U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

74–417 PDF 2012

TO AMEND PUBLIC LAW 89-732 TO MODIFY 

THE REQUIREMENT FOR A CUBAN NATIONAL 

TO QUALIFY FOR AND MAINTAIN STATUS AS 

A PERMANENT RESIDENT 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

IMMIGRATION POLICY AND ENFORCEMENT 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

ON

H.R. 2831 

MAY 31, 2012 

Serial No. 112–108 

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://judiciary.house.gov 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

LAMAR SMITH, Texas, Chairman 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia 

DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia 

STEVE KING, Iowa 

TRENT FRANKS, Arizona 

LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas 

JIM JORDAN, Ohio 

TED POE, Texas 

JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah 

TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

TREY GOWDY, South Carolina 

DENNIS ROSS, Florida 

SANDY ADAMS, Florida 

BEN QUAYLE, Arizona 

MARK AMODEI, Nevada 

JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California 

JERROLD NADLER, New York 

ROBERT C. ‘‘BOBBY’’ SCOTT, Virginia 

MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas 

MAXINE WATERS, California 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

HENRY C. ‘‘HANK’’ JOHNSON, JR., 

Georgia 

PEDRO R. PIERLUISI, Puerto Rico 

MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois 

JUDY CHU, California 

TED DEUTCH, Florida 

LINDA T. SA ́ NCHEZ, California 

JARED POLIS, Colorado 

RICHARD HERTLING, Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

PERRY APELBAUM, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION POLICY AND ENFORCEMENT

ELTON GALLEGLY, California, Chairman 

STEVE KING, Iowa, Vice-Chairman 

DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California 

LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

TREY GOWDY, South Carolina 

DENNIS ROSS, Florida 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas 

MAXINE WATERS, California 

PEDRO R. PIERLUISI, Puerto Rico 

GEORGE FISHMAN, Chief Counsel 

DAVID SHAHOULIAN, Minority Counsel 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

MAY 31, 2012 

Page 

THE BILL 

H.R. 2831, To Amend Public Law 89-732 to modify the requirement for 

a Cuban national to qualify for and maintain status as a permanent resident ....................................................................................................................... 3 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

The Honorable Elton Gallegly, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of California, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and 

Enforcement .......................................................................................................... 1 

The Honorable Zoe Lofgren, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of California, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Immigration Policy 

and Enforcement .................................................................................................. 5 

WITNESSES 

The Honorable David Rivera, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Florida 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 7 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 9 

Juan Carlos Go ́mez, Director, Carlos A. Costa Immigration and Human 

Rights Clinic, Florida International University College of Law 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 12 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 14 

Mauricio Claver-Carone, Executive Director, Cuba Democracy Advocates 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 18 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 20 

Tomas Bilbao, Executive Director, Cuba Study Group 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 25 

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 27 

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

Material submitted by the Honorable Zoe Lofgren, a Representative in Congress from the State of California, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee 

on Immigration Policy and Enforcement ........................................................... 33 

Material submitted by the Honorable Elton Gallegly, a Representative in 

Congress from the State of California, and Chairman, Subcommittee on 

Immigration Policy and Enforcement ................................................................. 42 

Material submitted by Mauricio Claver-Carone, Executive Director, Cuba Democracy Advocates ............................................................................................... 47 

Prepared Statement of the Honorable Albio Sires, a Representative in Congress from the State of New Jersey, submitted by the Honorable David 

Rivera, a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida ..................... 61 

Material submitted by Tomas Bilbao, Executive Director, Cuba Study Group .. 62 

(1) 

TO AMEND PUBLIC LAW 89-732 TO MODIFY 

THE REQUIREMENT FOR A CUBAN NATIONAL TO QUALIFY FOR AND MAINTAIN 

STATUS AS A PERMANENT RESIDENT 

THURSDAY, MAY 31, 2012 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION

POLICY AND ENFORCEMENT, 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, 

Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 1:30 p.m., in room 

2141, Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable Elton Gallegly 

(Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding. 

Present: Representatives Gallegly, Ross, Lofgren, and Jackson 

Lee. 

Staff Present: (Majority) Dimple Shah, Counsel; Marian White, 

Clerk; and (Minority) David Shahoulian, Subcommittee Chief 

Counsel. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. I call the Subcommittee to order. 

We are going to have votes here shortly so we will try to get our 

opening statements, mine and the Ranking Member’s, before we go 

to vote, and hopefully we will not be interrupted too long. 

Over the last 2 years, due to changes in U.S. policy, there has 

been a marked increase in travel to Cuba. In fact, travel from the 

U.S. to that country has tripled, with most of the increase coming 

as a result of travelers taking multiple trips per year. As a result, 

visiting Cuban Americans have become one of the Castro regime’s 

top sources of revenue. 

The Cuban Adjustment Act was enacted in 1966 to provide Cubans fleeing persecution with the ability to adjust to permanent 

residency status in the U.S. after 1 year. However, some Cubans 

who sought refuge in the U.S. under the CAA immediately and repeatedly travel back to Cuba once they receive permanent residence. Essentially, they are returning to the very same country 

that supposedly persecuted them. 

The original intent of the CAA must be maintained. The law was 

enacted to provide permanent residency to Cuban refugees who 

were not able to return to Cuba due to the fear of persecution and 

the political situation in that country. Today, the political situation 

in Cuba remains the same, with a Communist dictatorship that denies basic human rights to its people. The fact that some persons 

avail themselves of the CAA citing political persecution, and then 

2 

quickly travel back to the persecuting country, is an abuse of the 

generosity of the American people and is unacceptable. 

H.R. 2831 will rectify these abuses. The bill amends the CAA so 

that Cuban nationals who obtain permanent residence pursuant to 

the CAA will have their permanent resident status revoked if they 

travel to Cuba. The bill will help ensure that the CAA continues 

to protect Cuban refugees who are truly fleeing persecution, without becoming a vehicle to support the economy of the Castro regime. 

And with that, I would yield to the gentlelady from California, 

the Ranking Member, Ms. Lofgren. 

[The bill, H.R. 2831, follows: 

3 


HR2831-1.eps
4 


HR2831-2.eps
5 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The bill before us today is very simple. If enacted it would revoke 

the permanent residence status of any Cuban national who travels 

to Cuba prior to becoming a citizen, whatever the reason for the 

travel. Put another way, it turns the act of travel to Cuba into a 

deportable offense. 

No matter what the reason for stepping foot in Cuba, you lose 

your status. If you go to visit family members you haven’t seen in 

years, you lose your status. If you go to attend the funeral of your 

father or to donate a kidney to a dying sibling, you lose your status. If you go to meet with Cuban dissidents with the aim of 

transitioning Cuba to a democracy, you lose your status. Whatever 

the reason, the bill says to those who travel, don’t bother getting 

on a plane back to the United States, your permanent residency 

has been rescinded, you are no longer welcome here. 

