Transportation, Housing And Urban Development, And Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010--Conference Report

Floor Speech

TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2010--CONFERENCE REPORT -- (Senate - December 10, 2009)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MENENDEZ. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President, I rise to speak about the omnibus conference bill before the Senate and specifically about provisions on Cuba that have not passed the Senate and have not been subjected to debate by this body. These provisions would undo current law where the Castro regime would have to pay in advance of shipment for goods being sold to them because of their terrible credit history.

Yes, Cuba's credit history is horrible. The Paris Club of creditor nations recently announced that Cuba has failed to pay almost $30 billion in debt. Among poor nations that is the worst credit record in the world.

So I ask: If the Cuban Government has put off paying those to whom it already owes $30 billion, why does anyone think it would meet new financial obligations to American farmers?

Considering the serious economic crisis we are facing right now, we need to focus on solutions for hard-working Americans, not subsidies for a brutal dictatorship. We should evaluate how to encourage the regime to allow a legitimate opening--not in terms of cell phones and hotel rooms that Cubans cannot afford but in terms of the right to organize, the right to think and speak what they believe.

However, what we are doing with this omnibus bill is far from that evaluation, and the process by which these changes have been forced upon this body is so deeply offensive to me and so deeply undemocratic that I have no intention--no intention--of continuing to vote for Omnibus appropriations bills if they are going to jam foreign policy changes down throats of Members in what some consider ``must-pass'' bills.

I am putting my colleagues on notice: You may have the wherewithal to do that because you have a committee perch or an opportunity to stick something in that has not been debated on the floor of the Senate in what you think is a must-pass bill, but do not expect me to cast critical votes to pass that bill.

An example of the danger of what we are doing by changing the definition that is now being changed in this omnibus bill of what we call ``cash in advance'' is exhibited by a Europapress report. I want to quote from that press report: ``During a trade fair this month in Havana, Germany's Ambassador to Cuba, Claude Robert Ellner, told German businessmen that Cuba's debt to the German government had been forgiven''--forgiven--``in the hopes that Cuba will meet its debt obligations to them''--meaning to the businessmen.

In other words, German taxpayers will now be responsible for bailing out its private sector and, by implication, the Castro regime.

Thanks to the U.S. policy we have had up to now, of requiring the Castro regime to pay ``cash in advance'' for its purchases of agricultural products, U.S. taxpayers could rest assured that the same would not happen to them--that we would not have to forgive any debt or obligations in order to make sure private businesspeople got paid by the regime because, otherwise, they would be left defaulted.

The Castro regime has mastered the art of making some European Governments acquiesce to its every whim, even if it means a free pass for its daunting repression.

So how do they do it? It is rather simple. They give European countries a choice: either you do what we say or we will freeze your nationals' bank accounts and default on any debts. To me, that is also known as blackmail.

Let's take Spain, for example. Recently, European news services reported that Spain has begun a diplomatic offensive to convince the Castro regime to unblock nearly 266 million euros--or the equivalent of about 400 million United States dollars--in funds that have been frozen by the Castro regime of over 300 Spanish companies in Cuba. These are Spanish companies doing business in Cuba and now cannot get access to their money.

So what does the Spanish Government do? Not coincidentally, the Spanish Government announced that upon assuming the Presidency of the European Union in 2010, it would enter into a new bilateral agreement with the Castro regime that would replace the current European Union policy which contains diplomatic sanctions for human rights violations.

The Castro regime had made it clear to Spain that the current European Union policy was an ``insurmountable obstacle'' to normal relations and, I might add, for Spanish nationals and companies to get their money back. Therefore, the Spanish Government immediately responded to what I consider to be blackmail.

On a recent visit to Cuba, Spain's Foreign Minister, Miguel Angle Moratinos, met for 3 hours with Raul Castro. He did not get one concession--not one--on human rights. But he did get $300 million that Cuba owed to Spanish companies that do business inside of Cuba.

Is that what the United States of America intends to do?

So the lesson for dictators is, go ahead and freeze the bank accounts of other countries' companies and create debt you do not intend to pay for and you get a free pass for repression.

Look at another article. A recent Reuters article highlights that Cuba continues to block access to foreign business bank accounts. Let me quote from that article:

Many foreign suppliers and investors in Cuba are still unable to repatriate hundreds of millions of dollars from local accounts almost a year after Cuban authorities blocked them because of the financial crisis, foreign diplomats and businessmen said.

It goes on to say in the article:

The businessmen, who asked not to be identified--because they are fearful if they are--said they were increasingly frustrated because the Communist authorities refused to offer explanations or solutions for the situation, which stems from a cash crunch in the Cuban economy triggered by the global downturn and heavy hurricane damage last year.

This is a quote from one of those people. He says:

I have repeatedly e-mailed, visited the offices and sent my representative to the offices of a company I did business with for years and which owes me money, and they simply refuse to talk to me.

That is what a Canadian businessman told Reuters.

