On Cuban compensation for US nationalized properties
Posted by: "NPV" nvaldes@unm.edu
Mon May 25, 2009 4:53 pm (PDT)
On the matter of Cuban compensation for US properties -
It is important to consider the issues from each side of the conflict:
1. Cuba offered to pay compensation in 1960 to all foreign companies.
However, the Cuban position was that the compensation formula would be
similar to what the United States government did at the time that the US
military took over Japan in 1945. At that time the United States government
assumed that in order to have a political democracy in Japan it was
necessary to carry out an agrarian reform diminishing the economic (and
hence political power) of the landlords. The agrarian reform established by
the US had a compensation formula by which 1/3 of the value of the landed
property would be paid in cash and immediately, 1/3 would be paid in
installments during a 30 year period, and the last 1/3 would be paid in cash
[with interest] at the end of a 30 year period. The Cuban government adopted
a similar formula for US properties.
2. The US government, on the other hand, demanded that Cuba pay "in cash,
adequate and prompt" compensation. Adequate meant - pay what the owners of
the properties say the property is worth. Prompt meant pay all of the
compensation immediately. Finally, in cash meant that it should not be in
bonds, securities, etc.
3. The past issue that should be considered: the formula to determine the
worth of the property. The Cuban government maintained that the value of a
property should be determined on the basis of what the owners said the
property was worth for purposes of taxation throughout the 1950s. As a rule,
foreign investors undervalued their properties in order to pay fewer taxes
on a yearly basis. The Cuban government maintained that that would be the
figure that the state would accept; the US property owners disagreed. The
Cuban authorities offered to pay the worth that the owners claimed, but then
the owners had to pay back taxes (plus a penalty and interest). the United
States government considered such formula unacceptable.
The Cuban government also offered to establish a special fund for purposes
of compensation stemming from the sale of sugar to the United States. The
US government did not accept that proposal.
The majority of the US companies declared their investments in Cuba as
losses and consequently deducted their declared value to the IRS.
Nelson P Valdes
Showing posts with label Cuba. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cuba. Show all posts
Monday, May 25, 2009
Property Compensation Claims
US-Cuba thaw may mean compensation for lost assets
Created 25/05/2009 - 16:45
SOURCE: AP
After 47 years, Mario Sanchez's memory of the house near the Havana Zoo where he was born has faded.But he has not forgotten the address, and can look at the roof using satellite imaging on his computer at his Florida home, 370km away.
"My hope and dream is that one day I would be able to have my property returned to me," Sanchez, a computer science professor at Miami Dade Community College, said in a telephone interview.
With the prospect of improved relations between the United States and Cuba, Sanchez believes that day may no longer be so far off.
He's not alone. Some US companies and Cuban-Americans still hope to recover ownership or compensation for what they lost in the early 1960s, when Fidel Castro nationalized factories, farms, hotels, office towers, department stores, mills, mines, farmland and homes - the largest seizure of American-owned property in history.
The Obama administration's overtures to Havana, its easing of some facets of the 47-year-old trade embargo, and the Cuban government's willingness to discuss improved relations have kindled hope for settlements.
"It's early yet, but I'm optimistic," said Robert Muse, a Washington attorney who represents two of the largest claimants to certify lost property with the US Department of Justice.
"Any warming trend is positive because these claims can't be resolved in absence of rapprochement with Cuba."
Muse, who asked that his clients not be named in print, said international law recognizes the right of foreign owners to seek compensation for seized property.
In 1972, nearly 6000 American companies and individuals who were US citizens at the time their property was confiscated filed claims with the US government for property then worth more than $US1.8 billion and estimated to now be worth around $US7 billion.
Claimants include General Electric, General Motors, Ford, Sears, Coke, Pepsi, Citicorp and Goodyear. Texaco lost its refinery in the eastern city of Santiago. ITT was stripped of its stake in Cuba's phone company.
None of the numerous US companies contacted for this story would comment on claims, citing legal constraints.
But Muse said the "claims remain assets on the books of the companies."
The 10 largest claimants are US companies accounting for nearly $US1 billion of the original losses, he said.
But they are unlikely to want their assets back after years of neglect, and may settle instead for receiving special incentives to invest in the island if controls are lifted, Muse said.
"Companies are willing to be creative and innovative in settling," he said in a telephone interview.
Cuba also expropriated property belonging to hundreds of non-US firms and has signed compensation agreements with Canada, Switzerland, France, Great Britain, Spain and Mexico.
The US negotiated settlements for American property lost to Vietnam's communist government, to Iran after its Islamic revolution and to Eastern European countries that went communist after World War 2.
But not Cuba. In 1960 Castro's government offered compensation in bonds or sugar exports to the US but American authorities say that would have required their country to buy huge amounts of sugar at inflated prices.
A year later the US imposed the embargo and froze Cuban government accounts in American banks. At the end of 2005, the US Treasury Department said $US268.3 million remained, though how much is still there today is unclear.
Some of that money went to families who sued Cuba in American courts under a 1996 law allowing victims of terrorist groups or countries that sponsor them to seek damages.
Cuba has long said it is willing to compensate US interests but wants restitution for the embargo's economic damage, which it calculates at $US93 billion.
The Cuban government is less willing to pay for property lost by Cubans who later became US citizens.
That group includes Sanchez, the computer science professor, who was smuggled off the island at age 6 and didn't see his parents for six more years.
His family's land, home and beach house were seized when officials forced his father, the owner of a transportation company, to work for the new Castro government as a logistical consultant.
Now 53, Sanchez holds deeds to both homes and can still reel off his exact address in Havana's Nuevo Vedado neighbourhood: "Oeste 818 between Conill and Santa Ana Streets."
From what he sees on the satellite images, "The roof looks good." "I would have no problem living there," he said.
But some say it's impossible to turn back the clock.
"Finding out what belongs to who is going to be very hard. Too hard," said Clara Del Valle, 65, a descendant of the Bacardi family whose rum empire had to leave Cuba after Castro took over.
She is vice chairwoman of the Cuban-American National Foundation, an anti-Castro group.
Sanchez's house is an example of the difficulties that may lie ahead.
It looks unchanged from the fashionable one-story home in a black-and-white 1950s photo that Sanchez has, but is occupied by 80-year-old Iliana Paz and her daughter and son-in-law.
"This is my world," Paz said.
A retired attendant at a military mess hall, Paz said she lived in a decrepit apartment building until she moved into the house 42 years ago.
She said Sanchez's mother asked her to care for it until her return. She gave the mother's full name without prompting, saying that this proved she was in the home legally.
But Sanchez said he has never heard of Paz and that his mother, now deceased, never said anything about such instructions.
Also, Paz's account has inconsistencies, and neighbours suggest the house is controlled by the government, which decides who can live there.
Sanchez said he doesn't want to displace anyone.
"How do you deal with people who have been living in your house for 40 years?" he asked. "Do you throw them out on the street? You can't do it." Paz said she won't let him.
"Nothing can make me move," she vowed. "Nothing, nothing, nothing."
Source URL (retrieved on 26/05/2009 - 06:35): http://www.odt.co.nz/news/world/57892/us-cuba-thaw-may-mean-compensation-lost-assets
Created 25/05/2009 - 16:45
SOURCE: AP
After 47 years, Mario Sanchez's memory of the house near the Havana Zoo where he was born has faded.But he has not forgotten the address, and can look at the roof using satellite imaging on his computer at his Florida home, 370km away.
"My hope and dream is that one day I would be able to have my property returned to me," Sanchez, a computer science professor at Miami Dade Community College, said in a telephone interview.
With the prospect of improved relations between the United States and Cuba, Sanchez believes that day may no longer be so far off.
He's not alone. Some US companies and Cuban-Americans still hope to recover ownership or compensation for what they lost in the early 1960s, when Fidel Castro nationalized factories, farms, hotels, office towers, department stores, mills, mines, farmland and homes - the largest seizure of American-owned property in history.
The Obama administration's overtures to Havana, its easing of some facets of the 47-year-old trade embargo, and the Cuban government's willingness to discuss improved relations have kindled hope for settlements.
"It's early yet, but I'm optimistic," said Robert Muse, a Washington attorney who represents two of the largest claimants to certify lost property with the US Department of Justice.
"Any warming trend is positive because these claims can't be resolved in absence of rapprochement with Cuba."
Muse, who asked that his clients not be named in print, said international law recognizes the right of foreign owners to seek compensation for seized property.
In 1972, nearly 6000 American companies and individuals who were US citizens at the time their property was confiscated filed claims with the US government for property then worth more than $US1.8 billion and estimated to now be worth around $US7 billion.
Claimants include General Electric, General Motors, Ford, Sears, Coke, Pepsi, Citicorp and Goodyear. Texaco lost its refinery in the eastern city of Santiago. ITT was stripped of its stake in Cuba's phone company.
None of the numerous US companies contacted for this story would comment on claims, citing legal constraints.
But Muse said the "claims remain assets on the books of the companies."
The 10 largest claimants are US companies accounting for nearly $US1 billion of the original losses, he said.
But they are unlikely to want their assets back after years of neglect, and may settle instead for receiving special incentives to invest in the island if controls are lifted, Muse said.
"Companies are willing to be creative and innovative in settling," he said in a telephone interview.
Cuba also expropriated property belonging to hundreds of non-US firms and has signed compensation agreements with Canada, Switzerland, France, Great Britain, Spain and Mexico.
The US negotiated settlements for American property lost to Vietnam's communist government, to Iran after its Islamic revolution and to Eastern European countries that went communist after World War 2.
But not Cuba. In 1960 Castro's government offered compensation in bonds or sugar exports to the US but American authorities say that would have required their country to buy huge amounts of sugar at inflated prices.
A year later the US imposed the embargo and froze Cuban government accounts in American banks. At the end of 2005, the US Treasury Department said $US268.3 million remained, though how much is still there today is unclear.
Some of that money went to families who sued Cuba in American courts under a 1996 law allowing victims of terrorist groups or countries that sponsor them to seek damages.
Cuba has long said it is willing to compensate US interests but wants restitution for the embargo's economic damage, which it calculates at $US93 billion.
The Cuban government is less willing to pay for property lost by Cubans who later became US citizens.
That group includes Sanchez, the computer science professor, who was smuggled off the island at age 6 and didn't see his parents for six more years.
His family's land, home and beach house were seized when officials forced his father, the owner of a transportation company, to work for the new Castro government as a logistical consultant.
Now 53, Sanchez holds deeds to both homes and can still reel off his exact address in Havana's Nuevo Vedado neighbourhood: "Oeste 818 between Conill and Santa Ana Streets."
From what he sees on the satellite images, "The roof looks good." "I would have no problem living there," he said.
But some say it's impossible to turn back the clock.
"Finding out what belongs to who is going to be very hard. Too hard," said Clara Del Valle, 65, a descendant of the Bacardi family whose rum empire had to leave Cuba after Castro took over.
She is vice chairwoman of the Cuban-American National Foundation, an anti-Castro group.
Sanchez's house is an example of the difficulties that may lie ahead.
It looks unchanged from the fashionable one-story home in a black-and-white 1950s photo that Sanchez has, but is occupied by 80-year-old Iliana Paz and her daughter and son-in-law.
"This is my world," Paz said.
A retired attendant at a military mess hall, Paz said she lived in a decrepit apartment building until she moved into the house 42 years ago.
She said Sanchez's mother asked her to care for it until her return. She gave the mother's full name without prompting, saying that this proved she was in the home legally.
But Sanchez said he has never heard of Paz and that his mother, now deceased, never said anything about such instructions.
Also, Paz's account has inconsistencies, and neighbours suggest the house is controlled by the government, which decides who can live there.
Sanchez said he doesn't want to displace anyone.
"How do you deal with people who have been living in your house for 40 years?" he asked. "Do you throw them out on the street? You can't do it." Paz said she won't let him.
