Lincoln Diaz-Balart

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Speaker, the Cuban tyrant is engaged in a Stalinist crackdown which is pretty typical of him, but it is nevertheless extraordinarily brutal. I have at this point six pages in my hands of names of opposition leaders and independent press people who have been arrested in the last 4 months alone, renowned leaders such as Vladimiro Roca, Marta Beatriz Roque, Felix Bonne Carcasses, and Rene Gomez Manzano have been arrested; youth leaders such as Nestor Rodriguez Lobaina, Heriberto Leyva Rodriguez, and Rafael Fonseca Ochsa. As I say, I have six pages and they are growing the list by the day. I just want to send a word to the jailers of these prisoners. To each of them who go so far as to lay a hand on any political prisoner in Cuba, take note: It does not matter how long it takes, it does not matter how many times they say that they are following orders, it does not matter where they go, the Cuban people will make certain that they will be found, and they will be taken to justice.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the LoBiondo amendment to add $5 million in appropriations for the extremely successful Meals on Wheels Program. Because of this Federal-State-local program, many home-bound senior citizens in my district are able to receive at least one nutritious meal daily. Because many seniors on this program have disabilities, the $3 meals provided by this program are especially critical to seniors on a fixed income in Florida, who live alone or do not have anyone to care for them. As the Appropriations Committee's base bill essentially freezes fiscal year 1998 funding at the fiscal year 1997 level, this small increase in funding is very important to serve the growing number of elderly people who qualify for the program and to reduce the number of disabled who are being placed on waiting lists. I commend my colleague from New Jersey for advancing this meritorious amendment.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support this resolution. It is a resolution that provides tools needed by the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight so that it may conduct a proper, fair, and thorough investigation of political fund-raising improprieties and other possible violations of the law. Staff deposition authority is not something new for a committee to be granted. There are several examples from a few Republican, but mostly Democratic, controlled majorities in which this practice was used, consistent with what this resolution provides. The impeachment proceedings of President Nixon, the House assassinations inquiry, and Koreagate are all instances from the 1970s in which similar staff deposition authority was utilized. In the 1980's, there were, among others, the Iran-Contra committee and the Abscam investigations. And more recently, this authority for the taking of depositions by staff attorneys was practiced by the October Surprise Task Force, the White House Travel Office matter investigation, and the Bosnia select subcommittee. As for the international aspects of the investigation, there are also several cases of similar precedence, including the Church Committee, the House assassinations inquiry, Koreagate, Abscam, Iran-Contra, the October Surprise Task Force, and the Senate Whitewater investigation. It is important to keep in mind why deposition authority is needed by the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. This investigation, Mr. Speaker, concerns matters of very serious national security which require the sworn testimony of numerous key witnesses. Let us remember that there are serious allegations that even national security secrets were leaked, for example, to the Chinese Government in exchange for campaign contributions. In serious investigations such as this, the House has historically provided deposition authority in order to expedite the fact-finding process. As opposed to lengthy and possibly unfocused hearings, the deposition process allows the committee to obtain testimony under oath both quickly and confidentially. Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious matter. I think it is important that we all support it. We are simply trying to provide tools for the committee to make it easier, to make it possible, in fact, for the committee to get to the truth. I strongly urge the adoption of this resolution and urge my colleagues to vote for it.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I find it very interesting, to say the least, that our colleague on the other side of the aisle has just called the amendment that he introduced in this legislation late at night, when there were literally two other Members on the floor, noncontroversial. It would be the first time in the history of the United States that taxpayer funds would have to be spent, United States taxpayer funds would have to be spent, every 90 days to file a report by the United States Government with regard to any and all complaints against United States citizens made by the dictatorship of Cuba, one of the handful of terrorist states on the list of terrorist states by the State Department. It is important that we recognize what the so-called noncontroversial amendment that we are simply seeking a vote on, what that would do. United States taxpayer funds would have to be expended so that any and all complaints made by the terrorist state, the dictatorship of Cuba, any complaints against United States citizens, any and all complaints, would have to be reported on and paid for by United States taxpayers. To call that a noncontroversial amendment is really almost inconceivable. Now, we are simply asking for a vote, and we are going to ask a vote, the gentlewoman from Florida [Ms. Ros-Lehtinen] is going to ask for a vote at the appropriate time. It seems inconceivable that that would be called not only noncontroversial but that in any way it would be implied as though it were something excessive on our part to ask for a vote.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I object.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment to the amendment.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, this amendment offered by the gentleman from California, an attempt to trivialize the suffering of the Cuban people and the apartheid economy that the Cuban worker has to live under, is truly unfortunate. The issue is not cigars, the issue is the fact that the Cuban worker in this example, for example, those who work in the fields and in the factories producing the cigars, their product is sold only in dollars, in hard currency. Yet the Cuban worker cannot collect in any way, shape, or fashion the earnings produced by the dictatorship from his labor. So he is paid in almost worthless Cuban currency, made worthless, by the way, by the apartheid economy. And of course the dictatorship collects the very handsome, substantial sums in dollars that are generated by the actions of the Cuban worker; in this case, the cigar manufacturer and the agriculture manufacturer, the agricultural worker who works in the fields taking the tobacco to the factories. So what my amendment to the amendment says, to this very obvious attempt to trivialize the suffering of the Cuban worker and the apartheid economy, what my amendment to the trivializing effort says is very simple: We will have no objection to making Cuban cigars legal when the Cuban producers and the workers involved in that process are able to collect what their labor produces. Once there is a government in Cuba that frees political prisoners and legalizes political activity, and agrees, in effect, to return sovereignty to the people through willingness to hold free and fair elections, then that will be a government, obviously, that will permit that when the Cuban worker produces something like a cigar, then that currency that is generated by that sale will go to the worker, and not like now, where the dictatorship collects the dollars and keeps the worker in a situation, on the verge of the 21st century, of a total apartheid economy and abject, almost slavery, as I say, just a few years from the 21st century. I think it is really unfortunate we are trivializing this situation, but that is, in effect, what the amendment, what the core amendment, seeks to do. That is why I think, Mr. Chairman, it is important to amend the amendment by making clear that yes, the American people will be glad to help support the Cuban economy by the purchase of that wonderful product that nature makes possible and the hard work of the Cuban worker makes possible, the Cuban cigar, once the Cuban worker is able to benefit from his and her labor and not an apartheid economy, a regime that imposes an apartheid economy on the Cuban worker. That is what the amendment makes clear, Mr. Chairman. It is self evident. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Smith].

