Marco Rubio

You have a government there that's conducting an all-out assault on the constitutional order and on the independence of government institutions.

Gang activity is a threat to U.S. national security, and so working to reverse its growth would be one of my priorities.

I am concerned about a trend toward autocracy that threatens many nations in the hemisphere.

Expanding our economic relationship can help Honduras develop and grow while creating jobs in the United States.

Sudan is really low-hanging fruit. I mean--OK, Sudan. But, where we really--where an entity like this would really grow and be a legitimate entity that you could look at and say, 'Boy, I'm glad we have this,' is for them to say something…

I would argue that we ought to continue to use our voices and our votes.

It's hard to find any examples of things that we prevented from happening.

Libya, in fact, was approved by 145 of the U.N. Member States, which is appalling since Libya, today, is what they were back then, too.

I have also reviewed that file, Mr. Chairman, and I have nothing to add to what you've already said.

The United States is going to be a clear voice condemning this practice and calling out those nations and those governments that tolerate this or, worse, actually participate in this.

If confirmed, combating human trafficking would be one of my top priorities in Ecuador.

Human trafficking is not only a nasty business, it also has the potential to affect our national security.

As you know, El Salvador is a tier-two country, which means it's a source, destination, and transit country for human trafficking.

We have never offered unilateral concessions to the Cuban Government in exchange for Mr. Gross.

The only safe way to go to Cuba is to travel there and not really do anything more than, you know, cultural stuff, but really don't talk about politics because that could get you in trouble.

And my other concern is that Alan Gross was on the island for the purpose of fostering access to information.

So we make clear to people who are traveling to Cuba for people-to-people contact, we make clear to them that if they go too far in advocating for democracy or regime change that they could go to jail?

Isn't that something we're concerned about?

I would hope that we would establish a policy that clearly creates a nexus between the trips and our foreign policy toward the island, which is the hope of advancing democracy.

So we've already conceded, the administration has, that there's a price to be paid, that we recognize that these trips are providing hard currency for a repressive regime.

I would just advocate that if indeed we're going to allow people to travel to Cuba, and our hope is that somehow this travel to Cuba will help foster democracy...

But if our policy, ultimately, is to foster democracy, shouldn't these groups be evaluated on the basis of what they would do to foster democracy?

The benefit of having Americans travel to Cuba outweigh the hard currency

There's an open resistance in Cuba now; a resistance which is being oppressed

Political repression has increased