"Nothing can make me move," she vowed. "Nothing, nothing, nothing."
Source URL (retrieved on 26/05/2009 - 06:35): http://www.odt.co.nz/news/world/57892/us-cuba-thaw-may-mean-compensation-lost-assets
Monday, March 2, 2009
Cuba No Threat to US
Annual Threat Assessment of the
Intelligence Community for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
Dennis C. Blair
Director of National Intelligence
25 February 2009 http://www.dni.gov/testimonies/20090225_testimony.pdf
Cuba
President Raul Castro’s record since formally taking power in February 2008 indicates
his primary objective in the coming year will be to make Cuba’s dysfunctional socialist economy
more efficient. His task has been made more difficult, however, by the extensive damage to the
country’s already weak agricultural sector and infrastructure by three major and successive
hurricanes last year. The global economic downturn will further slow growth, diminishing the
regime’s options for addressing public dissatisfaction with living conditions.
Havana’s competent and immediate response to the hurricanes underscores the
effectiveness of regime controls and indicates that it remains capable of preventing a
spontaneous mass migration. Nevertheless, we judge that at a minimum the annual flow of
Cuban migrants to the United States will stay at the same high levels of about 35,000 legal and
illegal migrants annually that have prevailed over the past several years.
Raul almost certainly will continue to proceed cautiously on any reforms to the economy
in order to maintain elite consensus and avoid raising public expectations beyond what he is able
or willing to deliver. We have seen no indication in the modest changes he has implemented that
he intends to abandon core Communist economic principles, such as state ownership of
production. On the political front, all indications are that Raul will continue to deny elements of
civil society and pro-democracy dissidents the exercise of free expression.
Venezuela’s preferential terms for oil sales and payments for Cuban medical personnel
and other technical specialists will remain Cuba’s economic lifeline, despite Cuba’s efforts to
attract other sources of foreign investment from countries such as China and Russia. President
Chavez probably will prioritize aid to Havana over other foreign policy commitments.
We assess Raul will continue his efforts to bolster Havana’s international legitimacy by
projecting a more moderate political image. Nevertheless, Cuba almost certainly will remain
heavily involved behind-the-scenes in counseling and supporting authoritarian populist
governments in Latin America and otherwise seeking to undermine US influence across the
region.
…
Cuba, though an economic basket case, can still influence the Latin American left because of its socalled “anti-imperialist” stance.
…
Venezuela and Cuba have been particularly adept at parlaying provision of charitable
medical services to nationals of other countries into support in international forums such as the
United Nations.
Intelligence Community for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
Dennis C. Blair
Director of National Intelligence
25 February 2009 http://www.dni.gov/testimonies/20090225_testimony.pdf
Cuba
President Raul Castro’s record since formally taking power in February 2008 indicates
his primary objective in the coming year will be to make Cuba’s dysfunctional socialist economy
more efficient. His task has been made more difficult, however, by the extensive damage to the
country’s already weak agricultural sector and infrastructure by three major and successive
hurricanes last year. The global economic downturn will further slow growth, diminishing the
regime’s options for addressing public dissatisfaction with living conditions.
Havana’s competent and immediate response to the hurricanes underscores the
effectiveness of regime controls and indicates that it remains capable of preventing a
spontaneous mass migration. Nevertheless, we judge that at a minimum the annual flow of
Cuban migrants to the United States will stay at the same high levels of about 35,000 legal and
illegal migrants annually that have prevailed over the past several years.
Raul almost certainly will continue to proceed cautiously on any reforms to the economy
in order to maintain elite consensus and avoid raising public expectations beyond what he is able
or willing to deliver. We have seen no indication in the modest changes he has implemented that
he intends to abandon core Communist economic principles, such as state ownership of
production. On the political front, all indications are that Raul will continue to deny elements of
civil society and pro-democracy dissidents the exercise of free expression.
Venezuela’s preferential terms for oil sales and payments for Cuban medical personnel
and other technical specialists will remain Cuba’s economic lifeline, despite Cuba’s efforts to
attract other sources of foreign investment from countries such as China and Russia. President
Chavez probably will prioritize aid to Havana over other foreign policy commitments.
We assess Raul will continue his efforts to bolster Havana’s international legitimacy by
projecting a more moderate political image. Nevertheless, Cuba almost certainly will remain
heavily involved behind-the-scenes in counseling and supporting authoritarian populist
governments in Latin America and otherwise seeking to undermine US influence across the
region.
…
Cuba, though an economic basket case, can still influence the Latin American left because of its socalled “anti-imperialist” stance.
…
Venezuela and Cuba have been particularly adept at parlaying provision of charitable
medical services to nationals of other countries into support in international forums such as the
United Nations.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Ibero American Summit Urges End of Embargo
SAN SALVADOR, El Salvador (AP) -- Latin American leaders are urging the United States to repeal its 47-year-old trade embargo against Cuba.
The leaders say the "unilateral" embargo is unacceptable and harms the Cuban people.
The leaders made the statement on Friday, the final day of the IberoAmerican Summit in El Salvador.
The move came after the U.N. General Assembly on Wednesday asked the U.S. for the 17th year in a row to lift the embargo.
The U.S. has no diplomatic relations with Cuba and lists the country as a state sponsor of terror.
The embargo, imposed in 1962, has been tightened during President Bush's two terms.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Terrorism probes still haunting Posada at 80
Posted on Tue, Feb. 26, 2008
Miami Herald
BY JAY WEAVER
Luis Posada Carriles, the anti-Castro Cuban militant, celebrated his 80th birthday this month at an undisclosed location in Miami, but many serious legal and political questions about his alleged crimes as a younger man still loom as large as ever.
In New Jersey, Posada is the ''target'' of a federal grand jury investigation into the series of 1997 tourist-site bombings in Havana, his attorney Arturo Hernandez confirmed to The Miami Herald. Posada has denied any involvement in the bombings.
In Washington, Posada's alleged role in the bombing of a 1976 Cuban airliner that killed 73 people is being revisited by a Democratic lawmaker from Massachusetts who plans to hold congressional hearings on the matter in the spring.
And Posada's immigration status remains an issue with the Justice Deparment, which is pressing its appeal of a Texas judge's decision to dismiss an indictment that charged the Cuban with lying about his 2005 entry into the United States.
Indeed, everyone seems to have something to say about the former CIA-trained explosives expert who remains a freedom fighter in the minds of some and an international terrorist in the eyes of others.
Posada isn't talking to the media, but his attorney says the octogenarian is an innocent man in poor health who wants to spend the rest of his life in Miami among family, friends and exiles.
MOST SERIOUS
Perhaps Posada's most serious legal challenge is in Newark, N.J., where a federal grand jury, now in its third year, is weighing whether to indict Posada on conspiracy charges for the killing of an Italian tourist in a 1997 hotel bombing in Havana.
Justice officials won't comment, but they have a fax and other documents showing that Posada allegedly coordinated $3,200 in wire transfers from Cuban exiles in New Jersey to co-conspirators in Central America for the bombing campaign. Also, FBI agents have questioned jailed bombing recruits in Cuba and key witnesses in the United States and Central America familiar with Posada's alleged mission to disrupt the Cuban tourism industry.
One potential witness -- a notable writer who coauthored a 1998 New York Times series on Posada's history of violent activities against former Cuban leader Fidel Castro -- said she received grand jury subpoenas but has not testified before the New Jersey panel.
The series was based on her six-hour interview, most of it tape-recorded, with Posada in which he admitted to masterminding the Havana tourist-site bombings.
''They do not need me,'' author Ann Louise Bardach said.
Rep. William Delahunt, a Massachusetts Democrat, is more than willing to enter the political fray.
But Delahunt's interest has nothing to do with the 1997 bombings. He's interested in Posada's alleged role in the bombing of a 1976 Cuban airliner that killed 73 people, including members of the Cuban national fencing team.
Posada was acquitted by a Venezuelan military tribunal. While awaiting a retrial by a civil court in Venezuela, Posada escaped from prison in 1985.
Delahunt, annoyed by the government's lack of response to Venezuela's extradition request to try Posada, has drafted a resolution calling on the administration to urge the United Nations to create an ad hoc tribunal to prosecute him. He also plans to hold more public hearings on Capitol Hill.
''You cannot talk about a war on terror while Posada is still running around [South] Florida,'' said Caleb Rossiter, one of Delahunt's top aides.
SOME SUPPORT
But Posada has supporters in Washington, mainly Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a Republican from California.
In defending Posada, Rohrabacher points out that a 1977 taped interview by a New York-based journalist reveals that he never admitted to planting the airliner bomb.
In a Jan. 30 letter to a House Foreign Affairs subcommittee, Rohrabacher said testimony by journalist Blake Fleetwood was inconsistent with the reporter's own tapes.
Fleetwood said Rohrabacher has distorted his statements. In an e-mail to The Miami Herald, Fleetwood wrote: ``There is no doubt in my mind, from what Posada told me during my interview, that Posada was deeply involved in the conspiracy that culminated in the planting of the bomb and the deaths of 73 innocent civilians.''
Hernandez denied that his client was involved in any way and dismissed allegations of terrorism.
``He's not a terrorist. He's never been a terrorist.''
******************
Unpublished Letter to Miamii Herald
To the Editor;
Re: http://www.miamiherald.com/548/story/433488.html
It is often said that terrorism lies in the eyes of the beholder.
Real horrific crimes are committed, but political identification too often clouds moral judgment.
Think of Northern Ireland, Israel, Palestine, Sri Lanka, even 9/11. One man's villain is another man's hero.
Venezuela and Cuba demand extradition from the US of Luis Posada Carriles as a terrorist and the US justifies the anachronistic listing of Cuba as a terrorist state because it has given asylum to Joanne Cheismard. Brothers to the Rescue planes were shot down by a country protecting its sovereign air space or as wanton murder.
After 49 years, it's time to stop. Terrible inhumane things are done by both sides in war, revolution and counter-revolution, with the noblest of self-proclaimed intentions.
Cuba has a new leader, as soon will the US. They must show the courage to bridge 90 miles with a spirit of mutual respect. After a long conflict, wishing that the other were different is normal. However, setting preconditions for talking, insisting that the antagonist must first change itself to become an acceptable interlocutor, means one is not serious about solving problems.
John McAuliff
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Ag Sales at Havana Trade Fair
Cuba buys $300 mn in food products at trade fair
Havana, Nov 11 (EFE).- Cuba purchased more than $300 million worth of food
from Canadian, Chinese, Venezuelan and U.S. companies, among others, during
the 25th Havana Trade Fair that ended this weekend, officials said.
Some 1,425 firms from 53 countries took part in the fair, which ended on
Saturday.
The head of Cuban state-owned food importer Alimport, Pedro Alvarez, told
Efe that the island's purchases of food products would total between $1.6
billion and $1.7 billion this year, representing an increase of nearly $600
million over the past four years.
Alimport's purchases at the Havana Trade Fair reached some $301 million, of
which contracts with U.S. firms totaled about $106 million, "a figure much
smaller than in the previous year," Alvarez said.
"The blockade is directly harming U.S. companies due to all the limitations
that their government imposes on them by way of a complex system that does
not allow exports or travel and forces us to buy from them in cash," the
Cuban official said.
Washington has maintained a trade embargo against the island for more than
four decades.
The embargo was put in place in 1962 and, since then, 10 U.S. presidents
have supported it hoping it would lead to regime change in Havana, taking
the position that any cash infusion into Cuba, whether via tourism,
remittances or business dealings, only rewards and prolongs the life of the
communist government.
In 2003, President George W. Bush's administration tightened the embargo.
Except for certain exceptions, the United States prohibits the travel of
U.S. citizens to Cuba and, since 2004, Washington has restricted
Cuban-Americans to one visit every three years. Those who violate the law
are subject to fines and possible prison terms.
