H. Rept. 111-653 - 111th Congress (2009-2010)

Report text available as:

Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this legislative text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.


House Report 111-653 - TRAVEL RESTRICTION REFORM AND EXPORT ENHANCEMENT ACT

[House Report 111-653]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


111th Congress  }                                      {  Rept. 111-653
  2d Session    }          HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES    {         Part 1
=======================================================================
 
          TRAVEL RESTRICTION REFORM AND EXPORT ENHANCEMENT ACT 

                                _______
                                

               September 29, 2010.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Peterson, from the Committee on Agriculture, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 4645]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on Agriculture, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 4645) to remove obstacles to legal sales of United States 
agricultural commodities to Cuba and to end travel restrictions 
on all Americans to Cuba, having considered the same, report 
favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill 
do pass.

                           Brief Explanation

    The Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act 
prohibits the President from: (1) regulating or prohibiting 
travel to or from Cuba by U.S. citizens or lawful permanent 
residents or any transactions incident to such travel; and (2) 
restricting direct transfers from a Cuban financial institution 
to a U.S. financial institution executed in payment for a 
product authorized for sale under the Trade Sanctions Reform 
and Export Enhancement Act of 2000.
    The bill also amends the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export 
Enhancement Act of 2000 to define ``payment of cash in 
advance'' as the payment by the purchaser of an agricultural 
commodity or product and the receipt of such payment by the 
seller prior to: (1) the transfer of title of such commodity or 
product to the purchaser; and (2) the release of control of 
such commodity or product to the purchaser.

                            Purpose and Need

    Cuba relies on imports for most of its food needs and, 
between 2000 and 2006, Cuba's food and agricultural imports 
nearly doubled. In 2008, Cuba imported about $1.8 billion in 
agricultural products, compared to $550 million in 2000, with 
the U.S. share of these imports averaging about 35 percent 
annually. In 2008, due to higher food prices and natural 
disasters in Cuba, U.S. agricultural sales to Cuba reached $708 
million, consisting mostly of wheat, corn, poultry, and animal 
feed. In the first 10 months of 2009, however, U.S. exports to 
Cuba were valued at $449 million, 25% lower than the same time 
period in 2008.
    Other trading partners have dramatically increased their 
exports to Cuba. Brazil's exports to Cuba have tripled since 
2005. Exports from Canada and New Zealand have each doubled. 
Agricultural producers in the United States are well positioned 
to benefit from additional trade in Cuba--U.S. suppliers can 
reach the three major Cuban ports in a matter of one day or 
less, compared to 25 days from Brazil. However, even though 
U.S. firms offer reliable trading partners, quality products, 
and competitive prices, current U.S. policy hampers their 
ability to supply the Cuban market.
    U.S. agricultural exports to Cuba are allowed, but with 
numerous restrictions and licensing requirements. In 2000, 
Congress passed the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export 
Enhancement Act of 2000 (TSRA--PL 106-387), which allows for 
one-year export licenses for selling agricultural commodities. 
TSRA denies exporters access to U.S. private commercial 
financing or credit; all transactions must be conducted in cash 
in advance of shipment or with financing from third countries.
    In 2005, the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets 
Control (OFAC) clarified that TSRA's term of ``payment of cash 
in advance'' means that the payment is received by the seller 
or the seller's agent prior to the shipment of the goods from 
the port at which they are loaded. Since then, producers have 
been able to export agricultural products to Cuba so long as 
they received cash payment in advance of shipment and went 
through a third party country's bank to complete the 
transaction. According to the International Trade Commission, 
following this decision, the value of Cuban agricultural 
imports from the United States dropped by 10% in 2005 and a 
further 4% in 2006.
    U.S. regulations, such as those requiring the Cuban 
government to pay for U.S. agriculture products in cash or 
through letters of credit drawn on third-country banks, raise 
the cost of U.S. goods for Cubans and appear to limit U.S. 
sales.
    In December 2009, language was included in the FY2010 
Omnibus (PL 111-117) to clarify that ``payment in advance'' 
means payment prior to the transfer of title to the Cuban 
purchaser. However, this provision is a single-year provision 
and will expire at the end of the fiscal year.
    During a hearing held by this Committee in March 2010, 
agricultural producers testified as to the effect of removing 
both these restrictions and lifting the ban on travel. Rice 
producers in the United States have been the most negatively 
affected by the regulatory restrictions. In 2004, Cuba 
purchased approximately $64 million in U.S. rice. However, 
since that time, exports of U.S. rice to Cuba fell to zero in 
2009. National Association of Wheat Growers president Jerry 
McReynolds stated that the U.S. should have close to an 85% 
share of the Cuban market similar to the U.S. share of the rest 
of the Caribbean market. Unfortunately, due to our export 
restrictions, that share is down to 38%. If H.R. 4645 were to 
pass, U.S. wheat producers could gain close to $100 million.
    With regard to dairy, it was estimated that eliminating all 
of the financing and travel restrictions on U.S. agricultural 
exports to Cuba would have boosted 2008 dairy sales to Cuba 
from $13 million to between $39 and $87 million and increased 
U.S. market share that year from 6 percent to 18 to 42 percent.
    Soy producers pointed out that the inherent advantages due 
to the United States' proximity to Cuba mean that U.S. 
producers should be able to expand beyond the current 282,000 
metric tons of soybeans, soybean meal, and soybean oil that 
they shipped to Cuba in 2008.
    In addition to these direct benefits for bulk commodities, 
some commodities will also benefit from the increased demand 
expected for meat and value-added products. The National Corn 
Growers expect that U.S. chicken exports would double with the 
trade and travel restrictions eased. These additional 277,000 
metric tons of poultry would require almost 22 million bushels 
of corn to grow.
    Almost all sectors of U.S. agriculture have benefited and 
could benefit more from increased trade with Cuba. The United 
States has exported pork, cattle, dried beans and peas, fresh 
and dry fruits including apples, grapes, and pears to Cuba.
    The Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act 
(H.R. 4645) would expand agricultural trade to Cuba by 
addressing some of the trade restrictions put in place on 
agricultural sales. The legislation would do the following:
          (1) Eliminate the need to go through banks in other 
        countries to conduct agricultural trades, along with 
        the accompanying fees those banks charge. (Direct 
        payment provision);
          (2) Require agricultural exports to Cuba to meet the 
        same payment requirements as exports to other countries 
        by requiring payment when the title of the shipment 
        changes hands. (Payment in advance provision); and
          (3) Allow U.S. citizens to travel to Cuba, reducing 
        the bureaucratic red tape currently required for 
        agricultural associations, agribusinesses, and others 
        to make agricultural sales in the country and creating 
        increased demand for agricultural exports to feed the 
        increased number of American visitors.
    The U.S. International Trade Commission reports that if 
these restrictions were lifted, agricultural exports could 
increase by $216-478 million annually. Additionally, a study by 
Texas A&M University found that with passage of this 
legislation, the United States could export over $350 million 
worth of commodities more than currently and create over 6,000 
new jobs.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

