent to the President's leaving the government
    and control of the island of Cuba to its people.''\7\
        The essential role of Congress is manifest in the case of
    the Platt Amendment, where the executive branch recognized
    Congressional action as necessary, even though the draft text
    of the amendment had been written by Secretary of War Elihu
    Root, was approved by the President and his cabinet, and was
    personally handed by President McKinley to Senator Platt, who
    then offered the amendment at the request of the
    administration, with minor changes.\8\ Not only was action by
    Congress necessary but, once taken, it was binding upon the
    executive branch, to the extent that the President disclaimed
    the ability to end U.S. military governance of the island until
    those conditions had been satisfied. In a message approved by
    President McKinley, Secretary Root made this clear to the Cuban
    Constitutional Convention:

              ``[L]et me recall the relation which the President
            bears to the so-called Platt Amendment. That statute
            having been enacted by the law-making power of the
            United States, the President is bound to execute it,
            and to execute it as it is. He cannot change or modify,
            add to or subtract from it. The executive action called
            for by the statute is the withdrawal of the army from
            Cuba, and the statute authorizes that action when, and
            only when, a government shall have been established
            under a Constitution which contains, either in the body
            thereof or in an ordinance annexed thereto, certain
            definite provisions specified in the statute.''\9\

        Pursuant to article VII of the Platt Amendment, the United
    States and Cuba negotiated and concluded lease agreements in
    1903, which specified the area and the terms of United States
    jurisdiction and control over what became United States Naval
    Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.\10\
        When approving the Guantanamo naval station lease on
    October 2, 1903, President Theodore Roosevelt\11\ cited the
    1901 Act of Congress as providing his authority to do so:

              ``I, Theodore Roosevelt, President of the United
            States of America, having seen and considered the
            foregoing lease, do hereby approve the same, by virtue
            of the authority conferred by the seventh of the
            provisions defining the relations which are to exist
            between the United States and Cuba, contained in the
            Act of Congress approved March 2, 1901, entitled `An
            Act making appropriation for the support of the Army
            for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1902.'''\12\

        Today, the United States continues to exercise jurisdiction
    and control over Naval Station Guantanamo Bay pursuant to those
    1903 lease agreements with Cuba. While the 1934 Treaty of
    Relations between the United States and Cuba (ratified with the
    consent of the Senate) did away with other, controversial
    aspects of the Platt Amendment as part of President Franklin
    Roosevelt's ``Good Neighbor Policy'' toward the Western
    Hemisphere (see note 3), it deliberately did not supersede,
    abrogate, or modify the Guantanamo lease agreements, which Cuba
    and the United states chose to leave intact. Article III of
    that Treaty expressly notes that the stipulations of those 1903
    bilateral agreements ``shall continue in effect'' until the
    United States and Cuba agree to modify them.\13\
        In sum, the Act of Congress approved on March 2, 1901
    required the acquisition of U.S. naval basing rights as an
    express condition of the authority that Congress gave the
    President to return governance of Cuba to the people of Cuba in
    the years following the Spanish-American War. The President
    made use of that authority, and completed his obligation to
    fulfill that condition by negotiating and executing the 1903
    lease agreements, pursuant to which the United States continues
    to exercise jurisdiction and control over U.S. Naval Station
    Guantanamo Bay.
        Any action by a subsequent President to impair that
    jurisdiction and control--such as by returning or abandoning
    the Guantanamo base--without express congressional
    authorization would nullify the U.S. naval station requirement
    of the Act of Congress approved on March 2, 1901, an
    institutional injury for which no legislative remedy exists.
        For this reason, H.R. 4678 clearly states that:

              ``No action may be taken to modify, abrogate, or
            replace the stipulations, agreements, and commitments
            contained in the Guantanamo Lease Agreements, or to
            impair or abandon the jurisdiction and control of the
            United States over United States Naval Station,
            Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, unless specifically authorized or
            otherwise provided by----

                      (1) a statute that is enacted on or after the
                    date of the enactment of this Act;

                      (2) a treaty that is ratified with the advice
                    and consent of the Senate on or after the date
                    of the enactment of this Act; or

                      (3) a modification of the Treaty Between the
                    United States of America and Cuba signed at
                    Washington, DC, on May 29, 1934, that is
                    ratified with the advice and consent of the
                    Senate on or after the date of the enactment of
                    this Act.''
    ___

    NOTES

    \1\Nomination of Mr. Antony Blinken of New York, to be Deputy Secretary
    of State: Hearing before the Committee on Foreign Relations, United
    State Senate. 113th Cong. (November 19, 2014).