Alvarez said that despite the obstacles posed by U.S. regulations, 203 U.S.
businessmen took part in the fair.
The U.S. firms taking part in the fair are "efficient and competitive
suppliers," but due to the restrictions imposed by the embargo "they become
uncertain" sources of goods, Alvarez said.
Since food sales started in 2001, "they have remained stagnated by the
embargo, which is seriously harming U.S. companies," the Cuban official
said.
"The common denominator among U.S. businessmen has been total rejection of
the measures imposed by their government," Alvarez said.
He cited as examples the agreements signed for the purchase of 25,000 tons
of wheat from Nebraska and chicken from suppliers in Alabama, as well as
deals for corn and soy products.
Cuban purchases of U.S. food products totaled some $560 million in 2006,
Alvarez said.
Since food sales began in December 2001, Cuba has cut deals totaling more
than $2.2 billion with U.S. firms.
The Alimport chief said Cuba also signed deals at the Havana Trade Fair with
companies from Canada, China, Vietnam, Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, Italy,
Spain and France.
The contracts with Canada totaled some $140 million and covered the purchase
of wheat, peas and powdered milk, while the island agreed to purchase
200,000 tons of rice from Vietnam for more than $90 million, the Cuban
official said.
Cuba agreed to purchase feed from firms in Mexico and the Dominican
Republic, as well as supermarket products from Spanish suppliers, Alvarez
said.
"We are negotiating the fundamentals for food for the first third of the
year, from January to April, and, on an exception basis, some transactions
up to May or June (of 2008)," the head of Cuba's state-owned food import
firm said.
The Havana Trade Fair drew 997 foreign companies and 428 Cuban firms, as
well as 19 official delegations and 36 chamber of commerce delegations.
Spain, with more than 80 companies attending, was the largest foreign
exhibitor, the Trade Office in Havana said.
Some 45 percent of Cuba's foreign trade is with other countries in the
Americas, while Europe, Asia and the Middle East account for about 26
percent of trade.
Cuba's main trading partners are Venezuela, China, Spain, Canada, Italy and
Brazil, accounting for around 70 percent of the island's foreign trade. EFE
Havana, Nov 11 (EFE).- Cuba purchased more than $300 million worth of food
from Canadian, Chinese, Venezuelan and U.S. companies, among others, during
the 25th Havana Trade Fair that ended this weekend, officials said.
Some 1,425 firms from 53 countries took part in the fair, which ended on
Saturday.
The head of Cuban state-owned food importer Alimport, Pedro Alvarez, told
Efe that the island's purchases of food products would total between $1.6
billion and $1.7 billion this year, representing an increase of nearly $600
million over the past four years.
Alimport's purchases at the Havana Trade Fair reached some $301 million, of
which contracts with U.S. firms totaled about $106 million, "a figure much
smaller than in the previous year," Alvarez said.
"The blockade is directly harming U.S. companies due to all the limitations
that their government imposes on them by way of a complex system that does
not allow exports or travel and forces us to buy from them in cash," the
Cuban official said.
Washington has maintained a trade embargo against the island for more than
four decades.
The embargo was put in place in 1962 and, since then, 10 U.S. presidents
have supported it hoping it would lead to regime change in Havana, taking
the position that any cash infusion into Cuba, whether via tourism,
remittances or business dealings, only rewards and prolongs the life of the
communist government.
In 2003, President George W. Bush's administration tightened the embargo.
Except for certain exceptions, the United States prohibits the travel of
U.S. citizens to Cuba and, since 2004, Washington has restricted
Cuban-Americans to one visit every three years. Those who violate the law
are subject to fines and possible prison terms.
Alvarez said that despite the obstacles posed by U.S. regulations, 203 U.S.
businessmen took part in the fair.
The U.S. firms taking part in the fair are "efficient and competitive
suppliers," but due to the restrictions imposed by the embargo "they become
uncertain" sources of goods, Alvarez said.
Since food sales started in 2001, "they have remained stagnated by the
embargo, which is seriously harming U.S. companies," the Cuban official
said.
"The common denominator among U.S. businessmen has been total rejection of
the measures imposed by their government," Alvarez said.
He cited as examples the agreements signed for the purchase of 25,000 tons
of wheat from Nebraska and chicken from suppliers in Alabama, as well as
deals for corn and soy products.
Cuban purchases of U.S. food products totaled some $560 million in 2006,
Alvarez said.
Since food sales began in December 2001, Cuba has cut deals totaling more
than $2.2 billion with U.S. firms.
The Alimport chief said Cuba also signed deals at the Havana Trade Fair with
companies from Canada, China, Vietnam, Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, Italy,
Spain and France.
The contracts with Canada totaled some $140 million and covered the purchase
of wheat, peas and powdered milk, while the island agreed to purchase
200,000 tons of rice from Vietnam for more than $90 million, the Cuban
official said.
Cuba agreed to purchase feed from firms in Mexico and the Dominican
Republic, as well as supermarket products from Spanish suppliers, Alvarez
said.
"We are negotiating the fundamentals for food for the first third of the
year, from January to April, and, on an exception basis, some transactions
up to May or June (of 2008)," the head of Cuba's state-owned food import
firm said.
The Havana Trade Fair drew 997 foreign companies and 428 Cuban firms, as
well as 19 official delegations and 36 chamber of commerce delegations.
Spain, with more than 80 companies attending, was the largest foreign
exhibitor, the Trade Office in Havana said.
Some 45 percent of Cuba's foreign trade is with other countries in the
Americas, while Europe, Asia and the Middle East account for about 26
percent of trade.
Cuba's main trading partners are Venezuela, China, Spain, Canada, Italy and
Brazil, accounting for around 70 percent of the island's foreign trade. EFE
Orlando Sentinel Calls for End of Embargo Again
orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/orl-ed13307nov13,0,4204551.story
OrlandoSentinel.com
EDITORIAL
A wink-wink on embargo
Our position: The hypocrisy on Cuban trade should end by totally lifting sanctions.
November 13, 2007
The great hypocrisy of the U.S. trade embargo with Cuba came into fine focus last week, when more than 100 American businesses showed up at the Havana International Fair.
Business is good for the U.S. and its amigos. Sales from American farmers to Cuba have risen to more than $500 million per year. The legal loophole, put in play by the U.S. government, is that all transactions have to be made in cash.
It's time to stop the hard-line charade put on by the Bush administration and try to broker a plan to ease trade restrictions. Even Republicans like Gov. Dave Heineman of Nebraska favor expanding trade relationships.
Isolation hasn't worked for nearly 50 years. Time to try another approach.
Copyright © 2007, Orlando Sentinel
OrlandoSentinel.com
EDITORIAL
A wink-wink on embargo
Our position: The hypocrisy on Cuban trade should end by totally lifting sanctions.
November 13, 2007
The great hypocrisy of the U.S. trade embargo with Cuba came into fine focus last week, when more than 100 American businesses showed up at the Havana International Fair.
Business is good for the U.S. and its amigos. Sales from American farmers to Cuba have risen to more than $500 million per year. The legal loophole, put in play by the U.S. government, is that all transactions have to be made in cash.
It's time to stop the hard-line charade put on by the Bush administration and try to broker a plan to ease trade restrictions. Even Republicans like Gov. Dave Heineman of Nebraska favor expanding trade relationships.
Isolation hasn't worked for nearly 50 years. Time to try another approach.
Copyright © 2007, Orlando Sentinel
Friday, November 9, 2007
Miami Herald Supports Travel and Remittances
Miami Herald Editorial
Posted on Wed, Nov. 07, 2007
More remittances, travel for a free Cuba
Slowly but surely, change is coming to Cuba. Even Cuban teens are risking arrest to wear plastic bracelets stamped cambio (change). Now is the time for the United States to do its part to follow the advice of the late Pope John Paul II for the world to ''open itself to Cuba.'' The U.S. government should lift harsh restrictions on travel and remittances to the island to encourage more people-to-people contacts and support for Cubans pushing for democracy.
Castro's fantasy
Fissures among the communist regime's ruling elite are becoming more evident. Last week at the United Nations, Foreign Minister Felipe Pérez Roque said that Cuba was ready to renounce ''its sovereignty'' to ''join a grand bloc of Latin American and Caribbean nations.'' The comment may reflect Fidel Castro's fantasy, now adopted by Venezuela's Hugo Chávez, of a ''revolutionary'' empire. But it contradicts years of nationalist fervor fanned by the regime.
More telling is that the minister's remarks weren't published in Cuba's official press. This could be a sign of divisions between Castro loyalists and those who favor Fidel's brother, Raúl, the provisional ruler since Fidel became ill last year. Other signs suggest many within the official ranks may be fed up with the totalitarian system that offers no better future.
This is why President Bush was correct in his recent speech on Cuba to encourage Cubans in the military, police and government to strive for reconciliation and democratic change. After nearly 50 years of dictatorship, Cubans deserve better than cosmetic economic reform without human rights.
The U.S. government should do more to break the regime's imposed isolation of the Cuban people. How will civil society grow without outside resources and contacts? How will Cubans, including government and military officials, overcome their fear of change?
More family travel and cultural and academic exchanges would open a world of information and supportive contacts for Cubans on the island. More remittances would help sustain political prisoners as well as Cuban democrats stripped of jobs. This would allow Cubans to compare democracy and free markets to the regime's alternative.
Isolation a tool
President Bush should take the advice of experts like Vaclav Havel and Lech Walesa, who lived the transition to democracy in Eastern Europe, and most Cuban dissidents including hard-liner Martha Beatriz Roque. All push for more openings, travel and contact with Cuba. It is no accident that Cuba and North Korea are the longest-lasting dictatorships left. Both have used isolation to keep people enslaved.
After Fidel Castro dies, Cubans will have a chance to shape their destiny. Opening up to Cuba now will encourage a transition to freedom.
Unpublished letter to the editor
To the Editor,
I hope that the President or Congress follow the Miami Herald's advice and quickly restore remittances and travel to Cuba by Cuban Americans and for the purpose of non-tourist people to people exchanges.
In order to avoid bureaucratic delays by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, a general license should be established for all Cuban Americans and for IRS recognized not-for-profit 501c3 organizations. Visas should also be granted so American educational institutions can bring Cuban counterparts to the US.
This will enable the American student, religious, cultural, sports, professional, humanitarian and community groups that were active in the later Clinton and early Bush years to rapidly renew their diverse contacts in Cuba.
Many news accounts and documents emerging from Cuba suggest that a serious discussion is underway among the population and political leaders about needed economic and social reforms. Our country is far more likely to understand what is really taking place and to have a positive influence by interaction than by isolating ourselves from this process.
A positive initiative from Washington on travel is far more likely to encourage reform tendencies in Havana than provocative threats of instability and calls for military disloyalty.
Nearly 500 Americans, including representatives of exchange and humanitarian organizations, have signed a letter to Congressional leaders in support of family and purposeful travel. It can be seen at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/congresstravel/
Posted on Wed, Nov. 07, 2007
More remittances, travel for a free Cuba
Slowly but surely, change is coming to Cuba. Even Cuban teens are risking arrest to wear plastic bracelets stamped cambio (change). Now is the time for the United States to do its part to follow the advice of the late Pope John Paul II for the world to ''open itself to Cuba.'' The U.S. government should lift harsh restrictions on travel and remittances to the island to encourage more people-to-people contacts and support for Cubans pushing for democracy.
Castro's fantasy
Fissures among the communist regime's ruling elite are becoming more evident. Last week at the United Nations, Foreign Minister Felipe Pérez Roque said that Cuba was ready to renounce ''its sovereignty'' to ''join a grand bloc of Latin American and Caribbean nations.'' The comment may reflect Fidel Castro's fantasy, now adopted by Venezuela's Hugo Chávez, of a ''revolutionary'' empire. But it contradicts years of nationalist fervor fanned by the regime.