    Section 1 provides the short title of the bill.
    Section 2 provides that the President may not regulate or 
prohibit travel to or from Cuba by lawful U.S. citizens or 
permanent residents. The President currently has authority to 
license travel in 12 broad categories set forth in the Cuban 
Assets Control Regulations, but may not permit licensing for 
tourist activities.
    Section 3 of the bill clarifies current law provisions 
governing payment terms for sales of agricultural commodities 
or products to Cuba. Under the Omnibus Appropriations Act 2010, 
vessels carrying U.S. agricultural products to Cuba can leave 
U.S. ports before payment is confirmed, so long as payment is 
confirmed before title and control are given to the buyer. The 
appropriations provision is valid only for fiscal year 2010. 
Section 3 of the bill would make the policy in the 
appropriations language permanent. Under prior law, vessels 
could leave U.S. ports only after payment was confirmed, and it 
was unclear whether the goods would be vulnerable to seizure 
for unrelated claims while still at the U.S. port.
    Section 4 authorizes direct transfers from Cuban to U.S. 
banks in payment for agricultural and medical products under 
the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000.

                        Committee Consideration


                              I. HEARINGS

    The Committee on Agriculture held a hearing on March 20, 
2010 to review U.S. Agricultural sales to Cuba. Testimony was 
received from several individuals representing commodities, 
including the American Farm Bureau and the National Farmers 
Union.