    \2\As a consequence of the Joint Resolution of April 20, 1898, which
    incorporated the Teller Amendment, Cuba was treated differently than
    the other colonies relinquished by Spain. In contrast, the United
    States asserted unqualified sovereignty over the Philippines, Puerto
    Rico, and Guam at the conclusion of the War.

    \3\The provisos governing the return of sovereignty to Cuba were added
    by an amendment offered by Senator Orville Platt of Connecticut that
    was incorporated in the Act of March 2, 1901, ``An Act Making
    appropriation for the support of the Army for the fiscal year ending
    June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and two'' (Chapter 803; 31 Stat. 898).
    Certain aspects of the Platt Amendment--such as the limitations on
    Cuba's ability to conclude treaties with foreign powers, and Cuba's
    prospective consent to future intervention by the United States to
    preserve Cuban independence--were controversial among those who viewed
    them as undue constraints on Cuban sovereignty. Eventually, those
    provisions were abrogated by the 1934 Treaty of Relations between the
    United States and Cuba, as ratified with the consent of the U.S.
    Senate, as part of President Franklin Roosevelt's ``Good Neighbor
    Policy'' toward the Western Hemisphere. As discussed below, Cuba and
    the United States expressly chose to continue the Guantanamo leasing
    arrangements, which the 1934 Treaty expressly left intact.

    \4\The Act of March 2, 1901 (Chapter 803; 31 Stat. 898) states in
    relevant part:

            ``That in fulfillment of the declaration contained in the joint
            resolution approved April twentieth, eighteen hundred and
            ninety-eight . . . the President is hereby authorized to `leave
            the government and control of the island of Cuba to its people'
            so soon as a government shall have been established in said
            island under a constitution which, either as a part thereof or
            in an ordinance appended thereto, shall define the future
            relations of the United States with Cuba, substantially as
            follows:

            . . .

            VII. That to enable the United States to maintain the
            independence of Cuba, and to protect the people thereof, as
            well as for its own defense, the government of Cuba will sell
            or lease to the United States lands necessary for coaling or
            naval stations at certain specified points, to be agreed upon
            with the President of the United States.''

    \5\Instructions from Secretary of War Elihu Root to Major General
    Leonard Wood, Military Governor of Cuba (February 9, 1901), reprinted
    in Annual Reports of the War Department for the Fiscal Year Ended June
    30, 1901 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1901), 43.

    \6\As directed by Secretary Root, Governor Wood explained to the Cuban
    Constitutional Convention that ``The limitations of the power of the
    Executive Department of our government by the Resolution of Congress of
    April 20, 1898 [i.e., the Teller Amendment], are such, that the final
    determination upon the whole subject may ultimately rest in Congress,''
    and thus no views of executive branch officials ``can be construed as
    in any way committing the United States to any policy which should
    properly be determined by Congress.'' Letter of General Leonard Wood,
    Military Governor of Cuba, to Dr. Diego Tamayo, President of the
    Committee on Relations of the Cuban Constitutional Convention (February
    21, 1901), printed in Civil Report of Brigadier General Leonard Wood,
    Military Governor of Cuba, for the Period from January 1st to December
    31st 1901 (Government Printing Office), 10.

    \7\Report of the Secretary of War (November 27, 1901), printed in
    Annual Reports of the War Department for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30,
    1901 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1901), 49.

    \8\Editorial Comment, ``The Origin and Purpose of the Platt
    Amendment,'' American Journal of International Law 8 (1914), 585-91.
    Secretary Root's original language, which closely tracks the eventual
    text of the Platt Amendment, also can be found in his February 9, 1901
    instructions to Major-General Leonard Wood, the Military Governor of
    Cuba, reprinted in Annual Reports of the War Department for the Fiscal
    Year Ended June 30, 1901 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office,
    1901), 46.

