the latest get-tough initiative to rid Cuba of Fidel Castro punishes ordinary Cubans on both sides of the Florida straits and will surely have no more effect on the longevity of the Castro regime than all other such measures over the last 45 years, over the lifetime of ten different Presidents, have had. Specifically, the interim rule which went into effect on June 30, 2004, limits family visits to Cuba to one trip every 3 years for a maximum of 14 days under a specific license to visit only immediate family. No longer will emergency visits, even deathbed visits, be allowed, nor visits to aunts, uncles and cousins who are outside the definition of immediate family. The old policy allowed one trip per year under a general license for an unstated number of days, included a broader definition of family and allowed emergency visits under a specific license. Further, the new rule has ordered cutting the amount that Cuban-Americans visiting Cuba can spend on a daily basis from $167 to $50, and $50 does not buy very much these days. And these sweeping changes were done without so much as one hearing in Congress. The Davis amendment would prohibit funds in the bill from being used to implement, administer or enforce the rule containing these changes made in family travel. Regardless of Members' opinions on the travel ban, this policy is politics at its worse being played with families. We should adopt the amendment overwhelmingly and put a stop to this policy folly.
John W. Olver: “the latest get-tough initiative to rid Cuba of Fidel Castro punishes ordinary Cubans on both sides of the Florida…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing changes to U.S. policy on family travel to Cuba and their impact on Cuban-Americans.
Share
More from John W. Olver
I think that what the chairman has said is probably about as good as it gets. What we have now is a slightly amended version of the proposal. My understanding is that the major long-distance trucking companies are against this language and…
Reclaiming my time, we have no idea whether the Supreme Court will take this case. In the meantime, until such time it is taken and they do it, and we can't assume that, then the actions of HUD are proper in reaching a disparate impact…
I rise in opposition. The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 5 minutes.
Well, that can be established if they actually have a referendum that repeals what they have done. But there has been--as we know, California has received about $4 billion of moneys from the Federal Government from earlier funds in earlier…