When I first learned of this bill, I had my Subcommittee staff 

reach out to Mr. Rivera’s office to better understand why he believed such legislation was necessary. After all, this bill would appear to punish many of his own constituents simply for choosing 

to visit family members still in Cuba. My staff was told that the 

bill was necessary to prevent alleged abuses of the Cuban Adjustment Act. According to Mr. Rivera’s staff, the Act was meant for 

refugees so beneficiaries should not be traveling back to Cuba. His 

staff also expressed concern that recent arrivals were exploiting the 

Act to collect public benefits and then take those benefits back to 

Cuba where they could live a more lavish lifestyle. 

On the first point, I had my staff explain that permanent residency through the Cuban Adjustment Act is not limited to refugees 

and that the vast majority of Cubans who use the Act are familybased immigrants who make no claim of persecution. In fact, in fiscal year 2011, almost 18,000 Cubans were granted parole to the 

U.S. as family based immigrants compared to 3,000 who were admitted as refugees. Never has this country denied the ability for 

family-based immigrants to visit their homeland and doing so here 

would set a dangerous precedent. 

With respect to the claim that immigrants are using public benefits to live extravagantly in Cuba, I took that charge seriously and 

had my staff look into it. We searched for reports or studies on the 

issue, but there were none. We called the Social Security Administration, the Florida Department of Children and Families, Florida 

Legal Services, the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, and 

other experts on the use of public benefits, but each person we 

spoke to said this was not a serious possibility and each explained 

how incredibly difficult it would be to pull something like this off 

even for a short period of time. 

Nevertheless, we took Mr. Rivera’s staff at its word and we offered to assist them in drafting a bill that would revoke public benefits for any person who spent an inordinate amount of time in 

Cuba absent truly extraordinary circumstances, but this offer was 

declined. 

I think that a bill that would target abuse of benefits that may 

not exist would be one thing, but this bill does something substantially different. We are left with a bill that doesn’t differentiate between humanitarian travel and travel for other purposes. It doesn’t 

6 

matter whether a person came to the U.S. as a refugee or to reunite with family members. It doesn’t matter whether they traveled to Cuba for 1 day or 6 months, and it doesn’t matter whether 

they receive public benefits or not. It doesn’t matter whether they 

came last year or 50 years ago. 

This bill seems to have one purpose and one purpose only: to 

punish people who exercise their right to travel to Cuba. We all 

know that some want to restrict travel to Cuba, but deporting people for not agreeing with this position, I think, is simply wrong. 

Let’s talk about a real life example of a person who could be deported if this bill were to become law. You wouldn’t know it by his 

name, but my chief counsel on this Subcommittee, David 

Shahoulian, is of Cuban descent. His family came to the U.S. in 

1967 on one of the famous ‘‘Freedom Flights’’ from Cuba for America. His grandmother, Fedelini Perez, came on that flight and received her green card through the Cuban Adjustment Act the following year. 

Forty-five years later, his grandma remains a permanent resident of the United States. Lack of an education in Cuba made it 

difficult for her to pass the English and civics test required for citizenship, but she worked hard and did not rely on public assistance. 

During these 45 years, Mr. Shahoulian’s grandma traveled to Cuba 

exactly four times, each time for about a week to visit a sick or 

dying family member. Had this bill been law back then, she would 

not have been able to come back. 

David tells me that now at age 90, she is hoping to go back one 

more time to visit her siblings who she will never be able to see 

again. But if this were to become law she could go to see her siblings but not come back. Here is a bill that would deport David’s 

grandmother and others like her simply for visiting family members, and it is hard for me to consider this a serious policy proposal. It is hard for me to imagine our Committee giving this bill 

a hearing considering all of the problems our country is facing. 

And I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. I thank the gentlelady. 

As you know, the bells have gone off. We have three votes. One 

15, which translated in Congressional time it is about 29 to 37 

minutes, and two 5-minute votes, which translated is 7 or 8 minutes. Put that together, it is probably going to be between 45 and 

50 minutes. But we will be back as quickly as we can. 

Thank you. 

[Recess.] 

Mr. GALLEGLY. We have a very distinguished panel with us 

today. Each of the witnesses’ written statements will be entered 

into the record in its entirety. However, I would ask that your 

verbal testimony be held to 5 minutes and we provided the lights 

and you all know how those work. So if you would help us with 

that, I would be grateful. 

Today, we will start with our colleague, Congressman David Rivera, who represents the 25th Congressional District in Florida and 

is currently serving his first term in the House of Representatives. 

He serves on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and on the 

House Committee on Natural Resources. Prior, he served in the 

7 

Florida House of Representatives and worked in the U.S. Information Agency in the Office of Cuba Broadcasting. 

Congressman Rivera received his Bachelor’s Degree from Florida 

International University and a Master’s of Public Administration. 

Welcome, David. Glad to have you. 

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE DAVID RIVERA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing 

regarding a very important immigration enforcement matter. 

In 1966, the United States of America granted Cuban nationals 

one of the most benevolent immigration provisions ever granted to 

nationals of any country on the planet, what became known as the 

Cuban Adjustment Act. The Cuban Adjustment Act provides Cubans fleeing persecution in Cuba who arrive in the United States 

eligibility for permanent residency status after 1 year. In the history of America only one other nationality has been granted this 

benefit, Hungarians in 1956. The Cuban Adjustment Act is a precious gift to Cuban political refugees that must be preserved and 

protected and should never be abused or manipulated. 

Unfortunately, abuse and manipulation is exactly what has occurred in recent years. Because of these abuses and in order to preserve and protect the benefits of the Cuban Adjustment Act for future Cuban asylum seekers, the time has come to adjust the Cuban 

Adjustment Act. 

The fact is that in recent years it has become a common occurrence for Cubans to seek political asylum in the U.S. under the 

Cuban Adjustment Act and after a year and a day immediately and 

repeatedly travel back to the persecuting country. 

Increasingly, Cuban Americans are citing family reunification to 

justify travel that in reality that more closely resembles common 

tourism and other unauthorized travel. One of the latest manifestations of abuse of this law occurred when travel agencies providing 

Cuba travel services actually incentivized passengers to inducements such as free airfare as long as the passenger is willing to 

carry baggage filled with merchandise to be used for sale in Cuba. 

In these cases, Cuban Adjustment Act beneficiaries actually become human cargo vessels to promote commercial activity for Cuba. 

In many cases, those Cubans traveling are also recipients of U.S. 

taxpayer funded welfare programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, food stamps, public housing and cash assistance. In 

these cases, U.S. taxpayers are actually subsidizing travel to a 

country that has been designated a sponsor of terrorism by our own 

government. 

The original intent of the Cuban Adjustment Act was to provide 

residency status to Cuban refugees because they were not able to 

return to Cuba due to the political situation in Cuba in 1966, which 

certainly has not changed. In fact the political situation in Cuba is 

worse today with a Communist, totalitarian dictatorship in power 

that continues to deny basic civil liberties and human rights to its 

people, continues to imprison peaceful pro-democracy activists and 

continues to cause the deaths of Cubans who desperately seek to 

escape across the Florida straits. 