    \9\Letter of Secretary of War Elihu Root to Major General Leonard Wood,
    Military Governor of Cuba (May 31, 1901), printed in Civil Report of
    Brigadier General Leonard Wood, Military Governor of Cuba, for the
    Period from January 1st to December 31st 1901 (Washington, DC:
    Government Printing Office), 18. See also ``The Cubans Were Warned:
    Advised by Secretary Root Their Action Would Be Rejected.'' The New
    York Times, June 2, 1901.

    \10\Specifically, the Agreement Between the United States of America
    and the Republic of Cuba for the Lease to the United States of Lands in
    Cuba for coaling and naval stations, signed by the President of the
    United States on February 23, 1903, and the Lease to the United States
    by the Government of Cuba of Certain Areas of Land and Water for Naval
    or Coaling Stations, signed by the President of the United States on
    October 2, 1903.

    \11\After the assassination of President McKinley, his Vice President,
    Theodore Roosevelt, was sworn in as the 26th President of the United
    States on September 14, 1901.

    \12\Lease to the United States by the Government of Cuba of Certain
    Areas of Land and Water for Naval or Coaling Stations, signed by the
    President of the United States on October 2, 1903.

    \13\Treaty of Relations between the United States of America and the
    Republic of Cuba, 48 Stat. 1682, TS 866 (1934).

                                    Hearings

        March 23, 2016, full committee hearing on ``The
    Administration's Plan to Close the Guantanamo Bay Detention
    Facility: At What Foreign Policy and National Security Cost?''
    (Mr. Lee Wolosky, Special Envoy for Guantanamo Closure, U.S.
    Department of State; Mr. Paul M. Lewis, Special Envoy for
    Guantanamo Closure, U.S. Department of Defense); and
        February 25, 2016, full committee hearing on
    ``Strengthening U.S. Leadership in a Turbulent World: The FY
    2017 Foreign Affairs Budget.''

                            Committee Consideration

        On March 16, 2016, the Foreign Affairs Committee marked up
    H.R. 4678 pursuant to notice, in open session. After committee
    debate, H.R. 4678 was agreed to by voice vote, and was ordered
    favorably reported by unanimous consent.

                          Committee Oversight Findings

        In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of rules of
    the House of Representatives, the committee reports that
    findings and recommendations of the committee, based on
    oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of House Rule X, are
    incorporated in the descriptive portions of this report,
    particularly in the ``Background and Purpose'' section.

          New Budget Authority, Tax Expenditures, and Federal Mandates

        In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of House Rule XIII and
    the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (P.L. 104-4), the committee
    adopts as its own the estimate of new budget authority,
    entitlement authority, tax expenditure or revenues, and Federal
    mandates contained in the cost estimate prepared by the
    Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section
    402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                   Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

                                         U.S. Congress,
                                   Congressional Budget Office,
                                        Washington, DC, April 11, 2016.

    Hon. Edward R. Royce, Chairman,
    Committee on Foreign Affairs,
    House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

        Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
    prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4678, the United
    States Naval Station Guantanamo Bay Preservation Act.
        If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
    pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Sunita
    D'Monte, who can be reached at 226-2840.
                Sincerely,
                                                    Keith Hall.
    Enclosure

    cc:
            Honorable Eliot L. Engel
            Ranking Member.
    H.R. 4678--United States Naval Station Guantanamo Bay Preservation Act.
        As ordered reported by the House Committee on Foreign
    Affairs on March 16, 2016
        H.R. 4678 would prohibit the President from modifying,
    repealing, or replacing the current lease agreement for the
    U.S. Naval Station in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, unless authorized
    to do so by the Congress through legislation, a new treaty
    ratified by the Senate, or a modification of the existing U.S.
    treaty with Cuba that would be ratified by the Senate. The
    Administration has stated that it does not intend to leave the
    naval base or alter the terms of the current lease agreement;
    therefore, CBO estimates that implementing the bill would have
    no effect on the federal budget.
        Pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply because enacting H.R.
    4678 would not affect direct spending or revenues. CBO
    estimates that enacting H.R. 4678 would not increase net direct
    spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive
    10-year periods beginning in 2027.
        H.R. 4678 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 Sunita D'Monte.
    The estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy
    Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                              Directed Rule Making

        Pursuant to clause 3(c) of House Rule XIII, as modified by
    section 3(i) of H.Res. 5 during the 114th Congress, the
    committee notes that H.R. 4678 contains no directed rule-making
    provisions.