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I rise to advise the House that late last night, when the Committee of the Whole was meeting, there were three Members, I believe, three Members at most, in the Chamber. One of our colleagues introduced an amendment to the legislation that is being debated at this point which is replete more than with irony, with cynicism. It was an amendment introduced by a gentleman from New York that says more or less the following: If the terrorist state, the Cuban terrorist state, complains about any United States citizen, makes a complaint, then the State Department, paid for by United States taxpayer funds, will have an obligation to report to Congress on the complaints of the Cuban terrorist state. I have rarely seen examples of such advocacy directly, directly in favor of a state on the terrorist list of the State Department. That is the amendment that was introduced last night by one of our colleagues. So I want to advise the House that I will demand a separate vote in the House at the time that the Committee of the Whole rises on this unfortunate amendment. I think that it is important for our colleagues to know, for this House to know what was introduced into this legislation last night. It was truly unfortunate, and it was truly something that I think should be and, hopefully, will be stricken at the time that the Committee of the Whole rises and we have a separate vote in the House.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, on Rollcall No. 169, the Conference Report for H.R. 1469, I was absent. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 166, House Concurrent Resolution 84--conference report on the budget--I was absent. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 168, the Smith of New Jersey amendment to H.R. 1757, I was absent. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 167, the Campbell amendment to H.R. 1757, I was absent. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman], chairman of the Committee on International Relations.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon], chairman of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Goss], my distinguished colleague on the Committee on Rules. (Mr. GOSS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 159 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, there is this slight imbalance in time, but I just point out the curiosity that our friends on the other side of the aisle now want to bring up, talking about something unrelated, the supplemental bill, but under a closed rule, at the same time that they are criticizing the fact that one of the measures we bring up under this rule is not open while the other one is. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time because of the imbalance at this time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to say that it is truly disappointing that our friends on the other side of the aisle would put into question our commitment to the supplemental appropriations bill and the needs of the victims, when we are working as intensely as possible and will produce legislation as soon as possible. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California [Mr. Dreier], my distinguished colleague on the Committee on Rules.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my distinguished colleague and friend from Florida [Ms. Ros-Lehtinen] to continue the debate on the Foreign Relations Authorization Act and the European Security Act rule.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon], the chairman of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman].

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I think it is a very important point of clarification, the one that the chairman of the Committee on International Relations has just made. This is not a foreign aid bill. Yet the two measures before us are very important, not only the Foreign Policy Authorization Act but the bill wanted by the President of the United States, by the way, Mr. Speaker, to authorize the expansion of NATO. It is a very serious matter before the Nation, one that relates directly to our foreign policy and to our national security. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon], distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Goodlatte]. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon] is recognized for 2\1/4\ minutes.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding me this time, and I commend the gentleman for all the hard work on this legislation. I think it is unfortunate that our friends on the other side of the aisle are not looking very much at bipartisan measures that are included in the legislation before us. For example, my distinguished colleague, the gentlewoman from Florida [Ms. Ros-Lehtinen], inserted a very important provision in this legislation, especially at this time of negotiations between the United States and the European Union with regard to our sanctions policy against the Cuban dictatorship, a dictatorship that is in its last stages. There is no doubt that sovereignty will soon be returned to the people of Cuba. The dictatorship will not last long, and the day where the Cuban people will finally have self-determination and freedom will soon arrive, and especially at this moment when the United States and the European Union are negotiating because of a very unwise challenge by the European Union with regard to our policy at the World Trade Organization. It is very important that the measure that the gentlewoman from Florida [Ms. Ros-Lehtinen] included in this legislation that she referred to previously to insist upon full compliance with title IV of the Helms-Burton law be passed, and it is in here, Mr. Chairman. The gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Menendez], a very distinguished friend from the other side of the aisle, has included a very important provision as well. We need to stop the nuclear power plants that Castro is trying to complete from being completed. It was outrageous when we found out that the International Atomic Energy Commission was actually using U.S. taxpayer funds to assist Castro in the completion of those plants. That is prohibited in this legislation, Mr. Chairman. It is an important piece of legislation. It has bipartisan aspects to it. These measures have been supported on a bipartisan basis, and it is unfortunate that our colleagues have reacted in this way.