8 

The fact that Cubans avail themselves of the Cuban Adjustment 

Act citing politically persecution and then quickly travel back to 

the persecuting country is a clear and blatant abuse of the law. In 

fact it is outright fraud being perpetrated on the people and government of the United States. 

If Cubans are able to travel back to the Communist dictatorship, 

then they should not have received the residency benefits associated with the Cuban Adjustment Act and they should lose that 

benefit immediately. 

My legislation simply says that any Cuban national who receives 

political asylum and residency under the Cuban Adjustment Act 

and travels to Cuba while still a resident will have their residency 

status revoked. By reforming the Cuban Adjustment Act to stop its 

abuses, we are ensuring the residency benefits will be there for all 

future asylum seekers. In other words, adjust the Cuban Adjustment Act in order to save the Cuban Adjustment Act. 

Recent statements by Cuban leaders and Cuban state media regarding the facilitating of Cuban Americans traveling to Cuba 

make it abundantly clear that the regime is looking for this travel 

activity for its own economic benefits. 

But let me be clear, Mr. Chairman, in the final analysis my legislation is about protecting the rule of law here in the United States. 

The reason I believe this Committee was designated as the Committee of jurisdiction over my legislation is precisely because this 

Committee is charged with oversight responsibility to ensure that 

the spirit and letter of our immigration laws are followed. 

There are some that may try to distract attention from this issue 

of rule of law and attempt to divert this legislation into a debate 

about U.S. policy toward Cuba or Cuba travel regulations. I would 

strongly urge the Committee to maintain the focus on the purpose 

of my legislation to ensure that the spirit and letter of U.S. immigration law is enforced. 

Besides protecting against fraud and abuse in our immigration 

laws, my legislation will also protect American taxpayers from 

fraud and abuse in our social welfare program such as Medicare 

and Medicaid. These programs have been the victim of billions of 

dollars in stolen funds by individuals who come from Cuba under 

the Cuban Adjustment Act, receive refuge in Cuba after they have 

committed their illegal activities against the American taxpayer 

and live in Cuba protected by the Cuban Government as fugitives 

from U.S. justice. 

In sum, Mr. Chairman, it is imperative that Congress do everything in its power to enforce U.S. immigration law. I believe many 

Americans will be shocked to learn that we allow individuals to 

come to America from a terrorist nation with a special immigration 

status citing political persecution and then after a year and a day 

allow those same individuals to travel back to that terrorist nation. 

This abuse, fraud and manipulation of our immigration laws 

must end. The spirit of and letter of our immigration laws must be 

enforced. My legislation will do exactly that. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Rivera follows:] 

9 


DR-1.eps
10 


DR-2.eps
11 

Mr. GALLEGLY. Thank you, Mr. Rivera. 

Our next witness, Juan Carlos Go ́mez, serves as the Director of 

the Carlos A. Costa Immigration and Human Rights Clinic at the 

Florida International University College of Law, where he is an assistant clinical professor. Within the field of immigration law, he 

has helped thousands of individuals in situations, including removal and deportation proceedings, family immigration, and the 


DR-3.eps
12 

transfer of professionals and executives to the United States. Mr. 

Go ́mez received his BA from Florida International University with 

honors and his JD from the University of Pennsylvania Law 

School. 

Welcome, Mr. Go ́mez. 

TESTIMONY OF JUAN CARLOS GO ́ MEZ, DIRECTOR, CARLOS A. 

COSTA IMMIGRATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS CLINIC, FLORIDA 

INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW 

Mr. GO ́ MEZ. I am honored to appear here before you in the hope 

that I can be of assistance in regard to House Bill 2831. I came 

here as someone who was able to become an American because of 

the Cuban Adjustment Act, as someone who benefited from the 

freedom flights, and ironically I was made to feel a bit old because 

your grandmother and I seem to have been in the same boat in a 

way. 

As someone who has represented Cubans for over 20 years who 

were applying for lawful permanent residence under the Cuban Adjustment Act and as someone who has taught the workings of the 

Act in law school, the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966 is meant to 

be a tool to alleviate the suffering of Cubans who made it to the 

United States after fleeing oppression in Cuba. There have been 

amendments to the Act over the decades. The act currently requires only 1 year of physical presence in the United States in 

order to apply for adjustment. 

This act is an embarrassment to the Castro government because 

it serves as a reminder to the world that their failed system has 

for decades forced Cubans to flee Cuba. Some say the Cuban Adjustment Act is a magnet that attracts Cubans to the United 

States. They are wrong. It is freedom and opportunities that are 

the magnets that attract Cubans to the United States. It is particularly embarrassing to the Castros and their henchmen that it was 

not just persons who fled immediately after 1959 change in government but hundreds of thousands over the last 2 decades alone. As 

long as the caudillos, or military strongmen essentially, and their 

thugs are in power in Cuba, the Act must continue to exist. 

The main refugee system in the United States has been inadequate to address the problem of Cuban refugees seeking freedom 

in the United States. In the Cuban situation, parole authority has 

been used since the 1960’s because the global refugee quota system 

would have failed to alleviate the suffering of those who sought 

freedom in the United States. And while there have been various 

ways of migration of Cubans seeking freedom, the vast majority of 

Cubans have been paroled into the United States and have benefited from the Cuban Adjustment Act. Those of us who work in the 

field have seen thousands of good people become permanent residents, and many like myself have become United States citizens. 

The legislation seeks to ensure that we keep the intent of the Act 

in place and protect those legitimately seeking refuge in the United 

States. We must distinguish between the poor factory workers who 

are struggling to support themselves and their families here and 

their relatives in Cuba from the role of the wise guy who would 

take advantage of our laws. We must distinguish the victims of the 

oppressors from the opportunists. 

13 

And in addressing that, I would respectfully like to address a 

concern in the bill that I have mentioned in my written testimony. 

In its current form, the bill contains no exception for a person who 

would return to the island to deal with illness or death of a parent, 

spouse or child. I think that this is a matter that needs to be considered. 

In the context of this important discussion, we must also be 

aware that we have mechanisms in our immigration laws to filter 

out persons who would not be allowed to be admitted as lawful permanent residents. There are still unfortunately big weaknesses in 

our immigration laws as related to the Cuban situation. 

Congressman Rivera has mentioned some of them. The best example that I can think of is where the children, as we define the 

word ‘‘child’’ in the INA, of officers of the Cuban military or the 

elite of the Cuban machinery, including ministers, vice ministers, 

heads of bureaucracies, politburos from the local level on up who 

have immigrated to the United States. They benefited from the lifestyles of the elite along with the Castros in Cuba, and they did not 

have to actually be members of the Communist Party. So they have 

actually also benefited from the generosity of the Cuban Adjustment Act. 

Another example is that you have persons who are voluntarily 

part of the machine of government in Cuba who still can benefit 

from the Cuban Adjustment Act. It is ironic that while a country, 

and many individuals, have had to wait 50-plus years for freedom, 

former members of the Communist Party need only wait 5 years 

and then apply for benefits under the Cuban Adjustment Act. 