                    II. FULL COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

    On June 30, 2010 the Committee on Agriculture met, pursuant 
to notice, with a quorum present to consider H.R. 4645 and 
other pending business. Mr. Peterson offered an opening 
statement, as did Ranking Member Lucas.
    The bill, H.R. 4645 was placed before the Committee for 
consideration and without objection a first reading of the bill 
was waived and it was opened for amendment at any point. 
Counsel was recognized for a brief explanation of the bill.
    Mr. Baca and Mr. Rooney offered a joint amendment that 
would strike Section 2 which pertains to Cuba travel. Mr. 
Holden raised a point of order to the amendment stating that 
the section proposed to be stricken contains subject matter 
within the Rule X jurisdiction of another committee and 
striking such section would violate the terms of the Speaker's 
referral, pursuant to clause 2 of Rule XII. Chairman Peterson 
ruled that the amendment was not in order. Mr. Rooney appealed 
the ruling of the Chair. The Chairman moved to table the motion 
to appeal the ruling of the Chair. By voice vote, the motion to 
table the appeal was agreed to. Mr. Lucas asked for a recorded 
vote on the motion to table the appeal to the point of order on 
the Rooney/Baca amendment. The results of the recorded vote 
were: 28 yeas, 17 nays, 1 not voting. The motion to table the 
appeal was adopted and the ruling of the Chair was sustained. 
(See Roll Call #1).
    Mr. Conaway offered an amendment that would not allow 
section 2 to take effect until a transition government in Cuba 
is in power. Mr. Holden raised a point of order to the 
amendment because it related to subject matter within the Rule 
X jurisdiction of another committee and amending such section 
would violate the terms of the Speaker's referral, pursuant to 
clause 2 of Rule XII. Chairman Peterson ruled that the 
amendment was not in order. Mr. Conaway appealed the ruling of 
the Chair. Mr. Holden moved to table the motion to appeal the 
ruling of the Chair. By voice vote, the motion to table the 
appeal was agreed to. Mr. Conaway asked for a recorded vote on 
the motion to table the appeal to the point of order on the 
Conaway amendment. The results of the recorded vote were: 29 
yeas, 16 nays, 1 not voting. The motion to table the appeal was 
adopted and the ruling of the Chair was sustained. (See Roll 
Call #2).
    Mr. Conaway was then recognized to offer and explain 
another amendment that was a sense of Congress expressing that 
U.S. government should immediately implement both the U.S.-
Columbia and U.S.-Panama Free Trade Agreements. Mr. Holden 
raised a point of order to the amendment as the section of bill 
proposed to be amended contains subject matter within the Rule 
X jurisdiction of another committee and amending such section 
would violate the terms of the Speaker's referral, pursuant to 
clause 2 of Rule X. Chairman Peterson ruled that the amendment 
was not in order. Mr. Conaway appealed the ruling of the Chair. 
Mr. Holden moved to table the motion to appeal the ruling of 
the Chair. By voice vote, the motion to table the appeal was 
agreed to. Mrs. Schmidt asked for a recorded vote on the motion 
to table the appeal to the point of order on the Conaway 
amendment. The results of the recorded vote were: 26 yeas, 19 
nays, 1 not voting. The motion to table the appeal was adopted 
and the ruling of the Chair was sustained. (See Roll Call #3).
    Mr. Lucas was recognized to offer and explain an amendment 
that would add Section 5 to the bill that would delay 
implementation until the pending free trade agreements with 
Columbia, Panama, and Korea are implemented. Mr. Holden raised 
a point of order to the amendment as it is not germane because 
it conditions the effectiveness on further legislative action 
that is unrelated to the provisions of the bill and also 
conditions the effectiveness of provisions that are within the 
Rule X jurisdiction of another committee. Chairman Peterson 
ruled that the amendment was not in order. Mr. Lucas appealed 
the ruling of the Chair. Mr. Holden moved to table the motion 
to appeal the ruling of the Chair. By voice vote, the motion to 
table the appeal was agreed to. Mrs. Schmidt asked for a 
recorded vote on the motion to table the appeal to the point of 
order on the Lucas amendment. The results of the recorded vote 
were: 28 yeas, 17 nays, 1 not voting. The motion to table the 
appeal was adopted and the ruling of the Chair was sustained. 
(See Roll Call #4).
    Mr. Rooney was recognized to offer and explain an amendment 
that would delay the enactment of this act until the pre-Castro 
property rights of individuals in Cuba have been reinstituted. 
Mr. Holden raised a point of order that the amendment is not 
germane because it conditions the effectiveness on further 
legislative action that is unrelated to the provisions of the 
bill and also conditions the effectiveness of provisions that 
are within the Rule X jurisdiction of another committee. 
Chairman Peterson ruled that the amendment was not in order.
    Mr. Goodlatte was recognized to make a motion to report the 
bill favorably as to sections 1, 3, and 4 and report it 
unfavorably as to section 2. Discussion occurred and the 
Chairman ruled that the motion was out of order as the bill can 
either be reported favorably, unfavorably, or without 
recommendation. Discussion occurred and Mr. Goodlatte then 
moved that the bill be reported without recommendation. Mr. 
Costa moved to table the motion. By voice vote, the Chairman 
ruled that the Costa motion to table the Goodlatte motion to 
report the bill without recommendation passed. Mr. Goodlatte 
asked for a recorded vote. The results of the recorded vote 
were: 21 yeas, 24 nays, 1 not voting. (See Roll Call #5).
    The motion to table the motion failed. Mr. Conaway further 
pressed the Goodlatte motion. The Chairman recommended that the 
Committee not support the Goodlatte motion. By voice vote, the 
Goodlatte motion failed. A recorded vote was requested. The 
results of the recorded vote were: 3 yeas, 42 nays, 1 not 
voting. The motion to report H.R. 4645 without recommendation 
failed. (See Roll Call Vote #6).
    Mr. Kratovil offered a draft of dissenting views that other 
Members of the Committee could sign on to, and that he would 
like to be filed with the report.
    Mr. Holden moved that the bill, H.R. 4645, be reported 
favorably to the House with recommendation that it do pass. By 
voice vote, the motion to report the bill favorably passed. Mr. 
Goodlatte requested a recorded vote. The results of the 
recorded vote were: 25 yeas, 20 nays, 1 not voting. (See Roll 
Call Vote #7).
    Chairman Peterson informed Committee Members who wish to 
file supplemental, minority, or additional views to any of the 
measures before the Committee to transmit them to the Counsel's 
Office.
    Without objection, staff was given permission to make any 
necessary clerical, technical or conforming changes to reflect 
the intent of the Committee.
    Chairman Peterson thanked all the Members and adjourned the 
meeting subject to the call of the chair.