More telling is that the minister's remarks weren't published in Cuba's official press. This could be a sign of divisions between Castro loyalists and those who favor Fidel's brother, Raúl, the provisional ruler since Fidel became ill last year. Other signs suggest many within the official ranks may be fed up with the totalitarian system that offers no better future.
This is why President Bush was correct in his recent speech on Cuba to encourage Cubans in the military, police and government to strive for reconciliation and democratic change. After nearly 50 years of dictatorship, Cubans deserve better than cosmetic economic reform without human rights.
The U.S. government should do more to break the regime's imposed isolation of the Cuban people. How will civil society grow without outside resources and contacts? How will Cubans, including government and military officials, overcome their fear of change?
More family travel and cultural and academic exchanges would open a world of information and supportive contacts for Cubans on the island. More remittances would help sustain political prisoners as well as Cuban democrats stripped of jobs. This would allow Cubans to compare democracy and free markets to the regime's alternative.
Isolation a tool
President Bush should take the advice of experts like Vaclav Havel and Lech Walesa, who lived the transition to democracy in Eastern Europe, and most Cuban dissidents including hard-liner Martha Beatriz Roque. All push for more openings, travel and contact with Cuba. It is no accident that Cuba and North Korea are the longest-lasting dictatorships left. Both have used isolation to keep people enslaved.
After Fidel Castro dies, Cubans will have a chance to shape their destiny. Opening up to Cuba now will encourage a transition to freedom.
Unpublished letter to the editor
To the Editor,
I hope that the President or Congress follow the Miami Herald's advice and quickly restore remittances and travel to Cuba by Cuban Americans and for the purpose of non-tourist people to people exchanges.
In order to avoid bureaucratic delays by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, a general license should be established for all Cuban Americans and for IRS recognized not-for-profit 501c3 organizations. Visas should also be granted so American educational institutions can bring Cuban counterparts to the US.
This will enable the American student, religious, cultural, sports, professional, humanitarian and community groups that were active in the later Clinton and early Bush years to rapidly renew their diverse contacts in Cuba.
Many news accounts and documents emerging from Cuba suggest that a serious discussion is underway among the population and political leaders about needed economic and social reforms. Our country is far more likely to understand what is really taking place and to have a positive influence by interaction than by isolating ourselves from this process.
A positive initiative from Washington on travel is far more likely to encourage reform tendencies in Havana than provocative threats of instability and calls for military disloyalty.
Nearly 500 Americans, including representatives of exchange and humanitarian organizations, have signed a letter to Congressional leaders in support of family and purposeful travel. It can be seen at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/congresstravel/
Friday, October 26, 2007
Time Magazine on Bush speech
Time Magazine
Thursday, Oct. 25, 2007
Keeping Up the Hard Line on Cuba
By Tim Padgett/Miami
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1676501,00.html
Few would argue that democracy and human rights are as rare in Cuba as meat and modern appliances. That was duly underscored on Wednesday when President Bush invited the relatives of jailed Cuban dissidents to the State Department for his first policy speech on Cuba in four years. But any expectation of a major policy shift was dissipated after listening to the President. Bush simply gussied up some of the same old bromides — "The socialist paradise is a tropical gulag" — that have marked U.S.-Cuban relations for decades.
Bush reiterated his hard stance against lifting the 45-year-old U.S. trade embargo on Cuba if the seriously ill Fidel Castro, as expected, is succeeded by his brother Raul, who already runs the government. Predictably, Fidel said Bush's speech reflected the U.S.'s desire to "reconquer" Cuba. And the Castro brothers aren't exactly cowed by these traditional verbal assaults. They have thrived on it in the past: heated U.S. rhetoric usually bolsters their image at home as the island's anti-Yanqui defenders. With plenty of material support from Hugo Chavez in Venezuela (about 90,000 barrels of oil per day on highly favorable finance terms), the embargo, though still onerous, is not as painful as it once was.
As a result, critics of Bush's Cuba policy argue his address simply helped preserve rather than undermine Cuba's nebulous status quo. And they're urging Washington again to consider stepped up contact with Raul Castro — widely regarded as more pragmatically flexible than Fidel — as a more effective means of jump-starting a democratic transition. "President Bush is right when he says this is a unique moment in Cuba, but he's missing that moment," says Jake Colvin, director of USA Engage in Washington, which favors moves like lifting the ban on U.S. travel to Cuba — something even most Cuban-Americans in Miami now favor, and which many Cuba watchers suggest the Castros actually fear. Bush insisted that engaging Cuba now would just give "oxygen to a criminal regime." But, argues Colvin, "American citizens have always proven the best ambassadors of freedom and democracy."
Bush may also be alienating the very people he is reaching out to by suggesting Washington will be Cuba's post-Castro arbiter. In the eyes of ordinary Cuban citizens, that is perceived as surrogacy for the Miami Cuban exile community — whose anti-Castro hardliners, with their dreams of resurrecting a pre-Castro Cuba, are as disliked by many Cubans on the island as the Castros themselves are.
What's more, by attaching his Administration to Cuba's dissidents so publicly, Bush may actually compromise the position of the Castro critics who remain on the island, whose credibility often rests on being seen as a movement independent of the Miami exiles. In past interviews with TIME and other media groups, Oswaldo Paya, an engineer who is the most prominent of Cuba's dissidents, says he is uncomfortable whenever the White House tries to coopt him and his colleagues. He says it simply makes their goals more difficult to achieve.
*********
My letter to the editor response:
The completely counterproductive character of President Bush's speech on Cuba is demonstrated by the Cubans printing half of it in Granma and putting him on TV for 15 minutes.
Congress must be pressed to restore now the right of all Americans to travel freely to establish people to people contact with Cubans.
(Readers should consider signing our letter to Congressional leaders and call or write their own Representative and Senators.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/congresstravel/ )
The Presidential candidates must also be challenged to say what they will do if elected. Dodd and Kucinich have called for ending all travel restrictions; Obama, Richardson and Edwards favor only ending restrictions on travel by Cuban Americans. Clinton has embraced the Bush policy rather than that of her husband. Paul is the only Republican who favors ending travel restrictions.
http://candidatecubawatch.blogspot.com/
Thursday, Oct. 25, 2007
Keeping Up the Hard Line on Cuba
By Tim Padgett/Miami
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1676501,00.html
Few would argue that democracy and human rights are as rare in Cuba as meat and modern appliances. That was duly underscored on Wednesday when President Bush invited the relatives of jailed Cuban dissidents to the State Department for his first policy speech on Cuba in four years. But any expectation of a major policy shift was dissipated after listening to the President. Bush simply gussied up some of the same old bromides — "The socialist paradise is a tropical gulag" — that have marked U.S.-Cuban relations for decades.
Bush reiterated his hard stance against lifting the 45-year-old U.S. trade embargo on Cuba if the seriously ill Fidel Castro, as expected, is succeeded by his brother Raul, who already runs the government. Predictably, Fidel said Bush's speech reflected the U.S.'s desire to "reconquer" Cuba. And the Castro brothers aren't exactly cowed by these traditional verbal assaults. They have thrived on it in the past: heated U.S. rhetoric usually bolsters their image at home as the island's anti-Yanqui defenders. With plenty of material support from Hugo Chavez in Venezuela (about 90,000 barrels of oil per day on highly favorable finance terms), the embargo, though still onerous, is not as painful as it once was.
As a result, critics of Bush's Cuba policy argue his address simply helped preserve rather than undermine Cuba's nebulous status quo. And they're urging Washington again to consider stepped up contact with Raul Castro — widely regarded as more pragmatically flexible than Fidel — as a more effective means of jump-starting a democratic transition. "President Bush is right when he says this is a unique moment in Cuba, but he's missing that moment," says Jake Colvin, director of USA Engage in Washington, which favors moves like lifting the ban on U.S. travel to Cuba — something even most Cuban-Americans in Miami now favor, and which many Cuba watchers suggest the Castros actually fear. Bush insisted that engaging Cuba now would just give "oxygen to a criminal regime." But, argues Colvin, "American citizens have always proven the best ambassadors of freedom and democracy."
Bush may also be alienating the very people he is reaching out to by suggesting Washington will be Cuba's post-Castro arbiter. In the eyes of ordinary Cuban citizens, that is perceived as surrogacy for the Miami Cuban exile community — whose anti-Castro hardliners, with their dreams of resurrecting a pre-Castro Cuba, are as disliked by many Cubans on the island as the Castros themselves are.
What's more, by attaching his Administration to Cuba's dissidents so publicly, Bush may actually compromise the position of the Castro critics who remain on the island, whose credibility often rests on being seen as a movement independent of the Miami exiles. In past interviews with TIME and other media groups, Oswaldo Paya, an engineer who is the most prominent of Cuba's dissidents, says he is uncomfortable whenever the White House tries to coopt him and his colleagues. He says it simply makes their goals more difficult to achieve.
*********
My letter to the editor response:
The completely counterproductive character of President Bush's speech on Cuba is demonstrated by the Cubans printing half of it in Granma and putting him on TV for 15 minutes.
Congress must be pressed to restore now the right of all Americans to travel freely to establish people to people contact with Cubans.
(Readers should consider signing our letter to Congressional leaders and call or write their own Representative and Senators.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/congresstravel/ )
The Presidential candidates must also be challenged to say what they will do if elected. Dodd and Kucinich have called for ending all travel restrictions; Obama, Richardson and Edwards favor only ending restrictions on travel by Cuban Americans. Clinton has embraced the Bush policy rather than that of her husband. Paul is the only Republican who favors ending travel restrictions.
http://candidatecubawatch.blogspot.com/
Friday, September 28, 2007
Money Talks on Cuba Votes plus earlier articles
Hard-line Cuba PAC makes inroads with House freshmen
By Ian Swanson
The Hill
September 18, 2007
An anti-Castro political action committee has found dozens of new recruits to defend a hard-line position on Cuba, including House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.).
Clyburn, who has previously voted to lift the Cuban trade embargo, in July voted against a more limited measure sponsored by Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) that would have eased certain restrictions on agricultural trade with Cuba.
The U.S.-Cuba Democracy Political Action Committee (PAC), founded at the end of 2003, has given $322,500 in political donations in the 2007-2008 cycle, including $10,000 to Clyburn.
Sixty-six Democrats voted against Rangel’s amendment, which was a surprise to the longtime lawmaker and groups opposed to the trade embargo, which had hoped a Democratic Congress would be more amenable to changing Cuba policy.
“I was blindsided,” said Rangel, who acknowledged his side did not whip support. The presiding chairman ruled Rangel’s amendment had been approved by voice vote before opponents asked for a roll call vote. The amendment was defeated soundly, 182-245.
One embargo opponent noted that those opposed to Rangel’s amendment could have told him they had the votes to defeat it, which would have avoided the embarrassment of a floor defeat. Instead, they asked for a roll call vote to show their strength.
Clyburn said he voted against Rangel’s amendment on Cuba to save the farm bill, which was already controversial. “My whip count indicated that were this amendment to pass, it would have potentially killed the farm bill, legislation that’s critical to American farmers,” he said in a statement issued by his office.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) also voted against the Rangel amendment. Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), however, voted with Rangel, as did other members of leadership including Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.), the vice chairman of the Democratic Caucus, and Assistant to the Speaker Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.). Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) did not vote on the amendment, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) traditionally does not cast House votes.
Embargo opponents point to Clyburn’s vote in June for an amendment sponsored by Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) to bolster their case that he has shifted on Cuba policy. That measure, which passed the lower chamber, sought to increase funding for Cuban dissident groups above and beyond what was recommended by the House Appropriations Committee. Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.), Hoyer, Emanuel, Larson and Becerra all voted against that amendment.
