this legislation comes to the floor today propelled by our collective outrage over the recent murderous attack by the Castro regime on two defenseless and clearly marked civilian aircraft. Civilized people everywhere are rightly outraged by this brutal act and by the disregard that the Castro regime has shown for human life and human rights. It is long past time for Castro and his paranoid regime to follow Brezhnev, Honeker, Ceausescu, and all the other failed Marxist dictators into the dust-bin of history. There can be no disagreement about that. But does it follow that there should be no disagreement about this bill? Emphatically, it does not. In fact, this legislation is a product of outdated dogma about how to fight Communist dictators, just as much as Castro is an outdated Communist dictator. A vote for this bill is a vote to ratchet up the already tight Cuban embargo. That may be popular as a way to register our moral outrage at Castro's latest actions. Some may even believe it will help push his regime over the edge. To the contrary, passing this bill is exactly the wrong thing to do right now. What is our self-interest here? What should be our objective? It should be the peaceful transition to a Cuba with an open economic system and a democratic political system. What is the best way to get there? I think our recent experience is instructive, our experience with the Soviet Union, with Eastern Europe, with China and Vietnam.…
David Skaggs: “this legislation comes to the floor today propelled by our collective outrage over the recent murderous attack by the…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing legislation in response to a recent attack by the Castro regime on civilian aircraft.
Share
More from David Skaggs
I am saddened by the tone of antagonism and mistrust that is already starting to creep into the proceedings. Perhaps the flaws in this resolution do not equal a violation of fundamental fairness. Due process, of course, is different from…
but in recent years, we have allowed the President to usurp Congress' power in this area and far exceed, I believe, what the Constitution contemplated. I just wanted to offer to my colleagues' attention what I hope will be a graphic…
I guess I am in the awkward position of wanting to help love their amendment to death, to acknowledge how meritorious their claim is for additional resources but then say, as the chairman has, 'Not here.' Because the account that they…
But this really comes down to a pretty fundamental question, which is do you think the business of the United States courts, when involving the United States itself as a party, ought to be presumptively public business or not, yes or no…