                  Reporting the Bill--Roll Call Votes

    In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the Committee sets forth the 
record of the following roll call votes taken with respect to 
H.R. 4645.

Roll Call #1

    Summary: Holden motion to table the appeal to the point of 
order on the Rooney/Baca amendment.
    Results: 28 yeas, 17 nays, 1 not voting.

                                  YEAS

1. Mr. Holden                       15. Mrs. Halvorson
2. Mr. McIntyre                     16. Mrs. Dahlkemper
3. Mr. Boswell                      17. Mr. Bright
4. Mr. Baca                         18. Ms. Markey
5. Mr. Cardoza                      19. Mr. Kratovil
6. Mr. Scott                        20. Mr. Boccieri
7. Mr. Marshall                     21. Mr. Murphy
8. Ms. Herseth Sandlin              22. Mr. Owens
9. Mr. Cuellar                      23. Mr. Pomeroy
10. Mr. Costa                       24. Mr. Childers
11. Mr. Ellsworth                   25. Mr. Minnick
12. Mr. Walz                        26. Mr. Moran
13. Mr. Kagen                       27. Mr. Johnson
14. Mr. Schrader                    28. Mr. Peterson

                                  NAYS

1. Mr. Schauer                      10. Mrs. Schmidt
2. Mr. Lucas                        11. Mr. Smith
3. Mr. Goodlatte                    12. Mr. Roe
4. Mr. Graves                       13. Mr. Luetkemeyer
5. Mr. Rogers                       14. Mr. Thompson
6. Mr. King                         15. Mr. Cassidy
7. Mr. Neugebauer                   16. Mrs. Lummis
8. Mr. Conaway                      17. Mr. Rooney
9. Mr. Fortenberry

                               NOT VOTING

1. Mr. Kissell

Roll Call #2

    Summary: Holden motion to table the appeal to the point of 
order on the Conaway #1 amendment.
    Results: 29 yeas, 16 nays, 1 not voting.

                                  YEAS

1. Mr. Holden                       16. Mrs. Dahlkemper
2. Mr. McIntyre                     17. Mr. Bright
3. Mr. Boswell                      18. Ms. Markey
4. Mr. Baca                         19. Mr. Kratovil
5. Mr. Cardoza                      20. Mr. Schauer
6. Mr. Scott                        21. Mr. Boccieri
7. Mr. Marshall                     22. Mr. Murphy
8. Ms. Herseth Sandlin              23. Mr. Owens
9. Mr. Cuellar                      24. Mr. Pomeroy
10. Mr. Costa                       25. Mr. Childers
11. Mr. Ellsworth                   26. Mr. Minnick
12. Mr. Walz                        27. Mr. Moran
13. Mr. Kagen                       28. Mr. Johnson
14. Mr. Schrader                    29. Mr. Peterson
15. Mrs. Halvorson

                                  NAYS

1. Mr. Lucas                        9. Mrs. Schmidt
2. Mr. Goodlatte                    10. Mr. Smith
3. Mr. Graves                       11. Mr. Roe
4. Mr. Rogers                       12. Mr. Luetkemeyer
5. Mr. King                         13. Mr. Thompson
6. Mr. Neugebauer                   14. Mr. Cassidy
7. Mr. Conaway                      15. Mrs. Lummis
8. Mr. Fortenberry                  16. Mr. Rooney

                               NOT VOTING

1. Mr. Kissell

Roll Call #3

    Summary: Holden motion to table the appeal to the point of 
order on the Conaway #2 amendment.
    Results: 26 yeas, 19 nays, 1 not voting.

                                  YEAS

1. Mr. Holden                       14. Mr. Schrader
2. Mr. McIntyre                     15. Mrs. Halvorson
3. Mr. Boswell                      16. Mrs. Dahlkemper
4. Mr. Baca                         17. Ms. Markey
5. Mr. Cardoza                      18. Mr. Kratovil
6. Mr. Scott                        19. Mr. Schauer
7. Mr. Marshall                     20. Mr. Boccieri
8. Ms. Herseth Sandlin              21. Mr. Murphy
9. Mr. Cuellar                      22. Mr. Owens
10. Mr. Costa                       23. Mr. Pomeroy
11. Mr. Ellsworth                   24. Mr. Childers
12. Mr. Walz                        25. Mr. Minnick
13. Mr. Kagen                       26. Mr. Peterson