                      Non-Duplication of Federal Programs

        Pursuant to clause 3(c) of House Rule XIII, as modified by
    section 3(g)(2) of H.Res. 5 during the 114th Congress, the
    committee states that no provision of this bill establishes or
    reauthorizes a program of the Federal Government known to be
    duplicative of another Federal program, a program that was
    included in any report from the Government Accountability
    Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-
    139, or a program related to a program identified in the most
    recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.

                        Performance Goals and Objectives

        H.R. 4678 is intended to ensure that Congress plays its
    proper constitutional role in any decision affecting the
    disposition of the United States Naval Station at Guantanamo
    Bay, Cuba, which has its origins in acts of Congress. It states
    clearly that no action may be taken to modify the Guantanamo
    base lease agreements, or otherwise impair the jurisdiction or
    control of the United States over that base, unless
    specifically authorized by Congress, either by statute or by
    Senate consent to a new treaty.

                        Congressional Accountability Act

        H.R. 4678 does not apply to terms and conditions of
    employment or to access to public services or accommodations
    within the legislative branch.

                            New Advisory Committees

        H.R. 4678 does not establish or authorize any new advisory
    committees.

                             Earmark Identification

        H.R. 4678 contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax
    benefits, or limited tariff benefits as described in clauses
    9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of House Rule XXI.

     Presidential Signature Page of the 1903 Lease to the United States by
    the Government of Cuba of Certain Areas of Land and Water for Naval or
                                Coaling Stations

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                  ----------

                      (Courtesy of the National Archives)

                                Dissenting Views

        H.R. 4678, the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay
    Preservation Act, is unnecessary legislation. I respectfully
    dissent and urge opposition to the bill.
        While I agree with both President Barack Obama and
    President George W. Bush that the United States must close the
    detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, I believe that the Naval
    Station at Guantanamo Bay serves a number of worthy, national
    security purposes. As just one example, after the devastating
    earthquake in Haiti in 2010, the Naval Station was used as a
    critical logistical hub for our response.
        This legislation prohibits any changes to existing United
    States control over the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay
    without congressional action through (1) legislation; (2) a new
    treaty ratified by the Senate; or (3) a modification of the
    existing treaty also ratified by the Senate.
        This bill is unnecessary as President Obama has made it
    clear that he has no plans to alter the current lease agreement
    over the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay with the Cuban
    Government.
        In preparation for committee consideration of H.R. 4678, I
    sent a letter to President Obama asking if his administration
    had any plans to return the Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay to
    the Cuban Government. On March 11, 2016, I received a response
    from Department of State Assistant Secretary for Legislative
    Affairs Julia Frifield stating that, ``The Administration has
    no plans to alter the existing lease treaty, payments and other
    arrangements with Cuba related to the Guantanamo Bay Naval
    Station.'' This letter is attached.
        The letter further explains that the Guantanamo Bay Naval
    Station will continue to serve an important role for the United
    States, even after the detention facility closes, including in
    support of ``U.S. Coast Guard and other agency counter-drug and
    migrant interdiction activities.''
        The Committee on Foreign Affairs considered H.R. 4678
    immediately prior to President Obama's March 20-22, 2016, trip
    to Cuba with a goal of politicizing the issue. During this
    trip, President Obama continued to ignore tired, decades-old
    demands from the Cuban Government that the United States return
    the Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay. There is no plan nor has
    there ever been any plan to return the Naval Station at
    Guantanamo Bay to the Cuban Government.
        Democrats and Republicans in Congress agree that the United
    States base at Guantanamo Bay serves several key, national
    security purposes. But, that does not mean that we need
    unnecessary legislation solely intended to undermine our
    President. President Obama has been clear that he does not
    intend to return the Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay to the
    Cuban Government, and we should take his commitment at face
    value.
        For the above reasons, I strongly oppose H.R. 4678 and urge
    my colleagues to join me in opposition.

                                       Eliot L. Engel.
                                  ----------

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                      [all]