Moore flap could help change U.S. Cuba policy

Fri, 25 May 2007 04:51:00 +0000

News Analysis

Earlier this month, filmmaker Michael Moore announced that he had received a letter from the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) accusing him of illegal travel to Cuba, and threatening prosecution.

Moore has accused the government of using the threat to attempt to censor his work.

Moore went to Cuba while filming his new documentary, “Sicko.” The Cuba segment is only a minor part of the film, which aims to expose the way millions in the U.S. are deprived of life-saving health care by a system geared toward profits first.

Moore took with him a group of 9/11 rescue workers whose health had been damaged by exposure to toxic substances from the smoking ruins of the World Trade Center. The idea was for them to travel to the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, where hundreds of people accused of terrorism are being held and, some say, given better health care than many people in the U.S.

Not permitted to enter Guantanamo, they went on to Havana, where Cuban medical personnel gave them high quality attention.

Moore said his requests for a U.S. license to visit Cuba had gotten no response. This is the experience of many people who try to visit Cuba. Since the Bush administration came to power, it has cracked down hard on such travel.

By pouncing on the high-profile Moore, the government may be helping to bring about the end of its own policies.

The pretext for fining travelers to Cuba is that spending money on the island violates the Trading with the Enemy Act. Thousands of people have been subjected to fines of $7,000 and up.

Liberal, progressive and left groups have been working for years to end this policy and the 46-year-old trade blockade of Cuba.

Some conservative Republicans in Congress have also been working for a change in U.S. Cuba policy. Many come from agricultural regions and rely on farm interests for electoral support. The appetites of these farm areas for trade with Cuba have been whetted by the limited trade now permitted, and they want more, especially the opportunities that would open up if Cuba were allowed to buy on credit like other countries.

This combination of interests has led to passage of bipartisan amendments to end the blockade and travel restrictions in both houses of Congress. However, the previous right-wing Republican leadershp would “disappear” these measures when the legislation got to the House-Senate conference committee.

Now the situation is different. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) are not tied to the ultra-right and Cuban exile interests that have kept the restrictions going year after year, and are much less likely to strip out Cuba language from legislation.

So the prospect for ending the restrictions on trading with, and traveling to, Cuba are better than in many years.

Cuba solidarity activists are focusing on ending the travel ban first. Two bills, HR 654 and S 271, essentially abolish all restrictions on travel to Cuba. HR 654, sponsored by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), has 107 co-sponsors, including 10 Republicans. S 271, introduced by Sen. Michael Enzi (R-Wyo.) has 20 co-sponsors, including 3 Republicans.

Neither bill is moving fast right now, partly because Congress has been preoccupied with the Iraq war. People who want to see a change in our Cuba policy urge pressure on senators and representatives to sign onto the bill.

Senate debate on immigration begins

Fri, 11 May 2007 04:30:00 +0000

News Analysis

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has upped the ante in the national debate on comprehensive immigration reform by setting May 14 as the start of floor debate on the issue.

Behind the scenes, President Bush has been working with Republican senators to push a far more punitive bill than the one that was passed in the Senate last year, when Republicans were the majority. Reid’s move should bring the debate out into the open, with up and down votes on key provisions of such a bill.

There is tremendous pressure for passage of a comprehensive immigration reform bill before the summer congressional recess in August. After that, pressures of the 2008 presidential and congressional races would make compromise even more problematic.

The change of power in Congress, a revitalized immigrant rights movement and a public opinion trend more favorable to immigrants have made legalization of current and future immigrant workers — instead of their criminalization — the focus.

As the legislative battle begins, the over 500,000 people who marched for immigrant rights on May Day have moved the issue of legalization far forward.

Bush’s legislative approach in the Senate is for highly punitive legalization for lower-wage and less-skilled workers. In an outline of Senate talking points leaked by the White House, there is a prohibitive $10,000 fine per family member for legalization. Visas for family reunification would be reduced or nearly eliminated, favoring only those who are highly skilled. Future low-skilled workers would be in a second-class status guest worker program with two-year visas and no rights for their families to join them in the United States.

Administratively, Bush has stepped up raids and deportations, which officials openly state are aimed at convincing immigrants and others to accept punitive legalization and guest worker programs. Most right-wing Republicans still advocate enforcement-only measures, despite the fact that this position cost them many seats in last November’s elections.

Most Democrats support legalization and border security. They are seeking bipartisan support in favor of a comprehensive package that includes some punitive measures.

Business is working both sides of the aisle. Bush’s strategy plays to the interests of the bigger corporations that are proposing measures to increase the “competitiveness” of U.S. business on a global scale.

Labor opposes punitive measures, which make immigrants more vulnerable to exploitation and which undermine workers’ solidarity. The labor movement is insisting on full rights for all workers.

The Senate is where the Bush/corporate priorities have a stronger base. The slim 51-49 Democratic majority there, along with the 60-vote requirement to close debate, makes it easier for the Republican right wing to block a vote.

The House has a larger Democratic majority, with scores of Latino, African American, labor and civil-rights-based representatives, many in key positions. Legislation from the House is expected to be more immigrant-friendly.

Open debate in the Senate first, and then in the House, will give greater opportunities for the immigrant rights movement to educate and build support for stronger, broader and more just legalization.

Starting with the May Day rallies, immigrant rights groups are organizing and calling for full legalization. Supporters are being organized to telephone their senators in support of legalization and to state their opposition to Bush’s guest worker program and any elimination or reduction of moves toward family reunification.

rosalio_munoz @sbcglobal.net

People Before Profit blog

Moore flap could help change U.S. Cuba policy

Senate debate on immigration begins