Besides voting to lift the embargo last year, Clyburn had previously supported agricultural trade with Cuba. In a 2002 release, Clyburn said South Carolina was ideally positioned to take advantage of trading opportunities with Cuba that could benefit his state’s farmers.
A spokeswoman for Clyburn said he has always listened to all sides of the Cuba debate and has always supported programs that seek to amplify the voices of dissidents. In a comment e-mailed to The Hill, she said Clyburn would “continue to support lifting the embargo and travel ban because he wants to see the situation change in Cuba and between our two countries.”
The success of the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC illustrates how a relatively small special interest group can help shape public policy through targeted political donations and lobbying even as power shifts in Washington, according to supporters and opponents.
“From about 2000 to 2003, everything was going downhill in terms of maintaining current Cuba policy,” said Mauricio Claver-Carone, a former Treasury Department attorney who is one of the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC’s 32 directors. A coalition of liberal Democrats, free-trade Republicans and agriculture state lawmakers interested in opening travel and trade restrictions to Cuba seemed to be gaining ground, he said.
That’s when the PAC was formed and the decision was made to target new members of Congress in an effort to create a bipartisan wall of support for the embargo. Claver-Carone said the group’s effort is modeled after the bipartisan support in Congress built by pro-Israel groups.
The work began with the 2004 class and has continued ever since. “We went early and approached all these campaigns early on, and said what we believed,” said Claver-Carone.
Fifty-two of the 66 Democrats who voted against Rangel’s amendment have received one or more contributions from the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC since the beginning of the 2007-2008 cycle, according to Federal Election Commission filings.
It has given $56,000 to 22 Democratic freshmen this year, and 17 of those freshmen voted against Rangel’s amendment. The giving began during the run-up to the 2006 election. Freshman Reps. Bruce Braley (D-Iowa), Brad Ellsworth (D-Ind.), Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), Phil Hare (D-Ill.), Ed Perlmutter (D-Colo.), Albio Sires (D-N.J.), Zack Space (D-Ohio) and Charlie Wilson (D-Ohio) received donations before they were elected, and all but Giffords voted against Rangel’s amendment.
The votes of the freshmen are a concern to those who believe the current U.S. policy on Cuba is ineffective. “At this point we must as a matter of urgency prevent a generation of Democratic legislators from becoming permanent embargo supporters,” wrote Robert Muse, a Washington, D.C., lawyer with expertise in U.S.-Cuban policy, in an analysis of the vote.
Rangel blamed an organized opposition and a lack of urgency on the part of embargo opponents for defeat, and downplayed the role of political contributions.
“I don’t think we really put up much of a fight,” he said.
***********
Background information from a travel advocate:
Thursday, August 2, 2007
Reasons for the Failure of the Rangel Amendment
There’s no mystery about why the Rangel amendment failed. You can’t beat something with nothing. We have on our side no PAC, no organization on Capitol Hill to speak of, and no whip operation.
To begin with our lack of a PAC, since the beginning of the year, the US-Cuba Democracy PAC has given $322,500 to federal candidates, including at least two $1,000 contributions to every freshman Democrat. That means that all the new Democratic members have heard the pro-embargo arguments at least twice as they received their checks. In addition, two Democrats, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) and Cuban-American Albio Sires (D-NJ) are actively whipping Democrats – especially freshmen – to support the embargo. (The Diaz-Balart brothers have performed that function with incoming Republicans for several years).
In an unusual move, Speaker Pelosi installed Debbie Wasserman Schultz as a cardinal on the Appropriations Committee in only her second term. i.e. she Chairs the Appropriations Subcommittee that determines the funding level for the entire legislative branch. She also serves on the powerful Financial Services Appropriations Subcommittee. In addition she holds a leadership position at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Her job at the DCCC as head of the Frontline program is to help “vulnerable” Democrats win reelection. So, when she asks a new Democratic member to vote with her, she does so with considerable institutional authority.
If Wasserman Shultz’s status were not enough of a problem, we have lost Majority Whip James Clyburn. (Majority Leader Hoyer was always a problem on Cuba issues, but was thought to be offset in the leadership by Clyburn). The loss of Clyburn moves the situation in the House from serious to close to desperate.
To return to the US-Cuba Democracy PAC, of the 66 Democrats who voted against the Rangel amendment on Friday, 51 (77%) had received one or more contributions from the PAC since the beginning of the 2007-2008 election cycle:
Altmire $3,000
Andrews $1,000
Arcuri $2,000
Baca $2,000
Barrow $8,000
Bean $3,000
Berkley $5,000
Boyd $1,000
Braley $6,000
Brown (FL) $5,000
Butterfield $1,000
Cardoza $1,000
Carnahan $4,000
Castor $1,000
Chandler $2,000
Clyburn $10,000
Cuellar $6,000
Davis (AL) $3,000
Donnelly $3,000
Ellsworth $1,000
Engel $5,000
Gillibrand $3,000
Hare $1,000
Higgins $1,000
Hodes $1,000
Hoyer $5,000
Jones (OH) $2,500
Kennedy $1,000
Klein $11,000
Lipinski $1,000
Mahoney $7,000
Marshall $2,000
Melancon $2,000
Perlmutter $2,000
Rothman $1,000
Ryan (OH) $2,000
Salazar $6,000
Schiff $1,000
Sherman $1,000
Schuler $2,000
Sires $10,000
Skelton $2,000
Space $2,000
Wasserman Schultz $10,000
Wexler $5,000
Wilson (OH) $2,000
Wu $5,000
Of the remaining 15, 7 (47%) received one or more contributions from the US-Cuba Democracy PAC in the 2005-2006 election cycle:
Ackerman $6,000
Green (TX) $1,000
Hastings $6,000
McIntyre $5,000
Meek $4,500
Miller (NC) $4,000
Pallone $4,000
Altogether, 58 of the 66 Democrats who voted against the Rangel amendment on Friday (88%) received one or more contributions from the US-Cuba PAC in the last year and a half.
They didn't wait for the 110th Congress to convene either. The US-Cuba Democracy PAC gave out $62,000 after the 2006 general election - again mostly to newly-elected Democrats. That means the PAC gave a total of $384,500 to federal candidates since the 2006 general election.
The founding of the US-Cuba Democracy PAC and its targeting of campaign contributions coincides with the annual votes to defund enforcement of various provisions of the Cuban embargo. It is not to be critical – but only factual – to point out that those votes provided the basis for an annual appeal to wealthy Cuban Americans to provide funds to preserve the embargo in Congress. (As the list of PAC contributors reveals, they are almost exclusively Dade County-based Cuban Americans http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgave.asp?strID=C00387720&Cycle=2006).
It is always more difficult to pry a member of Congress away from a position taken in a recorded vote than to prevent that vote in the first place. At this point we must as a matter of urgency prevent a generation of Democratic legislators from becoming permanent embargo supporters. I hope our next discussion will be about how that might be done.
**********************
Thursday, August 2, 2007
Wall Street Journal Article on Rangel Defeat
Vote Rejects Efforts To Ease Cuba Trade Restrictions
By DAVID ROGERS Wall Street Journal July 30, 2007
Anti-Castro lawmakers in Congress are delighted by a House vote last week rejecting efforts to ease restrictions on financing for U.S. agricultural exports to Cuba.The 245-182 vote quashes speculation that the new Democratic Congress will change U.S.-Cuban policy substantially.Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D., Fla.), a favorite of her party leaders, helped deliver 66 Democratic votes against an amendment sponsored by the House's chief tax writer, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D., N.Y.)."The message is very clear," said Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R., Fla.). "There will be no possibility of a relaxation of sanctions until there is a democratic constitution in Cuba."Most striking, the fight came on an issue touching on agriculture, always a weak point for proponents of the U.S. trade embargo, which was relaxed in the last years of the Clinton administration to allow U.S. exports of food and medicine.The Bush administration has since imposed tough payment regulations that critics contend are overly burdensome, effectively requiring cash in advance of any shipment from American ports.Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R., Mo.) has waged a running battle in the annual Treasury Department appropriations bill to try to get Congress to override these rules and allow cash on delivery. As recently as June 28, pro-embargo forces made a strategic decision not to force a House vote on Ms. Emerson's language.But Mr. Rangel went further. His amendment -- offered to the farm bill last week -- would have allowed direct payments to U.S. banks and permitted visas for Cuban officials traveling to the U.S. to inspect agriculture export facilities."It went too far. We could not let it go," said Ms. Wasserman Schultz.The timing also left the chairman vulnerable. The farm bill happened to come to the floor after advocates of Cuban sanctions had mounted a lobbying campaign in Congress; the vote on the Rangel amendment was just a day after Raul Castro, Fidel's brother, had addressed his nation on Revolution Day; and Ms. Wasserman Schultz warned colleagues against adding a politically volatile issue to the farm bill.Undaunted, Mr. Rangel described the amendment as a "real win for America and a win for American farmers."But even pro-trade allies were skeptical. "His timing was horrendous," said John Kavulich, a senior policy adviser to the U.S. Cuba Trade and Economic Council."It's the best we've ever done on any vote that has an ag aspect," said Mr. Diaz-Balart.Ms. Wasserman Schultz, who worked with another Democrat, Rep. Albio Sires of New Jersey, said the 66 Democratic votes represent a solid core now that won't be easy to shake."The message is: there has not been a lessening of support for the sanctions against Cuba," Rep. Wasserman Schultz said. "Among Democrats there is a solid base for pushing for reform on the island."
****************
Analysis from a Capitol Hill observor
Here are some thoughts on the Rangel amendment vote to the Farm Bill
--Reasons for loss include:
- 2 hour notice to other Congressional offices and all interest groups/policy groups
- Farm Bill politics (people wanted to keep the bill as clean as possible and there was a lot of horse trading going on)
- No leadership or concerted whipping happening on our side
- Rangel was the face of the tax increase that was slipped into the Farm Bill the night before, severely hurting his chances of having any Republicans vote for his amendment (and some Dems)
- The other side was playing the terrorism card which always freaks Members out
- $$$ from the PAC
- 2 minute vote instead of a 15 minute vote where Members would have had time to think about their vote and last minute whipping could have been done on our side
Overall analysis of what this loss means
- This is a huge blow to changing any Cuba policy this year, though not the kiss of death
- The hardliners have more money, are more active and organized than our side
- We have gained an understanding of where the new Members stand, and while we lost 20 Dems on the vote we also won 21 Dems. This means that despite all the $$ that has been thrown at them, we have successfully gotten to half of them and can still work on the others.
By Ian Swanson
The Hill
September 18, 2007
An anti-Castro political action committee has found dozens of new recruits to defend a hard-line position on Cuba, including House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.).
Clyburn, who has previously voted to lift the Cuban trade embargo, in July voted against a more limited measure sponsored by Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) that would have eased certain restrictions on agricultural trade with Cuba.
The U.S.-Cuba Democracy Political Action Committee (PAC), founded at the end of 2003, has given $322,500 in political donations in the 2007-2008 cycle, including $10,000 to Clyburn.
Sixty-six Democrats voted against Rangel’s amendment, which was a surprise to the longtime lawmaker and groups opposed to the trade embargo, which had hoped a Democratic Congress would be more amenable to changing Cuba policy.
“I was blindsided,” said Rangel, who acknowledged his side did not whip support. The presiding chairman ruled Rangel’s amendment had been approved by voice vote before opponents asked for a roll call vote. The amendment was defeated soundly, 182-245.
One embargo opponent noted that those opposed to Rangel’s amendment could have told him they had the votes to defeat it, which would have avoided the embarrassment of a floor defeat. Instead, they asked for a roll call vote to show their strength.