                                  NAYS

1. Mr. Bright                       11. Mr. Fortenberry
2. Mr. Lucas                        12. Mrs. Schmidt
3. Mr. Goodlatte                    13. Mr. Smith
4. Mr. Moran                        14. Mr. Roe
5. Mr. Johnson                      15. Mr. Luetkemeyer
6. Mr. Graves                       16. Mr. Thompson
7. Mr. Rogers                       17. Mr. Cassidy
8. Mr. King                         18. Mrs. Lummis
9. Mr. Neugebauer                   19. Mr. Rooney
10. Mr. Conaway

                               NOT VOTING

1. Mr. Kissell

Roll Call #4

    Summary: Holden motion to table the appeal to the point of 
order on the Lucas amendment.
    Results: 28 yeas, 17 nays, 1 not voting.

                                  YEAS

1. Mr. Holden                       15. Mrs. Halvorson
2. Mr. McIntyre                     16. Mrs. Dahlkemper
3. Mr. Boswell                      17. Mr. Bright
4. Mr. Baca                         18. Ms. Markey
5. Mr. Cardoza                      19. Mr. Kratovil
6. Mr. Scott                        20. Mr. Schauer
7. Mr. Marshall                     21. Mr. Boccieri
8. Ms. Herseth Sandlin              22. Mr. Murphy
9. Mr. Cuellar                      23. Mr. Owens
10. Mr. Costa                       24. Mr. Pomeroy
11. Mr. Ellsworth                   25. Mr. Childers
12. Mr. Walz                        26. Mr. Minnick
13. Mr. Kagen                       27. Mr. Johnson
14. Mr. Schrader                    28. Mr. Peterson

                                  NAYS

1. Mr. Lucas                        10. Mrs. Schmidt
2. Mr. Goodlatte                    11. Mr. Smith
3. Mr. Moran                        12. Mr. Roe
4. Mr. Graves                       13. Mr. Luetkemeyer
5. Mr. Rogers                       14. Mr. Thompson
6. Mr. King                         15. Mr. Cassidy
7. Mr. Neugebauer                   16. Mrs. Lummis
8. Mr. Conaway                      17. Mr. Rooney
9. Mr. Fortenberry

                               NOT VOTING

1. Mr. Kissell

Roll Call #5

    Summary: Costa motion to table the Goodlatte motion to 
report the bill without recommendation.
    Results: 21 yeas, 24 nays, 1 not voting.

                                  YEAS

1. Mr. Holden                       12. Mr. Kagen
2. Mr. McIntyre                     13. Mrs. Halvorson
3. Mr. Boswell                      14. Mr. Bright
4. Mr. Baca                         15. Ms. Markey
5. Mr. Cardoza                      16. Mr. Owens
6. Mr. Scott                        17. Mr. Pomeroy
7. Ms. Herseth Sandlin              18. Mr. Childers
8. Mr. Cuellar                      19. Mr. Minnick
9. Mr. Costa                        20. Mr. Johnson
10. Mr. Ellsworth                   21. Mr. Peterson
11. Mr. Walz

                                  NAYS

1. Mr. Marshall                     13. Mr. King
2. Mr. Schrader                     14. Mr. Neugebauer
3. Mrs. Dahlkemper                  15. Mr. Conaway
4. Mr. Kratovil                     16. Mr. Fortenberry
5. Mr. Schauer                      17. Mrs. Schmidt
6. Mr. Boccieri                     18. Mr. Smith
7. Mr. Murphy                       19. Mr. Roe
8. Mr. Lucas                        20. Mr. Luetkemeyer
9. Mr. Goodlatte                    21. Mr. Thompson
10. Mr. Moran                       22. Mr. Cassidy
11. Mr. Graves                      23. Mrs. Lummis
12. Mr. Rogers                      24. Mr. Rooney

                               NOT VOTING

1. Mr. Kissell

Roll Call #6

    Summary: Goodlatte motion to report H.R. 4645 to the House 
without recommendation.
    Results: 3 yeas, 42 nays, 1 not voting.

                                  YEAS

1. Mr. Marshall                     3. Mrs. Dahlkemper
2. Mr. Schrader

                                  NAYS

1. Mr. Holden                       22. Mr. Childers
2. Mr. McIntyre                     23. Mr. Minnick
3. Mr. Boswell                      24. Mr. Lucas
4. Mr. Baca                         25. Mr. Goodlatte
5. Mr. Cardoza                      26. Mr. Moran
6. Mr. Scott                        27. Mr. Johnson
7. Ms. Herseth Sandlin              28. Mr. Graves
8. Mr. Cuellar                      29. Mr. Rogers
9. Mr. Costa                        30. Mr. King
10. Mr. Ellsworth                   31. Mr. Neugebauer
11. Mr. Walz                        32. Mr. Conaway
12. Mr. Kagen                       33. Mr. Fortenberry
13. Mrs. Halvorson                  34. Mrs. Schmidt
14. Mr. Bright                      35. Mr. Smith
15. Ms. Markey                      36. Mr. Roe
16. Mr. Kratovil                    37. Mr. Luetkemeyer
17. Mr. Schauer                     38. Mr. Thompson
18. Mr. Boccieri                    39. Mr. Cassidy
19. Mr. Murphy                      40. Mrs. Lummis
20. Mr. Owens                       41. Mr. Rooney
21. Mr. Pomeroy                     42. Mr. Peterson