If I may be so bold as to suggest that everyone from the officer 

class and management level on up in Cuba should be denied access 

to the Cuban Adjustment Act. For instance, if you work for the 

Ministry of Interior in Cuba, which serves as Castros main tool of 

repression and you are not a member of the Communist Party, you 

can become a lawful permanent resident in the United States 

under the Cuban Adjustment Act. I would also suggest that these 

individuals be denied access to the parole status or parolee status 

which is the mechanism that triggers access for most Cubans to 

the Cuban Adjustment Act. 

It is imperative that we continue to protect those who are fleeing 

Cuba as legitimate refugees. I appreciate the intention of House 

Bill 2831 in an effort to strengthen the Cuban Adjustment Act. We 

need to protect the Cuban Adjustment Act from abuse. 

I urge the Committee to be cautious and to protect the law from 

persecutors and others who are part of the machine of oppression 

in Cuba without hurting its victims. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Go ́mez follows:] 

14 


Gomez-1.eps
15 


Gomez-2.eps
16 


Gomez-3.eps
17 

Mr. GALLEGLY. Thank you very much, Mr. Go ́mez. 

Our next witness, Mr. Mauricio Claver-Carone, is the Executive 

Director of Cuba Democracy Advocates in Washington, D.C., a nonpartisan organization dedicated to the promotion of human rights, 

democracy, and the rule of law in Cuba. Prior to his work in government, he served as a clinical assistant professor at the Catholic 

University of America’s School of Law and as an adjunct professor 

at the George Washington University’s National Law Center. 


Gomez-4.eps
18 

Mr. Claver-Carone earned his BA from Rollins College, his JD 

from the Catholic University of America, and a Master of Law from 

Georgetown University Law Center. 

Welcome, Mr. Claver-Carone. 

TESTIMONY OF MAURICIO CLAVER-CARONE, 

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CUBA DEMOCRACY ADVOCATES 

Mr. CLAVER-CARONE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It is 

truly a privilege to be here with all of you today to testify in support of H.R. 2831. 

The Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act of 1966 gives Cuban nationals once they reach the United States and stay for a year a right 

to become legal permanent residents. Cubans are the only nationality to which the U.S. Congress has awarded this special privilege. 

The legislative history of the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act holds 

that immigrants from Cuba are refugees under international law, 

hence the original name of the Act. 

Under the United Nation’s convention relating to the status of 

refugees of 1951, a refugee is a person who, owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, 

membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable to or, owing to 

such fear, unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country. 

Undoubtedly, Cubans remain persecuted for their political opinions by the Castro dictatorship, which remains as brutal as ever. 

So it is not yet time to repeal the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act. 

According to U.S. Department of State’s most recent human 

rights report, the Castro’s regime violations include abridgement of 

the right of citizens to change their government; government 

threats, intimidation, mobs, harassment, detentions to prevent citizens from assembling peacefully; and a significant increase in a 

number of short-term detentions, which in December rose to the 

highest monthly number in 30 years. Moreover, it recognizes that 

these abuses were official acts committed at the discretion and direction of the government, and consequently the perpetrators enjoyed impunity for their actions. 

In 2011, Cuban independent journalists documented over 3,835 

political arrests by the Castro regime, more than 150 percent increase from the previous year. As a result, Cubans should undoubtedly continue to be paroled into the United States as refugees fleeing persecution from the sole remaining dictatorship in the Western Hemisphere. 

However, some things have changed since the Cuban Refugee 

Adjustment Act was originally enacted. In 1994, as rising political 

pressure and economic woes threatened the regime’s post-Soviet existence, Fidel and Raul Castro resorted to their old tactic of creating a migration crisis but with a new twist, that they began allowing Cubans to take to the sea in makeshift rafts. 

From this crisis, the Castro regime extracted a migration accord, 

the 1994 Accord, from the Clinton administration which allocated 

a minimum of 20,000 yearly visas to residents of Cubans regardless 

of their political status vis—vis the dictatorship. 

19 

Since the 20,000 minimum visas per year could not be met 

through the Immigration Nationality Act preference system, the 

Clinton administration decided to use the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act as its legal authority to allow this new category of humans to come to the United States and become legal permanent 

residents. Pursuant to the 1994 Accord, nearly half a million Cubans have entered the United States and become legal permanent 

residents under the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act. 

Although no longer a prerequisite, most have nonetheless had a 

political rationale for fleeing the island, others have not. Yet both 

are equally afforded the benefits of the Cuban Refugee Adjustment 

Act not only regarding their migratory status but also the generous 

means-tested public assistance programs afforded to refugees and 

to which they qualify thanks to the Cuban Refugee Adjustment 

Act. 

These include supplemental security income and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. Such public assistance is meant to 

help Cuban refugees settle here in the United States. 

The time has come to legally ensure that only Cubans who come 

to the United States as refugees are afforded the special privileges 

provided under the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act and thus restore the law’s original intent. 

This does not mean that Cubans who are not refugees should be 

denied entry into the United States. It simply means that they 

should be subject to the same set of immigration rules as Mexicans, 

Canadians, Filipinos, or any other nationalities patiently waiting to 

do so. They should not be allowed to jump the line. 

Thus, H.R. 2831 would bring non-refugee parity in this regard; 

otherwise this current back door loophole risks altogether ended 

the needed special protections to Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act 

originally intended for those persecuted by the Castro regime. 

The Castro regime has manipulated 1994 Accord to create a system of travel back and forth for tens of thousands of nonrefugee 

Cubans who nonetheless adjusted their status under the Cuban 

Refugee Adjustment Act. This travel network carries minimum political risk for the regime and for many reasons. 

These incongruences are further exacerbated by the fact that the 

U.S. government outsources first-year screening of Cubans chosen 

to be paroled into the United States under the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act to the Castro regime. That is right. The U.S. Interest 

Section in Havana hires Castro regime personnel to interview Cubans seeking visas. Thus, adding insult to injury, current U.S. policy allows the persecutors to choose who will ultimately be afforded 

the privilege of the Adjustment Act. 

The fairest and easiest way to legally classify Cubans who have 

a legitimate political rationale versus those who don’t is by identifying those who quickly turn around and travel back to the islands. 

Identifying those who travel back for a political rationale is not a 

new rubric. It is how the law distinguishes legitimate versus fraudulent refugee claims for every other nationality in the world. 

Therefore, it would bring parity for refugees as well. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony, and I truly appreciate the invitation and opportunity, and I will be pleased to respond to any questions. 

20 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Claver-Carone follows:] 


MCC-1.eps
21 


MCC-2.eps
22 


MCC-3.eps
23 


MCC-4.eps
24 

Mr. Gallegly. Thank you very much, Mr. Claver-Carone. 