The article goes on:

Delegations from foreign banks and investor funds holding commercial paper from Cuba's State banks have repeatedly traveled to Cuba this year seeking answers from the Central Bank or other authorities--without success.

Representatives of some companies with investment or joint ventures on the island say they were bracing for the possibility of not being able to repatriate year-end dividends paid to their accounts in Cuba.

Now, let's remember that some 90 percent of the country's economic activity is in the regime's hands, in the state's hands.

Foreign economic attachés and commercial representatives in Cuba said most of their nationals doing business with the Caribbean island still face payment problems.

That is all from that article. These are all those who are doing business with Cuba now finding themselves and their money trapped.

Last week, the Russian Federation's Audit Chamber revealed that the Cuban regime failed on three occasions to pay installments on the equivalent of $355 million in a credit deal it signed with Russia in September of 2006. That is just the latest episode in a saga that in 2009 alone includes, first, reports by Mexico's La Jornada and Spain's El Pais newspapers that hundreds of foreign companies that transact business with the Cuban regime's authorities have had their accounts frozen--frozen--since January of 2009 by the regime-owned bank that is solely empowered to conduct commercial banking operations in that country.

Second, a June 9, 2009, Reuters article said:

Cuba has rolled over 200 million Euros in bond issues that were due in May, as the country's central bank asked for another year to repay foreign holders of the debt, financial sources in London and Havana said this week.

Those are direct quotes from those articles.

As a reminder, in Castro's Cuba, you can only do business with the regime because private business activity is strictly restricted.

So the real reason so many whose work is often subsidized by business interests advocate Cuba policy changes is about money and commerce, not about freedom and democracy. It makes me wonder why those who spend hours and hours in Havana listening to Castro's soliloquies cannot find minutes--minutes--for human rights and democracy activists. It makes me wonder why those who go and enjoy the Sun of Cuba will not shine the light of freedom on its jails full of political prisoners. They advocate for labor rights in the United States, but they are willing to accept forced labor inside of Cuba. They talk about democracy in Burma, but they are willing to sip the rum with Cuba's dictators.

Which takes me to a place in Cuba called Placetas. Placetas is a city in the Villa Clara Province in the center of Cuba, in the heart of the island, in the center of Cuba. In other words, it is not a beachside resort frequented by Canadian and European tourists.

Placetas is also the home of this couple. It is the home of Cuban political prisoner and prodemocracy leader Jorge Luis Garcia Perez Antunez, generally known as Antunez. On March 15 of 1990, a then-25-year-old Antunez stood at the center square of Placetas listening to the government's official radio transmission calling for the Fourth Congress of the Communist Party. He spontaneously began to shout: ``What we want and what we need are reforms like the ones performed in Eastern Europe.'' Immediately, he was beaten by state security agents, charged with ``oral enemy propaganda,'' and imprisoned. That would begin a 17-year prison term, which is about half of his current life that he spent in prison. His crime? Saying: We need the types of changes that took place in Eastern Europe. For that, 17 years in prison. He was not released until 2007. He is now 45 years old, hopefully with an entire life ahead of him.

The Castro regime would love for Mr. Antunez and his wife, who is also a prodemocracy activist--this says in Spanish, ``we are all the resistance'' and ``long live human rights.'' They would love for him to leave the island permanently, but he refuses to do so. He has decided to stay in Cuba and demand that the human and civil rights of the Cuban people be respected. For this, he has been rearrested over 30 times since 2007.

Last week, at that same center in that small town of Placetas where he had been originally arrested simply for saying that: What we need is a change as we saw in Eastern Europe, Antunez and other local prodemocracy leaders gathered to honor Cuba's current political prisoners, people who simply, through peaceful means, try to create changes for democracy and human rights inside of their country and get arrested and languish in jail.

Antunez and his colleagues were not ``educated'' on the importance of human rights and civil disobedience by foreign tourists, as some of my colleagues suggest would happen--that we need to send foreign tourists to educate the Cubans about human rights and civil disobedience. He and all of those who are languishing in Castro's jails understand about human rights and civil disobedience in a way to try to capture your rights. Unwittingly, though, foreign tourists have financed their repression. They give money to the regime that ultimately gives them the state security forces that throw people such as Antunez in jail.

Let me read an open letter that just came out by Mr. Antunez that was sent to Cuba's dictator Raul Castro. I am going to quote from an English translation.

It says:

Mr. Raul Castro--

This is Mr. Antunez speaking now--

My name is Jorge Luis Garcia Perez Antunez--a former political prisoner--and I am writing to you again not because I pretend to make you aware of something that, far from alien, is commonplace in Cuba due to the nature and politics of your government. For several months now my spouse Yris Tamara Perez Aguilera and I find ourselves under forced house arrest by your political police. The week before the Juanes concert--that is the concert of the famous Colombian singer Juanes--a high ranking State security official upon arresting me informed me that there had been an order for my arrest throughout the island of Cuba, wherever I might be found. He emphasized that they were going to be watching every step I take. Since that date I have lost count of how many times I have been arrested, the majority of times with violence.