                               NOT VOTING

1. Mr. Kissell

Roll Call #7

    Summary: Holden motion to report H.R. 4645 favorably to the 
House.
    Results: 25 yeas, 20 nays, 1 not voting

                                  YEAS

1. Mr. Holden                       14. Mr. Kratovil
2. Mr. Boswell                      15. Mr. Boccieri
3. Mr. Cardoza                      16. Mr. Murphy
4. Mr. Scott                        17. Mr. Owens
5. Ms. Herseth Sandlin              18. Mr. Pomeroy
6. Mr. Cuellar                      19. Mr. Childers
7. Mr. Costa                        20. Mr. Minnick
8. Mr. Ellsworth                    21. Mr. Moran
9. Mr. Walz                         22. Mr. Johnson
10. Mr. Kagen                       23. Mr. Cassidy
11. Mrs. Halvorson                  24. Mrs. Lummis
12. Mr. Bright                      25. Mr. Peterson
13. Ms. Markey

                                  NAYS

1. Mr. McIntyre                     11. Mr. King
2. Mr. Baca                         12. Mr. Neugebauer
3. Mr. Marshall                     13. Mr. Conaway
4. Mr. Schrader                     14. Mr. Fortenberry
5. Mrs. Dahlkemper                  15. Mrs. Schmidt
6. Mr. Schauer                      16. Mr. Smith
7. Mr. Lucas                        17. Mr. Roe
8. Mr. Goodlatte                    18. Mr. Luetkemeyer
9. Mr. Graves                       19. Mr. Thompson
10. Mr. Rogers                      20. Mr. Rooney

                               NOT VOTING

1. Mr. Kissell

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee on Agriculture's 
oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in the 
body of this report.

           Budget Act Compliance (Sections 308, 402, and 423)

    The provisions of clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives and section 308(a)(1) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (relating to estimates of new 
budget authority, new spending authority, new credit authority, 
or increased or decreased revenues or tax expenditures) are not 
considered applicable. The estimate and comparison required to 
be prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 
under clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives and sections 402 and 423 of the Congressional 
Budget Act of 1974 submitted to the Committee prior to the 
filing of this report are as follows:

                                                     July 12, 2010.
Hon. Collin C. Peterson,
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4645, the Travel 
Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew 
Pickford.
            Sincerely,
                                         Robert A. Sunshine
                                        (For Douglas W. Elmendorf).
    Enclosure.

H.R. 4645--Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act

    H.R. 4645 would prohibit, with a few specific exemptions, 
the federal government from regulating or restricting travel-
related tranactions between the United States and Cuba. (Travel 
to Cuba is currently regulated by the Department of the 
Treasury's Office of Foreign Asset Control.) The legislation 
also would amend restrictions on financial transactions between 
the United States and Cuba related to the sale of specified 
goods. CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 4645 would reduce 
revenues by insignificant amounts each year.
    The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 establishes budget-
reporting and enforcement procedures for legislation affecting 
direct spending or revenues. Violations of the current travel 
restrictions to Cuba can result in civil and criminal fines. 
Hence, enacting H.R. 4645 would reduce the amount of fines 
currently collected. Collections of civil fines are recorded in 
the budget as revenues and deposited into the general fund of 
the Treasury. Criminal fines are also recorded in the budget as 
revenues, deposited in the Crime Victims Fund, and spent in 
subsequent years. Based on information from the Department of 
the Treasury, CBO estimates that allowing travel and travel-
related transactions to Cuba would reduce the amount of fines 
collected by less than $500,000 each year and in total over the 
2010-2020 period.
    H.R. 4645 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal 
governments.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Matthew 
Pickford. This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, 
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                    Performance Goals and Objectives

    With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
performance goals and objections of this legislation are to 
remove obstacles to legal sales of United States agricultural 
commodities to Cuba and to end travel restrictions on all 
Americans to Cuba.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee finds the 
Constitutional authority for this legislation in Article I, 
clause 8, section 18, that grants Congress the power to make 
all laws necessary and proper for carrying out the powers 
vested by Congress in the Constitution of the United States or 
in any department or officer thereof.

                        Committee Cost Estimate

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee report incorporates the 
cost estimate prepared by the Director of the Congressional 
Budget Office pursuant to sections 402 and 423 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                      Advisory Committee Statement

    No advisory committee within the meaning of section 5(b) of 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act was created by this 
legislation.