The next witness is Mr. Thomas Bilbao. Mr. Bilbao is Executive 

Director of the Cuban Study Group. Prior to joining the Cuban 

Study Group, Mr. Bilbao served as Director of Transition for Senator-elect Mel Martinez and Director of Operations for Mel Martinez for the U.S. Senate. 


MCC-5.eps
25 

In addition, he served in the administration of George W. Bush 

as Deputy Director of Operations for Advance at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 

Mr. Bilbao holds a Bachelor’s Degree from American University 

and an MBA from the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University. 

Welcome. 

TESTIMONY OF TOMAS BILBAO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

CUBA STUDY GROUP 

Mr. BILBAO. Thank you very much, Chairman Gallegly and 

Ranking Member Lofgren, and other honorable Members of the 

Committee, for the opportunity to present a point of view which all 

too often goes unrepresented in this body despite the fact that it 

reflects the opinions of the overwhelming majority of the Cuban 

American community. I believe it is important to provide this perspective on a bill that amounts to little more than yet another travel ban to Cuba, which it does so by targeting a longstanding benefit 

afforded to our community. 

For over a decade, the Cuba Study Group has advocated for 

human rights in Cuba and for policies to help break the isolation 

imposed on the Cuban people mainly by the policies of the Cuban 

regime, but sadly also by the policies of the U.S. government. 

Our moral beliefs tell us that dividing Cuban families is wrong 

no matter who is responsible for it and that the best way to help 

Cubans on the island become authors of their own future is by empowering them through resources and information. 

Since the reversal of restrictions on family travel and enacted in 

2004, Cuban Americans have taken over 400,000 trips annually, 

and this number continues to grow. Hundreds of thousands of Cubans in our community are voting with their feet, and they are telling us that for them family is more important than politics. 

A September 2011 poll conducted by Florida International University demonstrates that 57 percent of Cuban Americans in 

Miami-Dade County favor unrestricted travel to Cuba by any 

American, not just family travel, and those numbers rise to 75 percent for more recent arrivals, the target of H.R. 2831. 

In addition, leaders of Cuba’s pro-democracy movement have 

called on the U.S. to eliminate all travel restrictions to Cuba. Almost exactly 2 years ago today, 74 of Cuba’s top democracy advocates wrote to Congress and stated that, quote, we share the opinion that the isolation of the Cuban people benefits the most inflexible interests of its government while any opening serves to inform 

and empower the Cuban people and helps to further strengthen our 

civil society, end quote. 

Now, at a time when the Cuban Government is in the process 

of reforming its own onerous migratory laws, which deny its citizens the right to travel and divides Cuban families, this bill seeks 

to impose similar restrictions in the United States. Unfortunately, 

for the Cuban American community this latest effort to restrict 

travel to the island targets a longstanding benefit afforded to us 

which has enabled countless Cuban immigrants to adapt to life in 

the United States and to rise to the highest levels of academia, 

business, the arts, and public service. 

26 

Proponents of this bill have suggested the beneficiaries of the 

Cuban Adjustment Act shouldn’t travel to the island because they 

benefit from this law by claiming political persecution. However, 

the Cuban Adjustment Act does not make persecution a condition 

for obtaining lawful status. 

U.S. immigration law toward Cuba has a long history of providing resettlement assistance to Cuban immigrants regardless of 

whether they claim political persecution. This is because as Americans we understand that Cuban immigrants, whether they claim 

political asylum or not, are victims of a system that systematically 

violates individual liberties and which stifles private initiative. 

Suggesting that all Cuban immigrants benefiting from the Cuban 

Adjustment Act have claimed political persecution or were required 

to by law is simply incorrect. The bill’s proponents claim that it is 

necessary in order to prevent abuse and manipulation by Cuban 

Americans. Not only are these attacks unfounded as no evidence of 

widespread abuse has been presented, but they are divisive and 

they are insulting. 

Moreover, the bill is written so broadly as to penalize those 

Cuban Americans who by virtue of having family on the island 

must travel back to Cuba. The broad scope of the language of this 

bill seeks not just to prevent the abuses alleged by proponents of 

the bill but rather forces all Cuban immigrants who want to maintain stable legal status in the United States to give up visiting 

their family in Cuba. 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Lofgren, and other Members of 

this Committee, this bill as currently drafted amounts to little 

more than another concerted effort by some to restrict travel to 

Cuba regardless of the human costs and to criminalize those who 

do so by targeting longstanding benefits enjoyed by our community. 

The overwhelming majority of Cuban Americans reject efforts to 

restrict our rights to visit family on the island. We reject suggestions of abuse and manipulation waged against us in an effort to 

pass legislation that would force us to choose between not seeing 

a family member before they die and falling into undocumented 

status or even deportation proceedings. 

Thank you for this opportunity. I am happy to answer any questions that you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bilbao follows:] 

27 


Bilbao-1.eps
28 


Bilbao-2.eps
29 


Bilbao-3.eps
30 


Bilbao-4.eps
31 

Mr. GALLEGLY. Thank you all for your testimony. 

Mr. Claver-Carone, do you believe and can you give us your assessment of what kind of persecution, if any, remains in Cuba 

today? 

Mr. CLAVER-CARONE. As I mentioned in my testimony, Mr. 

Chairman, there actually—we are currently seeing a spike in repression in Cuba. Just in the month of December there was the 

highest number of political arrests per month in 30 years. So we 

are seeing despite all of the media reports about Raul Castro and 

whether he is a reformist or not, what we are seeing is that one 

thing has changed in Cuba since Raul Castro is in power, that repression has increased and is continuing to increase dramatically. 

We saw that just, as I mentioned before, in the month of—there 

was a 150 percent increase year over year in political arrests on 

the island. 

So we are seeing, you know, a huge spike and therefore those 

Cubans that are out there heroically fighting for freedom need to 

have the protections, and they need to know that the United States 

is out there in the moral and historic responsibility that they have 

had. 

However, our concern though is how do those people, how do 

those courageous freedom fighters in Cuba feel when they see people, people that even persecuted them coming to the United States, 

receiving the benefits under the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act, 

and then going back to the Cuba as if nothing happened. These are 

sometimes people that persecuted them, people that were parts of 

the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution and other things. 

It is very demoralizing for them, and that is our big concern in 

making sure that we have a bright line. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Bilbao, under the CRAA, Cubans are provided with benefits that no other Nations’ citizens enjoy. Don’t you 

believe these benefits should be preserved? 

Mr. BILBAO. Mr. Chairman, of course I believe that these benefits 

should be preserved. It is something that our community appreciates. It is a gesture by the American people, and the suggestion, 

however, that this bill is—that this benefit is under attack I think 

is baseless in the sense that we have not seen any evidence of 

widespread abuse. 

The only evidence I can see of this benefit being threatened is 

H.R. 2831, which seeks to repeal these benefits especially during 

a time when, as Mr. Claver-Carone suggests, repression is increasing on the island. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. In your testimony you state the intent of the 

CRAA was to regularize the immigration status of Cubans in the 

U.S. Wasn’t the intent to provide Cubans with refuge from an oppressive regime? 