Clyburn said he voted against Rangel’s amendment on Cuba to save the farm bill, which was already controversial. “My whip count indicated that were this amendment to pass, it would have potentially killed the farm bill, legislation that’s critical to American farmers,” he said in a statement issued by his office.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) also voted against the Rangel amendment. Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), however, voted with Rangel, as did other members of leadership including Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.), the vice chairman of the Democratic Caucus, and Assistant to the Speaker Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.). Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) did not vote on the amendment, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) traditionally does not cast House votes.
Embargo opponents point to Clyburn’s vote in June for an amendment sponsored by Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) to bolster their case that he has shifted on Cuba policy. That measure, which passed the lower chamber, sought to increase funding for Cuban dissident groups above and beyond what was recommended by the House Appropriations Committee. Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.), Hoyer, Emanuel, Larson and Becerra all voted against that amendment.
Besides voting to lift the embargo last year, Clyburn had previously supported agricultural trade with Cuba. In a 2002 release, Clyburn said South Carolina was ideally positioned to take advantage of trading opportunities with Cuba that could benefit his state’s farmers.
A spokeswoman for Clyburn said he has always listened to all sides of the Cuba debate and has always supported programs that seek to amplify the voices of dissidents. In a comment e-mailed to The Hill, she said Clyburn would “continue to support lifting the embargo and travel ban because he wants to see the situation change in Cuba and between our two countries.”
The success of the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC illustrates how a relatively small special interest group can help shape public policy through targeted political donations and lobbying even as power shifts in Washington, according to supporters and opponents.
“From about 2000 to 2003, everything was going downhill in terms of maintaining current Cuba policy,” said Mauricio Claver-Carone, a former Treasury Department attorney who is one of the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC’s 32 directors. A coalition of liberal Democrats, free-trade Republicans and agriculture state lawmakers interested in opening travel and trade restrictions to Cuba seemed to be gaining ground, he said.
That’s when the PAC was formed and the decision was made to target new members of Congress in an effort to create a bipartisan wall of support for the embargo. Claver-Carone said the group’s effort is modeled after the bipartisan support in Congress built by pro-Israel groups.
The work began with the 2004 class and has continued ever since. “We went early and approached all these campaigns early on, and said what we believed,” said Claver-Carone.
Fifty-two of the 66 Democrats who voted against Rangel’s amendment have received one or more contributions from the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC since the beginning of the 2007-2008 cycle, according to Federal Election Commission filings.
It has given $56,000 to 22 Democratic freshmen this year, and 17 of those freshmen voted against Rangel’s amendment. The giving began during the run-up to the 2006 election. Freshman Reps. Bruce Braley (D-Iowa), Brad Ellsworth (D-Ind.), Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), Phil Hare (D-Ill.), Ed Perlmutter (D-Colo.), Albio Sires (D-N.J.), Zack Space (D-Ohio) and Charlie Wilson (D-Ohio) received donations before they were elected, and all but Giffords voted against Rangel’s amendment.
The votes of the freshmen are a concern to those who believe the current U.S. policy on Cuba is ineffective. “At this point we must as a matter of urgency prevent a generation of Democratic legislators from becoming permanent embargo supporters,” wrote Robert Muse, a Washington, D.C., lawyer with expertise in U.S.-Cuban policy, in an analysis of the vote.
Rangel blamed an organized opposition and a lack of urgency on the part of embargo opponents for defeat, and downplayed the role of political contributions.
“I don’t think we really put up much of a fight,” he said.
***********
Background information from a travel advocate:
Thursday, August 2, 2007
Reasons for the Failure of the Rangel Amendment
There’s no mystery about why the Rangel amendment failed. You can’t beat something with nothing. We have on our side no PAC, no organization on Capitol Hill to speak of, and no whip operation.
To begin with our lack of a PAC, since the beginning of the year, the US-Cuba Democracy PAC has given $322,500 to federal candidates, including at least two $1,000 contributions to every freshman Democrat. That means that all the new Democratic members have heard the pro-embargo arguments at least twice as they received their checks. In addition, two Democrats, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) and Cuban-American Albio Sires (D-NJ) are actively whipping Democrats – especially freshmen – to support the embargo. (The Diaz-Balart brothers have performed that function with incoming Republicans for several years).
In an unusual move, Speaker Pelosi installed Debbie Wasserman Schultz as a cardinal on the Appropriations Committee in only her second term. i.e. she Chairs the Appropriations Subcommittee that determines the funding level for the entire legislative branch. She also serves on the powerful Financial Services Appropriations Subcommittee. In addition she holds a leadership position at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Her job at the DCCC as head of the Frontline program is to help “vulnerable” Democrats win reelection. So, when she asks a new Democratic member to vote with her, she does so with considerable institutional authority.
If Wasserman Shultz’s status were not enough of a problem, we have lost Majority Whip James Clyburn. (Majority Leader Hoyer was always a problem on Cuba issues, but was thought to be offset in the leadership by Clyburn). The loss of Clyburn moves the situation in the House from serious to close to desperate.
To return to the US-Cuba Democracy PAC, of the 66 Democrats who voted against the Rangel amendment on Friday, 51 (77%) had received one or more contributions from the PAC since the beginning of the 2007-2008 election cycle:
Altmire $3,000
Andrews $1,000
Arcuri $2,000
Baca $2,000
Barrow $8,000
Bean $3,000
Berkley $5,000
Boyd $1,000
Braley $6,000
Brown (FL) $5,000
Butterfield $1,000
Cardoza $1,000
Carnahan $4,000
Castor $1,000
Chandler $2,000
Clyburn $10,000
Cuellar $6,000
Davis (AL) $3,000
Donnelly $3,000
Ellsworth $1,000
Engel $5,000
Gillibrand $3,000
Hare $1,000
Higgins $1,000
Hodes $1,000
Hoyer $5,000
Jones (OH) $2,500
Kennedy $1,000
Klein $11,000
Lipinski $1,000
Mahoney $7,000
Marshall $2,000
Melancon $2,000
Perlmutter $2,000
Rothman $1,000
Ryan (OH) $2,000
Salazar $6,000
Schiff $1,000
Sherman $1,000
Schuler $2,000
Sires $10,000
Skelton $2,000
Space $2,000
Wasserman Schultz $10,000
Wexler $5,000
Wilson (OH) $2,000
Wu $5,000
Of the remaining 15, 7 (47%) received one or more contributions from the US-Cuba Democracy PAC in the 2005-2006 election cycle:
Ackerman $6,000
Green (TX) $1,000
Hastings $6,000
McIntyre $5,000
Meek $4,500
Miller (NC) $4,000
Pallone $4,000
Altogether, 58 of the 66 Democrats who voted against the Rangel amendment on Friday (88%) received one or more contributions from the US-Cuba PAC in the last year and a half.
They didn't wait for the 110th Congress to convene either. The US-Cuba Democracy PAC gave out $62,000 after the 2006 general election - again mostly to newly-elected Democrats. That means the PAC gave a total of $384,500 to federal candidates since the 2006 general election.
The founding of the US-Cuba Democracy PAC and its targeting of campaign contributions coincides with the annual votes to defund enforcement of various provisions of the Cuban embargo. It is not to be critical – but only factual – to point out that those votes provided the basis for an annual appeal to wealthy Cuban Americans to provide funds to preserve the embargo in Congress. (As the list of PAC contributors reveals, they are almost exclusively Dade County-based Cuban Americans http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgave.asp?strID=C00387720&Cycle=2006).
It is always more difficult to pry a member of Congress away from a position taken in a recorded vote than to prevent that vote in the first place. At this point we must as a matter of urgency prevent a generation of Democratic legislators from becoming permanent embargo supporters. I hope our next discussion will be about how that might be done.
**********************
Thursday, August 2, 2007
Wall Street Journal Article on Rangel Defeat
Vote Rejects Efforts To Ease Cuba Trade Restrictions
By DAVID ROGERS Wall Street Journal July 30, 2007
Anti-Castro lawmakers in Congress are delighted by a House vote last week rejecting efforts to ease restrictions on financing for U.S. agricultural exports to Cuba.The 245-182 vote quashes speculation that the new Democratic Congress will change U.S.-Cuban policy substantially.Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D., Fla.), a favorite of her party leaders, helped deliver 66 Democratic votes against an amendment sponsored by the House's chief tax writer, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D., N.Y.)."The message is very clear," said Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R., Fla.). "There will be no possibility of a relaxation of sanctions until there is a democratic constitution in Cuba."Most striking, the fight came on an issue touching on agriculture, always a weak point for proponents of the U.S. trade embargo, which was relaxed in the last years of the Clinton administration to allow U.S. exports of food and medicine.The Bush administration has since imposed tough payment regulations that critics contend are overly burdensome, effectively requiring cash in advance of any shipment from American ports.Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R., Mo.) has waged a running battle in the annual Treasury Department appropriations bill to try to get Congress to override these rules and allow cash on delivery. As recently as June 28, pro-embargo forces made a strategic decision not to force a House vote on Ms. Emerson's language.But Mr. Rangel went further. His amendment -- offered to the farm bill last week -- would have allowed direct payments to U.S. banks and permitted visas for Cuban officials traveling to the U.S. to inspect agriculture export facilities."It went too far. We could not let it go," said Ms. Wasserman Schultz.The timing also left the chairman vulnerable. The farm bill happened to come to the floor after advocates of Cuban sanctions had mounted a lobbying campaign in Congress; the vote on the Rangel amendment was just a day after Raul Castro, Fidel's brother, had addressed his nation on Revolution Day; and Ms. Wasserman Schultz warned colleagues against adding a politically volatile issue to the farm bill.Undaunted, Mr. Rangel described the amendment as a "real win for America and a win for American farmers."But even pro-trade allies were skeptical. "His timing was horrendous," said John Kavulich, a senior policy adviser to the U.S. Cuba Trade and Economic Council."It's the best we've ever done on any vote that has an ag aspect," said Mr. Diaz-Balart.Ms. Wasserman Schultz, who worked with another Democrat, Rep. Albio Sires of New Jersey, said the 66 Democratic votes represent a solid core now that won't be easy to shake."The message is: there has not been a lessening of support for the sanctions against Cuba," Rep. Wasserman Schultz said. "Among Democrats there is a solid base for pushing for reform on the island."
****************
Analysis from a Capitol Hill observor
Here are some thoughts on the Rangel amendment vote to the Farm Bill
--Reasons for loss include:
- 2 hour notice to other Congressional offices and all interest groups/policy groups
- Farm Bill politics (people wanted to keep the bill as clean as possible and there was a lot of horse trading going on)
- No leadership or concerted whipping happening on our side
- Rangel was the face of the tax increase that was slipped into the Farm Bill the night before, severely hurting his chances of having any Republicans vote for his amendment (and some Dems)
- The other side was playing the terrorism card which always freaks Members out
- $$$ from the PAC
- 2 minute vote instead of a 15 minute vote where Members would have had time to think about their vote and last minute whipping could have been done on our side
Overall analysis of what this loss means
- This is a huge blow to changing any Cuba policy this year, though not the kiss of death
- The hardliners have more money, are more active and organized than our side
- We have gained an understanding of where the new Members stand, and while we lost 20 Dems on the vote we also won 21 Dems. This means that despite all the $$ that has been thrown at them, we have successfully gotten to half of them and can still work on the others.
Monday, September 24, 2007
Raul Castro stirs hopes for Cuba farmers
By Marc Frank September 18, 2007
JARUCO, Cuba (Reuters) - Down on the ranch, the talk among the cattle hands is that help is on its way.
And it could not come sooner for Cuba's state-owned agriculture, where production has slumped for years and weeds are taking over unused fields.
Roasting a pig over a fire amid the dust and flies, ranch manager Manolo sips rum and gazes out over the pastures of the farming cooperative where he has worked for a decade.
"A year ago I sold 22 head of cattle to the state for 18,000 pesos. This year the same number brought more than 60,000," he said. That is the equivalent of $2,700, up from $810 last year.