                Applicability to the Legislative Branch

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 
104-1).

                       Federal Mandates Statement

    The Committee adopted as its own the estimate of Federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act (Public Law 104-4).

Earmark Statement Required by Clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the 
                        House of Representatives

    H.R. 4645 does not contain any congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 
clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

    In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italics, existing law in which no change 
is proposed is shown in roman):

       TRADE SANCTIONS REFORM AND EXPORT ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2000


        TITLE IX--TRADE SANCTIONS REFORM AND EXPORT ENHANCEMENT

SEC. 901. SHORT TITLE.

    This title may be cited as the ``Trade Sanctions Reform and 
Export Enhancement Act of 2000''.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 908. PROHIBITION ON UNITED STATES ASSISTANCE AND FINANCING.

    (a) * * *
    (b) Prohibition on Financing of Agricultural Sales to 
Cuba.--
        (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

        (4) Definitions.--In this subsection--
                  (A) * * *
                  (B) the term ``United States depository 
                institution'' means any entity (including its 
                foreign branches or subsidiaries) organized 
                under the laws of any jurisdiction within the 
                United States, or any agency, office or branch 
                located in the United States of a foreign 
                entity, that is engaged primarily in the 
                business of banking (including a bank, savings 
                bank, savings association, credit union, trust 
                company, or United States bank holding 
                company); [and]
                  (C) the term ``United States person'' means 
                the Federal Government, any State or local 
                government, or any private person or entity of 
                the United States [.]; and
                  (D) the term ``payment of cash in advance'' 
                means, notwithstanding any other provision of 
                law, the payment by the purchaser of an 
                agricultural commodity or product and the 
                receipt of such payment by the seller prior 
                to--
                          (i) the transfer of title of such 
                        commodity or product to the purchaser; 
                        and
                          (ii) the release of control of such 
                        commodity or product to the purchaser.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                            DISSENTING VIEWS

    I strongly support all reasonable efforts to expand U.S. 
agricultural exports and open up new markets to our domestic 
producers. Consequently, I am supportive of sections 3 and 4 of 
H.R. 4645, which will help increase agricultural exports to 
Cuba and generate new revenue for Michigan's family farmers. 
However, I strongly disapprove of section 2 of the legislation, 
which would lift the restrictions on Americans traveling to 
Cuba and put dollars in the pockets of the repressive Castro 
regime.
    For nearly five decades, the Cuban government has committed 
countless human rights abuses, repressed free speech and 
political association among its own citizens, and wrongly 
detained thousands of political prisoners. Unfortunately, the 
regime's human rights record is showing no signs of 
improvement.
    Lifting the travel restrictions will result in an economic 
windfall to the Cuban government, increasing their revenue by 
an estimated $2 billion in the first year alone. While Congress 
can and should continue to debate the broader question of U.S. 
policy toward Cuba, any legislation in this area must be 
considered within the context of our overall foreign policy 
goals and with a full understanding of the entirety of our 
relationship with Cuba. It would be irresponsible and unwise 
for Congress to grant a major concession to the Cuban 
government by lifting the travel restrictions without first 
demanding meaningful and measurable improvements in the Castro 
government's human rights record.
    While it was not within the Agriculture Committee's 
jurisdiction to remove the travel provisions from H.R. 4645 
during the Committee's consideration of the bill, I am 
nonetheless displeased that these travel provisions remain 
included in what is otherwise an important agricultural bill. I 
want to clearly indicate to the Committee and to my colleagues 
that I do not believe that the travel provisions should be 
included in H.R. 4645, and I hope that this section will be 
struck or modified by the Foreign Affairs Committee in a manner 
that is consistent with our nation's respect for human rights 
and our foreign policy goals.
    My objective is to pass a bill to help Michigan 
agriculture, not to see legislation die or not come up for a 
vote in the House. It is my opinion that a version of H.R. 4645 
that includes lifting the travel ban to Cuba will not be 
enacted. That is why I will continue to work to amend H.R. 4645 
so that it can pass and help Michigan farmers, Michigan jobs, 
and Michigan's economy.

                                   Mark H. Schauer.