Mr. BILBAO. Mr. Chairman, the intent of the Act was to regularize the status of thousands of Cubans who were already in the 

United States at the time and who did not have—and were basically in legal limbo and the fact that that act in no place mentions 

the fact that they have to be politically persecuted would suggest 

to me that the practice that has been common for the last 10 years 

of overwhelming majority of people who have benefited from this 

being actually folks on track for family reunification as opposed to 

32 

political persecution, that this act is intended to help Cubans adjust their status and is not limited solely to those who claim political persecution. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Claver-Carone, if I ask you the same question would you give me the same answer? 

Mr. CLAVER-CARONE. No. Actually, if you read the legislative history of the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act, thus the name, the 

Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act, it was meant to protect people 

that were persecuted in Cuba and to provide them a way to adjust 

their status here in the United States. 

We are not saying that people should not travel back to Cuba. 

We want to have the foreign policy debate. We can have that in the 

Committee down the hall. However, if people are coming to the 

United States and adjusting under the Cuban Refugee Adjustment 

Act, they should apply and they should be based on those rules and 

they should be subject to those rules. 

If people want to come here under non-refugee status, then they 

should get in line with a lot of people throughout the world that 

are patiently waiting to come to the United States and enjoy those 

privileges. So it is how you use the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. Congressman Rivera, would you like to comment 

on that? 

Mr. RIVERA. Sure. I will just conjure up the words of our former 

colleagues from the United States Congress in 1966. Congressman 

Michael Feighan of Ohio stated the granting of permanent resident 

status would further American policy objectives by further demonstrating the desire of the United States to play a full and sympathetic role as a country of asylum to refugees from communism. 

Former Congressman Claude Pepper: I want to commend the 

Committee to provide humanitarian aid for these people fleeing 

from Communist persecution and tyranny under Castro toward establishing permanent residence in our country. 

Obviously, the pretext of the Cuban Adjustment Act is political 

persecution. The only reason it was ever enacted in 1966 was because of the political situation in Cuba, the existence of a Communist, totalitarian dictatorship that denied basic human rights 

and civil liberties, the exact same conditions that exist today. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. My time has expired. 

I yield to the gentlelady from California, the Ranking Member, 

Ms. Lofgren. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I would just like to make a quick statement for the record. I notice in Congressman Rivera’s written remarks that he describes 

U.S. taxpayer funded welfare programs and includes Social Security and Medicare as those welfare programs. And I would just like 

to note for the record I think that would come as quite a surprise 

to the Social Security recipients who have paid into that program 

their entire lives in order to be eligible along with Medicare recipients who have paid in their entire lives in order to be eligible for 

Medicare. I personally do not consider Medicare and Social Security to be welfare. 

Now, as to this Act, as you look at immigration law, it seems to 

me that the bill doesn’t actually affect Cuban refugees. There were 

3,000 Cubans who came as refugees last year, and 18,000 who 

33 

came from Cuba who were not refugees, and I would ask unanimous consent to put in the record a report from the Congressional 

Research Service titled ‘‘Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966,’’ pointing 

out that the Cuban Adjustment Act does not require any claim of 

persecution or a showing that you must be a refugee or asylee or 

any individualized hardship under the Act. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. Without objection. 

[The information referred to follows:] 


74417A-1.eps
34 


74417A-2.eps
35 


74417A-3.eps
36 

Ms. LOFGREN. So the refugees could actually, under the law, 

under section 209 of the Immigration Act, they can become a permanent resident anyhow. This bill really directs the attention to 

people who are coming, the 18,000 who came last year who adjusted under the Cuban Adjustment Act. Now, I understand from 

Mr. Claver-Carone’s comment that he may feel that the Cuban Adjustment Act as to family and non-refugees doesn’t have a purpose. 


74417A-4.eps
37 

I would actually like to see something like the Cuban Adjustment 

Act extended to other victims of communism. 

For example, I think about the people in Venezuela who are suffering from a Communist dictator. Maybe we should see whether 

they should also receive a benefit such as the Cuban Adjustment 

Act, or the people in Vietnam who are suffering from the vicious 

Communist dictatorship. Maybe they should also receive a benefit 

such as this. 

But that is for another day. 

I just think that to target the family members for deportation if 

you go for any purpose is an extraordinary measure. 

Now, listening to Mr. Claver-Carone’s comment that there might 

be people who had oppressed people—I mean, really there is a provision that makes people excludable from the United States if they 

have given material support to terrorist groups and other things. 

And maybe, the bill doesn’t do this, but I would be certainly happy 

to work with you, sir, to tighten up the language to make sure that 

people who are engaged in oppressing the Cuban people are not 

able to utilize the Cuban Adjustment Act. I think that would be a 

worthy goal. This bill does not do that. 

I would just like to talk a little bit as well about the whole issue 

of public benefits. We asked, I asked my staff to research the eligibility for Temporary Assistance to Needy Families in the State of 

Florida. Now, it is hard to get. You have to have minor children. 

You have to be very poor, and if you are not disabled, you have to 

participate in a work program. It is revoked if you don’t maintain 

your residency. So if you leave Florida for 60 days, you lose the 

benefit, but further, you have to come in every week to work. So 

obviously if you are in Cuba, you are not going to be able to meet 

the work requirement, you are not going to get this benefit. 

The food stamp program also has the 60-day, if you are gone for 

60 days the benefit is revoked, and also SSI, if you are out of the 

United States for more than 30 days it is revoked, and it is worth 

noting that the Department of Homeland Security and Social Security Administration have executed an information sharing agreement to really make sure that nobody has the capacity to evade 

this law where you can’t get SSI if you are disabled and go some 

place else for more than 30 days. 

Just speaking for myself, if you are a disabled person, and your 

father dies, I think you should be able to go to the funeral even 

if you are on SSI, but this bill would say no, if you are a permanent 

resident under the Cuban Adjustment Act and you go to your dad’s 

funeral, don’t bother to come back to Miami. I just don’t agree with 

this. 

I would look for—I know my time has expired, Mr. Chairman, 

but I would look forward to working with those who want to tighten the Act to make sure the communists don’t benefit from it. A 

noble goal. Let us work on that. But let’s not deport David’s grandma. 

I yield back. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. I thank the gentlelady. 

The gentleman from Florida, Mr. Ross. 

Mr. ROSS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Rivera, I 

understand the reunification of a family and how important that is. 

38 

But it seems to me that there is another gain here, and I guess my 

question to you is this. What does the Castro regime stand to gain 

from the CRA that we have? 

Mr. RIVERA. Well, I can tell you that precisely in 2004 the Bush 

administration changed the travel regulations to Cuba to making 

it instead of—I believe at that time it was twice a year to once 

every 3 years, and the reason that occurred was because of the 

fraud and abuse and manipulation of those regulations that occurred where people were making claims of family reunification, 

which cannot be verified because as you know when you are dealing with a Communist, totalitarian dictatorship like the Castro regime, no documentation or reliable information can be counted 

upon from the Cuban Government, which is exactly why we need 

these types of regulations. 

