Lincoln Diaz-Balart: “it is really a shame my erudite and learned legal scholar colleague, the gentleman from California [Mr. Campbell], is so…”

“it is really a shame my erudite and learned legal scholar colleague, the gentleman from California [Mr. Campbell], is so incorrect in his interpretation of this legislation. First of all, and I heard him before the Committee on Rules yesterday where he pointed out that there was unfair treatment of some of the parties, I want to point out that on page 35 in title III, the provisions of title 28 of the United States Code and the Rules of Courts, they apply under this section to the same extent as those provisions with regard to any other action. The point I am trying to make is this is not an extraterritorial law, and when we say we will protect the property of American citizens that was stolen by a dictatorship, we are protecting the rights of American citizens' property, and not the rights of other citizens from other countries. So this is not an extraterritorial piece of legislation. Now, the essence of what we are trying to do is to shatter the arguments of the opponents of this legislation, that despite the fact that they supported embargoes against South Africa and Haiti, they now say that we should have a policy of helping the regime through trade and through investment in Cuba. It is a double standard that has been rejected by this Congress before and that is going to be rejected again. It has been rejected by the administration as well.”