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

    We strongly support all reasonable efforts to expand U.S. 
agricultural exports and open up new markets to our domestic 
producers. Consequently, we are supportive of the intent of 
H.R. 4645, to help increase agricultural exports to Cuba and 
generate new revenue for America's family farmers. However, we 
strongly oppose section 2 of the legislation, which would lift 
the restrictions on Americans traveling to Cuba.
    For nearly five decades, the Cuban government has committed 
countless human rights abuses, wrongfully denied private 
property rights, repressed free speech and political 
association among its own citizens, and wrongly detained 
thousands of political prisoners. Unfortunately, the regime's 
human rights record is showing no signs of improvement. In 
February, political activist Orlando Zapata Tamayo died in a 
Cuban prison after an 86-day hunger strike. Furthermore, the 
Cuban regime has been detaining an American citizen, Alan 
Gross, in a maximum security prison since December without 
charges or trial. Mr. Gross, a 60-year-old international 
development worker, was in Cuba on a USAID project helping to 
provide communications equipment and assistance to nonprofit 
Jewish community organizations on the island.
    Lifting the travel restrictions would result in an economic 
windfall to the Cuban government, increasing their revenue by 
an estimated $2 billion in the first year alone. While Congress 
can and should continue to debate the broader question of U.S. 
policy toward Cuba, any legislation in this area must be 
considered within the context of our overall foreign policy 
goals and with a full understanding of the entirety of our 
relationship with Cuba. It would be irresponsible and unwise 
for Congress to grant a major concession to the Cuban 
government by lifting the travel restrictions without first 
demanding meaningful and measurable improvements in the Castro 
government's human rights record, beginning with the release of 
Alan Gross.
    Although Representatives Baca (D-CA) and Rooney (R-FL) 
offered an amendment to strike section 2, this amendment was 
ruled out of order. Consequently, Members did not have an 
opportunity to vote on this amendment and voice their 
displeasure with the inclusion of these travel provisions in 
what is otherwise an important agricultural bill. We want to 
clearly indicate to the Committee and to our colleagues that we 
do not believe that the travel provisions should be included in 
H.R. 4645, and we hope that this section will be struck or 
modified by the Foreign Affairs Committee in a manner that is 
consistent with our nation's respect for human rights and our 
foreign policy goals.
                                   Frank Kratovil, Jr.
                                   Kathleen A. Dahlkemper.
                                   Frank D. Lucas.
                                   K. Michael Conaway.
                                   Kurt Schrader.
                                   Glenn Thompson.
                                   Henry Cuellar.
                                   Steve King.
                                   Thomas J. Rooney.
                                   Brad Ellsworth.
                                   Larry Kissell.
                                   Jean Schmidt.
                                   Blaine Luetkemeyer.
                                   Adrian Smith.
                                   Bob Goodlatte.
                                   Sam Graves.
                                   Joe Baca.
                                   Deborah L. Halvorson.
                                   Mike McIntyre.
                                   Mark H. Schauer.
                                   David P. Roe.
                                   Randy Neugebauer.
                                   Mike Rogers.
                                   John A. Boccieri.

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

    H.R. 4645 has two main themes included in its four 
sections. One is to increase American agriculture exports to 
Cuba. The other is to lift travel restrictions on Americans 
traveling to Cuba. We support increasing agriculture exports 
but strongly oppose the easing of travel restrictions. Because 
the travel provisions remained in the legislation and members 
were denied the opportunity to vote on amendments to improve 
the bill, the Committee's consideration of this legislation was 
contentious and H.R. 4645 was reported by a vote of 25-20. This 
did not have to be the case as legislation without the travel 
provisions likely would have passed the Committee by voice 
vote.
    We believe we should continue to facilitate the shipment of 
food to Cuba, and streamlining that process is important. 
Section 2 of H.R. 4645, however, effectively repeals the 
embargo that the U.S. has had in place to prevent the 
enrichment of Castor's regime. Removing travel restrictions for 
tourism has nothing to do with removing technical barriers to 
exports.
    Unfortunately, during the Committee's consideration of H.R. 
4645, members were denied the opportunity to vote on a bi-
partisan amendment to strike the travel provisions. Rep. Joe 
Baca (D-CA) and Rep. Tom Rooney (R-FL) offered an amendment to 
strike Section 2. This amendment was ruled out of order and the 
appeal of the Chair's ruling was tabled. This was a most 
unfortunate outcome, as it was clear a bi-partisan majority of 
the Committee supported the Baca-Rooney amendment.
    Subsequent amendments to delay the implementation H.R. 4645 
until Cuba moved toward a democratic government, made 
significant progress on human-rights and private property 
rights or until pending free trade agreements are implemented 
were also ruled out of order and subsequent appeals of the 
Chair's rulings tabled. Again, this was most unfortunate at 
these amendments likely enjoyed broad support in the Committee.
    We are also gravely concerned that the committee process is 
being manipulated to move this legislation to the full-House 
without proper consideration by other committees of 
jurisdiction. Although H.R. 4645 was referred the Committee on 
Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Financial Services, it is 
unclear if either committee will act on the legislation. It is 
therefore possible this Committee's consideration of this 
legislation was the last opportunity to improve this bill by 
striking Section 2 before it is considered by the full House.
                                   Frank D. Lucas.
                                   K. Michael Conaway.
                                   Bob Goodlatte.
                                   David P. Roe.
                                   Jean Schmidt.
                                   Thomas J. Rooney.
                                   Jeff Fortenberry.
                                   Randy Neugebauer.
                                   Steve King.
                                   Blaine Luetkemeyer.
                                   Mike Rogers.
                                   Sam Graves.
                                   Glen Thompson.
                                   Adrian Smith.