So to say that there should be some sort of a humanitarian cause 

of the Castro regime will somehow play a part in and help facilitate 

documentation of these humanitarian cases is absurd. 

Mr. ROSS. There is no evidence of that, is there? In fact, there 

is evidence just to the contrary. 

Mr. Rivera. You absolutely cannot rely on them for any type of 

information whatsoever. That is their modus operandi is to provide 

propaganda, false information, false documentation. But those 

cases of abuse represented not millions but hundreds of millions of 

dollars in benefits to the Castro regime. Just as now when we have 

unlimited travel from people that are under the new Obama regulations for Cuba travel, again, it has increased in hundreds of millions of dollars to the regime. This represents a permanent travel 

market for the Castro regime where people come to the United 

States again under the pretext of political asylum, under fleeing 

political persecution. That is the only pretext. 

Mr. ROSS. Stay here a year and a day. 

Mr. RIVERA. And then they return and do so repeatedly. 

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Claver-Carone, let me ask you that because it 

seems to me that there is a list of people who want to go back to 

Cuba but the Cuban Government won’t let a certain number of people but do selectively allow others to come back. Why is that? 

Mr. CLAVER-CARONE. It is actually and particularly since the 

1994 interpretation, the Castro regime has gamed the system in 

the sense of which is appalling to us and mindboggling to us, but 

the first tier of interviews in the U.S. Interest Section in Havana 

of people who gave these reviews are done by the Castro regime. 

So the persecutor interviews the people that are coming and basically knowing that they are going to be coming back because—— 

Mr. ROSS. It is a setup. 

Mr. Claver-Carone. Exactly. Meanwhile, there is a blacklist of 

hundreds of thousands of Cubans that they consider politically 

threatening that they will not give a visa to go back to Cuba. So 

it is a game, essentially for them. They have legitimately gamed 

the system and the travelers have gamed the system. 

Mr. ROSS. What would be the motivation for that? Is it not that 

we as a country are somewhat funding their welfare state through 

this program? 

Mr. Claver-Carone. What is created is a system of travel back 

and forth and it is indirectly a—I mean it is a relief mechanism 

39 

for the regime, a main relief mechanism for the regime, and what 

we see with the rules that now the Obama administration has interpreted them and allowed them to be unlimited, it is not a coincidence that we are seeing such a dramatic rise in the visits to Cuba. 

It doesn’t mean that there are more travelers to Cuba amongst 

Cuban Americans. It is the visits. Why? Because a lot of the travelers are aware of the limitations in the assistance. They are aware 

of the 30-day and the 60-day limitations for SSI and TANF and all 

these things, and in that sense they are traveling more often. So 

they go, they stay for a month, they come back, then they go back 

for the next month, and they have essentially gamed the system as 

well. It is a game from beginning now to end. 

And meanwhile, those that are legitimately and truly politically 

threatening to the regime are on this blacklist. They are not even 

allowed to go back. So it is perfect for them. It is a perfect situation. 

Mr. ROSS. Now, the State Department has considered them, has 

considered Cuba to be a state sponsor of terrorism along with Iran 

and Syria and the Sudan, and yet if an Iranian over here under 

asylum were to go back they could not come back to the U.S., but 

Cubans under the CRA can come back and come back and come 

back. Why should we treat the Cuban refugee any differently than 

we are treating the Iranian refugee as well? 

Mr. CLAVER-CARONE. I think, Congressman, I mean you hit this 

nail on the head, and what this bill seeks to do is to bring parity 

for non-refugees and for refugees. It makes no sense that someone 

that flees from Iran, Sudan, Syria, or other source countries of refugees has to—until 2004 sometimes they have to wait 14 years to 

become permanent residents. Now they just have to go through the 

processing times which might be even 5 years to become a permanent resident, not to mention to become a citizen. So it is nonsensical, frankly. Cubans still have a—— 

Mr. ROSS. And doesn’t the current state of affairs pose a security 

threat to the United States with Cuba? 

Mr. CLAVER-CARONE. Absolutely, because the system is gamed 

from beginning to end. So in addition to you not only have that 

these are refugees and people that are fleeing, but they are also 

from a state sponsor of terrorism country and they have the most 

lax rules of any country in the world. 

Mr. ROSS. Thank you. I see my time has expired. I yield back. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. I thank the gentleman. The gentlelady from 

Texas, Ms. Jackson Lee. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you. I am in between two hearings, 

and I thank the witnesses for their kindness. And with having astute staff, Ranking Member Lofgren and I was able to get an assessment, a very moving story, of David’s grandmother. And I 

think I have lived on the Immigration Subcommittee now for a decade plus and have been filled with such stories and such stories of 

humanity. 

The mover of this legislation is a good friend, and I thank him 

for the sincerity in which he offers this legislation, but I am baffled 

and I think I have difficulty in comprehending that when you write 

legislation of this type, with all good intentions, Mr. Bilbao, you 

wind up passing a large fishnet and before you know it you have 

40 

gotten people who simply want to be reunited with family members, people who are going to see sick loved ones, dying loved ones. 

So as I understand the legislation coming on the Cuban Adjustment Act, it is to prevent individuals who return to Cuba from becoming a legal permanent resident. I want you to give me a global 

perspective about—I want you to take your imagination because 

imagination turns out to be truth, of how far reaching could this 

be. What innocent person could be caught up in this fishnet, this 

web, and be prohibited from doing an honest, sincere, needed visit, 

and then why are we preempting with punishment for someone 

who is going that simply wants to visit and they have—and you 

might clarify for me, is this someone that has a political agenda as 

a former elected official or terrorist that we are talking about? My 

understanding is it is the average person that comes, is under the, 

potentially could be under the Cuban Adjustment Act that has to 

return to Cuba. 

Mr. Bilbao, would you answer those questions for me, please? 

Mr. BILBAO. Thank you, Congresswoman Lee. I can do better 

than use my imagination. I can give you a concrete example. In 

2004, after the Bush administration imposed the new family restrictions on travel, a gentleman by the name of Sergeant Carlos 

Lazo, who is an army medic serving in Iraq, wanted to go visit his 

son who was in Cuba and who is ill during his 2-week R&R from 

the battle in Iraq, but because of the changes in the regulations he 

was unable to do so. Today Cuban Americans serve in the armed 

forces as residents before becoming naturalized citizens, and in this 

case if this legislation were passed we could have a situation as 

someone like a Sergeant Carlos Lazo, who is a bronze star recipient 

and whose commitment to freedom is unquestionable, be deported 

or become an illegal immigrant in this country just because of the 

fact that during his 2-week R&R from the war in Iraq from saving 

American soldiers as a medic he wanted to go visit his ill son in 

Cuba. And that along with a number of other potential unforeseen 

circumstances are the result of the type of legislation that casts 

such a wide net in an effort to basically just restrict the rights of 

Cubans to be able to visit their family in the island. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. What do you say, I know that we have had 

long testimony of other witnesses and I am going to pursue the line 

of questioning with you because I want you to be balanced, what 

do you say to the advocates of this that we are stemming the tide 

of fraudulent persons, persons who would wreak havoc on the Adjustment Act and may be affiliating and fraternizing with the government? 