"Things are moving in the right direction. We have to make unused land produce and we need more resources for that," said Manolo, who asked that his last name not be used because of government rules about talking to foreign journalists.
Similar upbeat talk can be heard across Cuba's countryside, spurred by acting president Raul Castro, who has been running the government since his brother, ailing Cuban leader Fidel Castro, fell ill more than a year ago.
Raul Castro has made agriculture a top priority, stressing the need to produce more food in a country that relies on imports to feed its 11 million people, even from the United States, its ideological foe since Cuba's 1959 revolution.
The younger Castro has doubled and tripled what the state pays for cattle, milk and other farm products, and cut red-tape that often left farmers unpaid and crops to rot.
In a key speech on July 26 in the central agricultural province of Camaguey, Raul Castro called for "structural and conceptual changes" in the state-dominated agricultural sector to reverse a decline in output and reduce prices.
"We face the imperative of making our land produce more, and the land is there to be tilled ... we must offer these producers adequate incentives for the work they carry out in Cuba's suffocating heat," he said.
Raul's aides are hard at work on a plan with a year-end deadline, Communist party sources report.
THE WITCH'S WEED
The workers at Manolo's ranch climb aboard a beat-up 1948 Chevrolet truck to tour their cooperative, called a Basic Unit of Production, where they own everything but the land, which is leased to them by the state free of charge.
Cattle and sheep graze over the low-lying hills, but almost half the land is covered by a prickly brush called "marabu" and a waste-high weed that farmers call the "witch's weed" because it quickly renders pasture useless.
"We need a bulldozer or at least machetes to cut this down, then herbicide to kill the roots to stop it reappearing," said a ranch hand as the truck bounced along a dirt road. "Not even goats can eat the stuff."
Cuba is emerging from a severe economic crisis triggered by the 1991 collapse of its former benefactor, the Soviet Union, and the loss of massive subsidies that resulted in shortages of food, fuel, transportation and capital.
Agricultural inputs, such as seed, fertilizers, pesticides and farm equipment, were cut by 80 percent.
Cuba's inefficient farm production almost ground to a halt, land fell into disuse and the dreaded "marabu" spread.
The weekly economy newspaper Opciones recently reported that "marabu and other weeds have become a plague in Cuba" that covers one third of the 3.6 million hectares (9 million acres) of arable land.
The closure of half Cuba's sugar mills in 2003 added sugar cane plantations to the vast tracts of unused land and deepened the crisis in agriculture by throwing tens of thousands of people out of work.
THE STATE AS LANDOWNER
Cuba has gradually pulled out of its economic crunch with financial help from Venezuela and China, and high prices for its top export commodity, nickel. This has allowed the state to assign resources to upgrade farming infrastructure.
Many Cuban farmers, however, believe that more incentive is needed to turn Cuban agriculture around. Some experts argue that the state should hand land over to the farmers and farming cooperatives if it wants to raise productivity.
Most of the land in Cuba is owned by the state, making it perhaps the largest unproductive landowner in Latin America.
"Here there is land and enough men to produce all the food the country needs," said farmer Arsenio Perez in a telephone interview from eastern Santiago de Cuba province.
"The only thing you need now is to bring them together in the best way and you'll see how the land provides all that's missing," he said.
After Castro's 1959 revolution, large landowners were stripped of their property (his father's estate was the first to be confiscated). Hundreds of thousands of private holdings of up to 6.5 hectares were allowed, including the growers of the tobacco leaves for Cuba's famous hand-rolled cigars.
But, unlike other socialist countries, the state kept most of the land for itself.
"Small farmers own just 15 percent of the land," said sociologist Aurelio Alonso in a discussion on property in the magazine Temas. "But they produce 60 percent of what we eat."
JARUCO, Cuba (Reuters) - Down on the ranch, the talk among the cattle hands is that help is on its way.
And it could not come sooner for Cuba's state-owned agriculture, where production has slumped for years and weeds are taking over unused fields.
Roasting a pig over a fire amid the dust and flies, ranch manager Manolo sips rum and gazes out over the pastures of the farming cooperative where he has worked for a decade.
"A year ago I sold 22 head of cattle to the state for 18,000 pesos. This year the same number brought more than 60,000," he said. That is the equivalent of $2,700, up from $810 last year.
"Things are moving in the right direction. We have to make unused land produce and we need more resources for that," said Manolo, who asked that his last name not be used because of government rules about talking to foreign journalists.
Similar upbeat talk can be heard across Cuba's countryside, spurred by acting president Raul Castro, who has been running the government since his brother, ailing Cuban leader Fidel Castro, fell ill more than a year ago.
Raul Castro has made agriculture a top priority, stressing the need to produce more food in a country that relies on imports to feed its 11 million people, even from the United States, its ideological foe since Cuba's 1959 revolution.
The younger Castro has doubled and tripled what the state pays for cattle, milk and other farm products, and cut red-tape that often left farmers unpaid and crops to rot.
In a key speech on July 26 in the central agricultural province of Camaguey, Raul Castro called for "structural and conceptual changes" in the state-dominated agricultural sector to reverse a decline in output and reduce prices.
"We face the imperative of making our land produce more, and the land is there to be tilled ... we must offer these producers adequate incentives for the work they carry out in Cuba's suffocating heat," he said.
Raul's aides are hard at work on a plan with a year-end deadline, Communist party sources report.
THE WITCH'S WEED
The workers at Manolo's ranch climb aboard a beat-up 1948 Chevrolet truck to tour their cooperative, called a Basic Unit of Production, where they own everything but the land, which is leased to them by the state free of charge.
Cattle and sheep graze over the low-lying hills, but almost half the land is covered by a prickly brush called "marabu" and a waste-high weed that farmers call the "witch's weed" because it quickly renders pasture useless.
"We need a bulldozer or at least machetes to cut this down, then herbicide to kill the roots to stop it reappearing," said a ranch hand as the truck bounced along a dirt road. "Not even goats can eat the stuff."
Cuba is emerging from a severe economic crisis triggered by the 1991 collapse of its former benefactor, the Soviet Union, and the loss of massive subsidies that resulted in shortages of food, fuel, transportation and capital.
Agricultural inputs, such as seed, fertilizers, pesticides and farm equipment, were cut by 80 percent.
Cuba's inefficient farm production almost ground to a halt, land fell into disuse and the dreaded "marabu" spread.
The weekly economy newspaper Opciones recently reported that "marabu and other weeds have become a plague in Cuba" that covers one third of the 3.6 million hectares (9 million acres) of arable land.
The closure of half Cuba's sugar mills in 2003 added sugar cane plantations to the vast tracts of unused land and deepened the crisis in agriculture by throwing tens of thousands of people out of work.
THE STATE AS LANDOWNER
Cuba has gradually pulled out of its economic crunch with financial help from Venezuela and China, and high prices for its top export commodity, nickel. This has allowed the state to assign resources to upgrade farming infrastructure.
Many Cuban farmers, however, believe that more incentive is needed to turn Cuban agriculture around. Some experts argue that the state should hand land over to the farmers and farming cooperatives if it wants to raise productivity.
Most of the land in Cuba is owned by the state, making it perhaps the largest unproductive landowner in Latin America.
"Here there is land and enough men to produce all the food the country needs," said farmer Arsenio Perez in a telephone interview from eastern Santiago de Cuba province.
"The only thing you need now is to bring them together in the best way and you'll see how the land provides all that's missing," he said.
After Castro's 1959 revolution, large landowners were stripped of their property (his father's estate was the first to be confiscated). Hundreds of thousands of private holdings of up to 6.5 hectares were allowed, including the growers of the tobacco leaves for Cuba's famous hand-rolled cigars.
But, unlike other socialist countries, the state kept most of the land for itself.
"Small farmers own just 15 percent of the land," said sociologist Aurelio Alonso in a discussion on property in the magazine Temas. "But they produce 60 percent of what we eat."
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Tampa Meeting Builds Collaboration for Normalization
Cuban Groups Gather In Tampa To Speak With One Voice
The Tampa Tribune
Published: May 30, 2007
In his youth, Havana native Antonio Zamora put it all on the line to take out the Fidel Castro regime and rid the hemisphere of a menacing Soviet satellite. He survived the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion - and subsequent imprisonment in a Cuban jail.
He could be the avatar of anti-Castro, pro-embargo Cuban gravitas. For years he was legal counsel for the hard-line Cuban American National Foundation. And he readily acknowledges that he 'wrote the book on Miami politics.'
But time has elapsed, and times have changed. The influential Miami lawyer is now president of FORNORM, the Foundation For The Normalization of US/Cuba Relations.
He was in town last week, along with representatives of 16 other organizations to speak with one voice on the need to normalize relations with Cuba. To speak, in effect, with a voice other than the strident, pro-embargo, South Florida one that has dominated the subject of Cuban-American relations for the better part of half a century.
They gathered, appropriately enough, in the theater of Ybor City's Circulo Cubano (Cuban Club).
'It's a different world now,' Zamora said. 'Back then was a function of the Cold War era. That's over. Things change. The U.S. now is talking to North Korea, talking to Iran, mending its relations with Libya, and Cuba is 90 miles away and we have this estranged relationship.
'Normalization will open up all kinds of opportunities,' he stressed. 'For too long, we shut out reconciliation. We need a different approach.'
To that end, the Change U.S. Policy Towards Cuba national forum, which featured speakers from California to South Florida, represented a pragmatic leap for those who want to end the counterproductive, Cold War atavism that is U.S. policy toward Cuba.
It's a policy long driven by the highly partisan influence-peddling of savvy, right-wing, South Florida Cuban-Americans. The hardliners haven't merely worn their emotions on their guayabera sleeves. They formed PACs, 501c-3s and delivered money and votes to those they targeted. They took copious notes on the inveterately effective Jewish lobby. All discussions and debates were framed in rhetoric that routinely resonated with 'dictator' and 'freedom' references. Who didn't loathe the former and love the latter? That simplistic, that effective.
The playing field tilted more in the 1990s when the GOP took over Congress - and then Florida. In fact, the Sunshine State's congressional delegation would include Cuban-American, pro-embargo zealots Mario Diaz-Balart, Lincoln Diaz-Balart and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen in the House and Mel Martinez in the Senate.
This is what the less-organized, pro-travel, anti-embargo normalization crowd has long faced. The frustration of trying to combat the well-financed, take-no-prisoners opposition armed only with better arguments - from economic to geopolitical to moral - and well-intentioned splinter groups. Not nearly enough ammo to fight the good fight - and win.
For example, when Republican congressional ally Jeff Flake of Arizona attended a fundraiser in Miami in his honor, he left with some $6,000. This was no way 'to fund a friend in Congress,' underscored Tampa's Al Fox, president of the Alliance for Responsible Cuba Policy Foundation.
'The legislative process,' Fox said, 'is like a paella. Without rice, no paella. You need sponsors, legislative know-how and money. Without money, there is no legislative process.'
Times Have Changed
But times, as Zamora said, have changed. So have some priorities. Islamist terrorism will do that. So will a tragically botched Iraqi invasion and occupation.
At a time when the United States needs serious allies and its prestige and clout are on the global skids, a seemingly arrogant, mean-spirited, pro-embargo policy against Cuba belies our protestations that we really are the good guys.
It's also a time when public opinion has turned.
According to Associated Press, Gallup and CNN polls, Americans now favor normalized relations between the United States and Cuba. Some show the margin at nearly 2-to-1. And a recent survey by Florida International University reports that 55.2 percent of Cuban-Americans in Miami-Dade County are in favor of unfettered travel from the United States to Cuba; 51.3 percent support the establishment of full U.S.-Cuban diplomatic relations; and 76.4 percent agree that the embargo has not worked well or not at all.
So much for the monolithic mind-set of Cuban-Americans, especially across generations. Even in South Florida.