Mr. Dictator--allow me a few questions that may help you clarify some doubts amongst those compatriots of mine who are hopeful that your government would diminish repression or that even Democratic openings could be made.

He poses this question:

With what right do the authorities, without a prior crime being committed, detain and impede the free movement of their citizens in violation of a universally recognized right? What feelings could move a man like Captain Idel Gonzalez Morfi to beat my wife, a defenseless woman, so brutally, causing lasting effects to her bones for the sole act of arriving at a radio station to denounce with evidence the torture that her brother received in a Cuban prison. Or is it that for you there are only five families that exist in our country that have the right to protest and demand justice for their jailed relatives? Should you not be ashamed that your corpulent police officers remain stationed for days at the corner of my home to impede us from leaving our house and monitoring our movements in our own city?

Where is the professionalism and ethics of your subordinates that with their ridiculous operations provoke the mockery of the populace towards these persons on almost a daily basis? How do you feel when you encourage or allow these persons who call themselves men to beat and drag women through the streets such as: Damaris Moya Portieles, Marta Diaz, Ana Alfonso Arteaga, Sara Marta Fonseca, Yris Perez, and most recently--the well-known blogger, Yoani Sanchez. I am adding for the record ``the well-known blogger.'' He doesn't say that, but she is a well-known blogger, internationally known, recently beaten simply as she was trying to go to a place of civil disobedience.

How can you and your subordinates sleep calmly after deliberately and maliciously physically knocking down on more than one occasion Idania Yanez Contreras who is several months pregnant? How can you and your government speak about the battle of ideas when you are constantly repressing ideas through beatings, arrests, and years of incarceration?

Maybe your followers cannot find or even attempt to find a response. However, I find myself in the long list of persons that are not afraid to respond.

You act this way because you are a cruel man, and insensible to the pain and suffering of others. You act this way because you are faithful to your anti Democratic and dictatorial vocation, because you are convinced that dictatorships like the one you preside over can only be maintained through terror and torture, and because the most minimal opening can lead to the loss of the one thing that you are interested in--which is maintaining yourself in power.

Lastly, returning to my case in particular, I will respond without even asking you beforehand the concrete motives of your continued repression against my person. Your government and your servants in the repressive corps cannot forgive my two biggest and only ``crimes.'' First, that despite almost two decades of torture and cruel and inhuman punishment during my unjust and severe sanction, you could not break my dignity and my position as a political prisoner. And second, because even though I am accosted and brutalized and above all risk returning to prison, I have taken the decision not to leave my country in which I will continue struggling for a change that I believe is both necessary and inevitable.

The letter is signed: From Placetas, Jorge Luis Garcia Perez Antunez, December 2009.

This is the voice of those who languish under Castro's brutal dictatorship. As you can see, Mr. Antunez is an Afro-Cuban, not part of the White elite of the regime's dictatorship; not what the regime tells the world, that Cubans who are all White seek to oppose the dictatorship. Most of the movement for democracy inside of Cuba are Afro-Cubans. Inside of Cuba, they are subjected to a citizenship status that is less than any human being should be subjected to.

Antunez's voice rings in my head. It tugs at my conscience.

His words:

Despite almost two decades of torture and cruel and inhuman punishment during my unjust and severe sanction, you could not break my dignity and my position as a political prisoner, because even though I am accosted and brutalized and above all risk returning to prison, I have taken the decision not to leave my country in which I will continue struggling for a change I believe is both necessary and inevitable.

Antunez is right. Change in Cuba is inevitable, but the United States needs to be a catalyst of that change. It does not need to be a sustainer of that dictatorship. It does not need to create an infusion of money that only goes to a regime that ultimately uses it not to put more food on the plates of Cuban families but to arrest and brutalize people such as Mr. Antunez.

These are the human rights activists on whom some would turn their backs for the sake of doing business. I guess the only thing they can see is the color of money. Well, not me, not now, and not ever.

Thank you, Mr. President. With that, I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa is recognized.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I don't rise to add to what the Senator from New Jersey said. I just wish to take this opportunity to tell him I agree with him, and I appreciate his leadership on this issue over several years--even the years before he came to the Senate.

Often, I am asked in my State, because we can export so much agricultural stuff, if I would vote to open trade with Cuba. I said I am willing to open trade for Cuba when they give political freedom and economic freedom to the people of that country because this dictator has run Cuba into the most impoverished country in the world. Before he took over, they had a very viable middle class and they were a prosperous country.

I stand ready to help the Senator on what he is trying to do in that area.

Mr. MENENDEZ. If the Senator will yield, I thank the distinguished Senator from Iowa for his comments and for the position he has taken over a long period of time. It may not be the easiest, but I believe it is the one that is morally correct. Most important, on that day--which I believe is sooner rather than later--in which Cubans are free, they will remember who stood with them in the midst of this. That will make all the difference in the world. I thank the Senator.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source