Mr. BILBAO. Well, the best that I can do and the best effort to 

be unbiased I will just read directly from a letter submitted to Congress by 74 of Cuba’s leading democracy advocates almost 2 years 

ago exactly today. And in that letter they say, quote, the support 

or presence of American citizens, their direct help and the many 

opportunities for exchange used effectively in the desired direction 

would not be an abandonment of Cuban civil society but rather a 

force to strengthen it. They go on to say, we believe that defending 

each and every human right for people must be an absolute priority 

ahead of any political or economic consideration and that no reVerDate Aug 31 2005 12:41 Jul 24, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 H:\WORK\IMMIG\053112\74417.000 HJUD1 PsN: DOUGA
41 

striction of these rights can be justified on economic, political or social grounds. We believe that rights are protected with rights. 

And this hearing, Congresswoman, is about a bill that would restrict the rights of Cuban Americans. And the question then is why 

would Cuban Americans advocate for a bill that restricts the rights 

of their constituents or their fellow Cuban Americans. And I believe that it is quite clear that what H.R. 2031 seeks to do is to 

punish Cuban Americans who disagree with the policy of isolating 

the Cuban Government at all costs. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Would the gentlelady yield? 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I would be happy to yield. 

Ms. LOFGREN. For just 15 seconds. Our colleague Congressman 

Rivera indicated that in his view we need to adjust the Cuban Adjustment Act in order to save the Cuban Adjustment Act. And I 

just want to state because several reporters came up to me that I 

am totally opposed to repealing the Cuban Adjustment Act. And I 

think I speak for the Democrats in this House that we will fight 

repeal of the Cuban Adjustment Act. 

And with that I would yield back. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. I thank the gentlelady. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I want to thank the Chairman if I could and 

just thank Mr. Bilbao for giving us the real story on why we should 

balance our response to this issue. Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. Before I conclude I do have one unanimous consent request that we enter into the record a background document 

provided by Rep. Rivera which includes quotes by Democrat members of the House during the debate in the original Cuban Adjustment Act. The quotes note that the justification for the CAA is that 

Cubans already in the U.S. could not go back to Cuba as would 

have been required under the immigration law in order to gain 

lawful permanent residence. 

And without objection, that will be entered into the record. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

42 


74417B-1.eps
43 


74417B-2.eps
44 


74417B-3.eps
45 


74417B-4.eps
46 


74417B-5.eps
47 

Mr. GALLEGLY. With that, I want to thank each and every one 

of you for your testimony today. And all Members will have—— 

Mr. CLAVER-CARONE. Mr. Chairman, is it possible to also submit 

a letter from 500 Cuban pro democracy leaders that actually contradicted the letter of the 74, that disagreed with the letter of the 

74, so 500 pro democracy leaders. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. Is that a request to have those letters—— 

Mr. CLAVER-CARONE. Yes. I ask it be submitted also for the 

record. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. Without objection, that will be made a part of the 

record of the hearing. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

48 


74417C-1.eps
49 


74417C-2.eps
50 


74417C-3.eps
51 


74417C-4.eps
52 


74417C-5.eps
53 


74417C-6.eps
54 


74417C-7.eps
55 


74417C-8.eps
56 


74417C-9.eps
57 


74417C-10.eps
58 


74417C-11.eps
59 


74417C-12.eps
60 


74417C-13.eps
61 

Mr. RIVERA. Also, Mr. Chairman, our colleague Albio Sires wanted to ask that his testimony be also submitted for the record. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. Without objection. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

Prepared Statement of the Honorable Albio Sires, a Representative in 

Congress from the State of New Jersey 

Mr. Chairman, Thank you for holding today’s hearing on H.R. 2831, legislation 

aimed at reducing the abuse of the privileges given to Cuban immigrants in this 

country. As a Cuban immigrant, a representative of a large Cuban-American population, and a strong advocate for immigrant rights, I am pleased to have the opportunity to submit a statement on this topic. H.R. 2831 highlights the need to reform 

the current system to ensure that all help offered under the Cuban Adjustment Act 

(CAA) continues to be available for those who desperately need it. 

I want to be clear; it is not my intention to attack immigrants. I support reforming the broken immigration system in the United States to benefit our economy, encourage family unity, and provide refuge to persecuted peoples. I also support providing federal assistance to immigrants in need. Because of these priorities, I believe we must uphold the CAA to protect Cubans seeking refuge while bringing parity to a system that has gotten out of control. 

No other immigrants receive the advantages that Cuban immigrants receive 

under the CAA. Under current law, all Cuban immigrants have ability to adjust to 

permanent legal resident status after one year in the United States and obtain financial assistance from the United States under such programs as the Temporary 

Assistance for Needy Families program and the Supplemental Security Income program. The CAA was specifically designed to help Cuban refugees unable to return 

to Cuba, and those who need help should get it. However, presently all Cuban immigrants, refugees or not, fall under the CAA. 

This law was not designed for those Cubans who wish to live in the United States 

and vacation in Cuba. Non-refugees are abusing the benefits offered under the CAA. 

This is the only case when refugee benefits are given to non-refugees. Under the 

CAA system and newly relaxed travel regulations, non-refugees can receive expedited permanent status and then simply return to Cuba whenever they like. If they 

qualify, these immigrants can even receive U.S. benefits that they may spend in 

Cuba. The Cuban Adjustment Act was designed to help Cubans safely and efficiently escape the Cuban regime. The law was not designed to aid U.S. dollars flowing to the Cuban Communist Party. 

These abuses need to be addressed. Congress should consider legislation that differentiates between asylum seekers from Cuba and other types of Cuban immigrants. The United States should maintain its commitment to Cubans who rely on 

the protection of the United States by allowing threatened Cubans to receive the 

benefits under the CAA. All other Cuban immigrants should be treated the same 

as immigrants from other countries. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if Mr. Bilbao’s letter that 

he referenced might also be included in the record. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. If Mr. Bilbao would like to add that, without objection, that will be made a part of the record of the hearing. 

Mr. BILBAO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

62 


74417D1-1.eps
63 


74417D1-2.eps
64 


74417D1-3.eps
65 


74417D2-1.eps
66 


74417D2-2.eps
67 


74417D2-3.eps
68 


74417D3.eps
69 

Mr. GALLEGLY. With that, that concludes the testimony. Again, 

I want to thank all the witnesses today. Without objection, all 

Members will have 5 legislative days to submit to the Chair additional written questions for the witnesses which will be forwarded 

and asked of the witnesses to respond in as timely a fashion as 

possible so we can make their comments a record of the hearing. 

Without objection, all Members will have 5 legislative days to submit any additional materials for inclusion in the record. And with 

that I again want to thank the witnesses. The Subcommittee 

stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:07 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

Æ