Moreover, the Miami Herald, long an editorial mouthpiece for militant anti-Castroites, has now recognized the 'counterproductive restrictions on travel to the island.'
In Congress, there are two bills trolling for more co-sponsors that would end restrictions on travel to Cuba by all Americans. House Resolution 654, which has 108 co-sponsors to date, was submitted by Reps. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., and Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. Rangel also chairs the powerful House Ways and Means Committee. On the Senate side, there is S 721, introduced by Sen. Mike Enzi, R-W.Y., and Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., which has 20 bipartisan co-sponsors.
None of the co-sponsors, unconscionably, is from Florida.
Rep. Jose Serano, D-N.Y., has proposed the embargo-lifting Cuban Reconciliation Act, and Rep. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., has introduced a bill to ease payment regimens for agricultural sales to Cuba. Last year, Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, submitted a bill that would exempt U.S. oil exploration from the embargo.
The rumblings of change are manifest. The tipping point, however, isn't yet imminent.
That can't happen as long as South Florida's hard-liners have a de facto veto in U.S.-Cuba relations. And Congress, which has the real power to undo a failed Cuban policy, needs to be pressured the old-fashioned way: money and an organized voting bloc.
Pragmatic Approach
Amid exhortations for more money, better cooperation and increased media sophistication, Zamora underscored a bottom-line approach that harkened back to his Cold War roots. Because 'winning the message' wasn't enough, he urged the implementation of 'guerilla tactics.'
Zamora, however, isn't so literal these days.
He urged an alliance with other political constituencies - notably black Americans and non-Cuban Hispanics. He also advised going after non-Cuban, Florida politicians who are hardly true believers when it comes to a pro-embargo, anti-travel Cuban policy, but have had to go along to get along with a Republican majority in Congress - a majority that is no longer there.
And, yes, Zamora was talking about Democratic U.S. Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Kendrick Meek and Allen Boyd. The latter two remain incongruous members of the hard-line Cuban Democracy Caucus.
Before the forum was finished, others had strongly suggested pressuring presidential candidates such as Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton into co-sponsoring the Senate bill to lift travel restrictions to Cuba.
Fox even urged calling U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor's office every single day.
It obviously remains to be seen how much, if any, difference the Tampa forum will make. This much, however, seemed apparent. Such a gathering, with its emphasis on building cooperation and leveling the playing field, was long overdue. As was a key role for Tampa, the city with intimate, historic roots to Cuba, direct links to national icon Jose Marti and a reputation for moderate Cuban politics. Tampa is now a major player in whatever unfolds.
The timing would seem propitious as events fast forward. To wit: the eroding role of Fidelismo, a Bush presidency in retreat and a rapidly metastasizing geopolitical mess. Plus, the evolving generational attitudes among Cuban-Americans, 40 percent of whom don't live in South Florida. Then add the inevitability of more aggressive lobbying by U.S. business interests, residents appalled by un-American travel restrictions and Cuban-Americans wanting to see loved ones on the island more often than once every three years.
'The significance of the forum,' summarized Fox, the Alliance for Responsible Cuba Policy president, 'is that we have an umbrella big enough to cover a whole range of opinions. We all don't agree on everything. But we agree on the goal of removing the economic embargo. We are working together. That is significant.'
Joe O'Neill is a writer who lives in Hyde Park. He can be contacted at www.OpinionsToGoOnLine .com.
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/may/30/cuban-groups-gather-in-tampa-to-speak-with-one-voi/
The Tampa Tribune
Published: May 30, 2007
In his youth, Havana native Antonio Zamora put it all on the line to take out the Fidel Castro regime and rid the hemisphere of a menacing Soviet satellite. He survived the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion - and subsequent imprisonment in a Cuban jail.
He could be the avatar of anti-Castro, pro-embargo Cuban gravitas. For years he was legal counsel for the hard-line Cuban American National Foundation. And he readily acknowledges that he 'wrote the book on Miami politics.'
But time has elapsed, and times have changed. The influential Miami lawyer is now president of FORNORM, the Foundation For The Normalization of US/Cuba Relations.
He was in town last week, along with representatives of 16 other organizations to speak with one voice on the need to normalize relations with Cuba. To speak, in effect, with a voice other than the strident, pro-embargo, South Florida one that has dominated the subject of Cuban-American relations for the better part of half a century.
They gathered, appropriately enough, in the theater of Ybor City's Circulo Cubano (Cuban Club).
'It's a different world now,' Zamora said. 'Back then was a function of the Cold War era. That's over. Things change. The U.S. now is talking to North Korea, talking to Iran, mending its relations with Libya, and Cuba is 90 miles away and we have this estranged relationship.
'Normalization will open up all kinds of opportunities,' he stressed. 'For too long, we shut out reconciliation. We need a different approach.'
To that end, the Change U.S. Policy Towards Cuba national forum, which featured speakers from California to South Florida, represented a pragmatic leap for those who want to end the counterproductive, Cold War atavism that is U.S. policy toward Cuba.
It's a policy long driven by the highly partisan influence-peddling of savvy, right-wing, South Florida Cuban-Americans. The hardliners haven't merely worn their emotions on their guayabera sleeves. They formed PACs, 501c-3s and delivered money and votes to those they targeted. They took copious notes on the inveterately effective Jewish lobby. All discussions and debates were framed in rhetoric that routinely resonated with 'dictator' and 'freedom' references. Who didn't loathe the former and love the latter? That simplistic, that effective.
The playing field tilted more in the 1990s when the GOP took over Congress - and then Florida. In fact, the Sunshine State's congressional delegation would include Cuban-American, pro-embargo zealots Mario Diaz-Balart, Lincoln Diaz-Balart and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen in the House and Mel Martinez in the Senate.
This is what the less-organized, pro-travel, anti-embargo normalization crowd has long faced. The frustration of trying to combat the well-financed, take-no-prisoners opposition armed only with better arguments - from economic to geopolitical to moral - and well-intentioned splinter groups. Not nearly enough ammo to fight the good fight - and win.
For example, when Republican congressional ally Jeff Flake of Arizona attended a fundraiser in Miami in his honor, he left with some $6,000. This was no way 'to fund a friend in Congress,' underscored Tampa's Al Fox, president of the Alliance for Responsible Cuba Policy Foundation.
'The legislative process,' Fox said, 'is like a paella. Without rice, no paella. You need sponsors, legislative know-how and money. Without money, there is no legislative process.'
Times Have Changed
But times, as Zamora said, have changed. So have some priorities. Islamist terrorism will do that. So will a tragically botched Iraqi invasion and occupation.
At a time when the United States needs serious allies and its prestige and clout are on the global skids, a seemingly arrogant, mean-spirited, pro-embargo policy against Cuba belies our protestations that we really are the good guys.
It's also a time when public opinion has turned.
According to Associated Press, Gallup and CNN polls, Americans now favor normalized relations between the United States and Cuba. Some show the margin at nearly 2-to-1. And a recent survey by Florida International University reports that 55.2 percent of Cuban-Americans in Miami-Dade County are in favor of unfettered travel from the United States to Cuba; 51.3 percent support the establishment of full U.S.-Cuban diplomatic relations; and 76.4 percent agree that the embargo has not worked well or not at all.
So much for the monolithic mind-set of Cuban-Americans, especially across generations. Even in South Florida.
Moreover, the Miami Herald, long an editorial mouthpiece for militant anti-Castroites, has now recognized the 'counterproductive restrictions on travel to the island.'
In Congress, there are two bills trolling for more co-sponsors that would end restrictions on travel to Cuba by all Americans. House Resolution 654, which has 108 co-sponsors to date, was submitted by Reps. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., and Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. Rangel also chairs the powerful House Ways and Means Committee. On the Senate side, there is S 721, introduced by Sen. Mike Enzi, R-W.Y., and Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., which has 20 bipartisan co-sponsors.
None of the co-sponsors, unconscionably, is from Florida.
Rep. Jose Serano, D-N.Y., has proposed the embargo-lifting Cuban Reconciliation Act, and Rep. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., has introduced a bill to ease payment regimens for agricultural sales to Cuba. Last year, Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, submitted a bill that would exempt U.S. oil exploration from the embargo.
The rumblings of change are manifest. The tipping point, however, isn't yet imminent.
That can't happen as long as South Florida's hard-liners have a de facto veto in U.S.-Cuba relations. And Congress, which has the real power to undo a failed Cuban policy, needs to be pressured the old-fashioned way: money and an organized voting bloc.
Pragmatic Approach
Amid exhortations for more money, better cooperation and increased media sophistication, Zamora underscored a bottom-line approach that harkened back to his Cold War roots. Because 'winning the message' wasn't enough, he urged the implementation of 'guerilla tactics.'
Zamora, however, isn't so literal these days.
He urged an alliance with other political constituencies - notably black Americans and non-Cuban Hispanics. He also advised going after non-Cuban, Florida politicians who are hardly true believers when it comes to a pro-embargo, anti-travel Cuban policy, but have had to go along to get along with a Republican majority in Congress - a majority that is no longer there.
And, yes, Zamora was talking about Democratic U.S. Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Kendrick Meek and Allen Boyd. The latter two remain incongruous members of the hard-line Cuban Democracy Caucus.
Before the forum was finished, others had strongly suggested pressuring presidential candidates such as Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton into co-sponsoring the Senate bill to lift travel restrictions to Cuba.
Fox even urged calling U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor's office every single day.
It obviously remains to be seen how much, if any, difference the Tampa forum will make. This much, however, seemed apparent. Such a gathering, with its emphasis on building cooperation and leveling the playing field, was long overdue. As was a key role for Tampa, the city with intimate, historic roots to Cuba, direct links to national icon Jose Marti and a reputation for moderate Cuban politics. Tampa is now a major player in whatever unfolds.
The timing would seem propitious as events fast forward. To wit: the eroding role of Fidelismo, a Bush presidency in retreat and a rapidly metastasizing geopolitical mess. Plus, the evolving generational attitudes among Cuban-Americans, 40 percent of whom don't live in South Florida. Then add the inevitability of more aggressive lobbying by U.S. business interests, residents appalled by un-American travel restrictions and Cuban-Americans wanting to see loved ones on the island more often than once every three years.
'The significance of the forum,' summarized Fox, the Alliance for Responsible Cuba Policy president, 'is that we have an umbrella big enough to cover a whole range of opinions. We all don't agree on everything. But we agree on the goal of removing the economic embargo. We are working together. That is significant.'
Joe O'Neill is a writer who lives in Hyde Park. He can be contacted at www.OpinionsToGoOnLine .com.
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/may/30/cuban-groups-gather-in-tampa-to-speak-with-one-voi/
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Potential Republican Presidential Candidate Flaunts Embargo on Cigars
[Fred] Thompson's work space looks just like what the home office of a successful politician or CEO should look like--though a little messier: a large desk, dark wood, leather furniture, lots of books and magazines and newspapers, a flat-screen TV, and box upon box of cigars--Montecristos from Havana.
The presence of the cigars and the absence of a press chaperone were clues that Thompson is taking a different approach to his potential candidacy. A campaign flack would have insisted on hiding the cigars--Senator, how did you get those Cuban cigars? Isn't there a trade embargo?
“From the Courthouse to the White House: Fred Thompson auditions for the leading role” by Stephen F. Hayes The Weekly Standard 04/23/2007
http://weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=13528&R=1136E33842
The presence of the cigars and the absence of a press chaperone were clues that Thompson is taking a different approach to his potential candidacy. A campaign flack would have insisted on hiding the cigars--Senator, how did you get those Cuban cigars? Isn't there a trade embargo?
“From the Courthouse to the White House: Fred Thompson auditions for the leading role” by Stephen F. Hayes The Weekly Standard 04/23/2007
http://weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=13528&R=1136E33842
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)