Lincoln Diaz-Balart: “Just a couple things from the debate that we have heard. The sponsor of the amendment talked about that this may be a…”

“Just a couple things from the debate that we have heard. The sponsor of the amendment talked about that this may be a personal issue for some. Mr. Chairman, let me be very frank and very clear: this is not a personal issue. Let me also talk about what the language in the bill does that this amendment is trying to take out. It doesn't deal with the overriding issue of policy versus whether we like the President's policy or not. It deals with one specific issue and one specific issue only, Mr. Chairman: whether we should condone, whether we should approve, whether we should permit the trafficking of confiscated--in other words, stolen--property. When the gentleman from my side of the aisle said that, you know, this is an issue about traveling to other countries, when we travel to Russia, we should be able to do that, that is fine. But is he also saying, which is what this amendment says, that we should condone the use of stolen, confiscated property, property that was stolen and confiscated illegally from Americans? So if you support this amendment, Mr. Chairman, what you are saying is it is okay to do business on property that was stolen from Americans. Now, I can understand having differences of opinion on overall policy, but the language in the mark deals specifically with confiscated--in other words, stolen--properties from Americans.…”