the two are expected to discuss the ukraine russia conflict and other issues. we expect a joint conference tomorrow. we will bring you live on c-span. >> february is black history month, and the c-span bus is on the road visiting the top historically black colleges and university to speak with her five -- speak with their faculty. this tuesday during "washington journal," will be fits university -- fisk university in nashville. >> a look at u.s. cuba relations and the obama administration's attempt to normalize relationships with the country. by lifting economic and travel sanctions that have been in place for decades. this is two hours 40 minutes. >> this hearing will come to order.

we look at the obama administration's sudden shift on cuban policy and sudden it was. members of congress were left in the dark. most of the administration am a , including the state department, was left in the dark as well. instead, talks with the cuban regime were conducted by two white house officials. unfortunately, the white house was unwilling to provide these key witnesses today. this committee, charged with oversight of our foreign policy, is handicapped when those officials most involved in policymaking are unavailable. the administration's growing track record as secret negotiations whether this is on the subject of iran or the release of the five taliban commanders is increasingly troublesome. had the white house consulted more widely, it may have heard that havana is facing the threats of losing venezuelan oil

subsidies and mounting public pressure for basic reforms within the country. this could have been used to leverage meaningful political concessions on human rights in cuba by that regime. but this was a one-sided negotiation with the u.s. making a series of concessions to havana. the release of 53 political prisoners is one area in which the administration did secure a commitment from the cuban government. in an odd twist, the administration cap these names secret for weeks. -- kept these names secret for weeks. only after bipartisan pressure from the committee was the list ever released and human rights advocates can track whether these individuals are put back in jail or harassed or monitored. four years ago, rail castro -- raoul castro promised to

release all political prisoners. yet in a recent freedom house report we read that systemic use of short-term preventable detentions along with harassment and beatings are used to intimidate the dissidents and maintain control. advocates put the number of political arrests in cuba at over 8000. assistant secretary jacobson, i appreciate your meeting with dissidents when you were in havana last month but i am very concerned that your cuban counterparts are attempting to link your discussions to a commitment that the u.s. sees all democracy programs. castro is making more demands. last week they dictator called for the return of the u.s. naval station, an end to u.s. broadcasts, and just compensation. there is little debate over the importance of this facility for

the u.s. navy to conduct counter narcotics and he military and missions. our broadcasts are vital until a free media can operate. in defending this policy change, the president compared our economic relationship with cuba to that of china and vietnam. in china and vietnam, while communist, at least foreign firms can hire and recruit staff dreck they without pay going to the government. not so in cuba which is more like north korea that it is vietnam or china. acumen worker receives only a -- a cuban worker at a foreign old resort receives only a fraction of their salary, as little as 5%. in the regimes of the castro brothers, the method is the same.

extract hard currency from foreign businesses and invested in these security apparatus. instead of dismantling of 50-year-old failed policy as a it claims, the administration may have given a 50-year-old failed regime a new lease on life to continue its repression at home and militant support for marxist regimes abroad. before going to mr. ingle i am going to yield my remaining time to ileana ros-lehtinen. the chairman emeritus of this committee. she fled committee -- cuba as a refugee in age eight and her years of work has been marked by a tireless commitment to freedom and democracy for people around the world. >> thank you so much and i strongly second your grave concerns about the way that foreign policy is being run from the white house by secret negotiations with the castro regime while keeping congress, the american people, even our

own diplomats in the dark. this decision is in line with the president's other examples of executive overreach and bypassing consultations with congress. just like the taliban and five trade, the president has established a dangerous precedent that the u.s. does negotiate with terrorists, putting a target on every americans back and jeopardizing our national security. ever since the secret negotiations began in june 2013, this is what the castro regime has been doing since they won the talks. just a few examples. july 15, 2013. a north korean flag cargo ship was caught in panama after it left cuba heading to north korea after inspection. it included components of surface-to-air missile systems and launchers, make 21 jet fighter parts and engines,

showcasing's, rocket projectiles, and cargo was hidden under 200,000 bags of sugar. october 6, 2013. over 135 democracy activists arrested in one day throughout cuba up. also arrested was the leader of ladies in white who was dragged through the streets by her hair and her husband and boy was also arrested. june 12, 2014. others were arrested. cuba and russia agreed to open the spying facility. in 2014 it led to almost 9000 arrests of pro-democracy leaders in one year. almost a 40% increase from 2013. while we were in negotiations in 2013, 2014, and last month while

the u.s. delegation arrived, russia possible i ship docked in cuba. last week, the castro regime sentenced a young man. dangerousness that may lead to a crime. an activist was brutally beaten all over her face and body and she told state security, "i would rather die than remain quiet and accept this." all this happened why the u.s. was negotiating secretly with the regime.

shame on us. thank you. >> mr. eliot engel of new york. >> thank you very much. let me thank you for calling this hearing. i followed cuba closely. i have worked with iliana ross lehtinen. and others trying to bring freedom to cuba. firstly i am delighted that allen gross is finally home after five long years. i first met his wife judy back in december of 2009. one of my sons went to school with one of the children so i always felt a connection to the

family. alan's release from prison was long overdue and i am overjoyed he has been reunited with his family. as we know, president obama announced several changes in u.s. policy toward cuba but this is not the end of the story. the onus is on the cuban government to respond by moving forward with real reform. what does this mean? it means free and fair elections, respect for the rule of law, an independent press and upholding the values enshrined in the inter-american democratic charter. it also means releasing each and every political prisoner currently jailed in cuba and ending the harassment affordable activists. we want to see the formation of political pluralism. only then will we be comfortable with cuba moving along the path to democracy. president obama has the authority to reestablish relations with cuba and to pay the regulatory changes he announced on december 17. at the same time, congress has the authority to maintain or eliminate the trade embargo on cuba.

normalizing relations cannot be a one-way street. it has to be give-and-take on both sides and at this time i believe that congress must see a greater political opening in cuba before lifting the embargo. last month, chairman royce and i sent a letter to secretary kerry and asked for the names of the 53 political prisoners to cuban -- the cuban government committed to releasing. i was grateful for his response with a full list of the released prisoners. to be sure, the release of these 53 prisoners was a very positive step. unfortunately, a few of these prisoners were subsequently detained because of their political activism. while these individuals are no longer in jail, we must be vigilant in insuring their safety.

i urge the state department to use its talks with cuban officials to continue pushing for the release of all political prisoners. let me say that the upcoming summit of the americas in panama presents an important opportunity for the countries in the region. we will be eager to hear from cuban civil society leaders along with other independent civil society leaders from throughout the americas. i hope to be there and i hope it will have a delegation, a bipartisan delegation going there. irish the government and -- i urge the panamanian government and regional leaders to be as open and transparent as possible and allowing civil society participation at the summit. one request before close. i asked unanimous consent to submit for the record to statements. one on behalf of allen gross in the second from our colleague representative barbara lee. a foreign affairs committee member. along with her questions for the record. >> without objection. >> thank you. i would like to close by thanking our witnesses for being here today. i look forward to hearing from

each of you and thank you for holding this important hearing. >> we go now to mr. jeff duncan. chairman of the subcommittee on western hemisphere. >> thank you. in addition to the other comments, i remain deeply skeptical of the obama administration's unilateral shift. in addition to circumventing congress and failing to consult cuban dissidents, the president made his decision. using political speechwriters and the national security council staff to craft this policy change. i want to associate myself with your remarks and those of the gentlelady from florida. him expressing my deep concern for the lack of manner and process in developing this policy change. yesterday witnesses and testimony in the senate hearing recognize that the western

hemisphere -- that russia is one of the most openly challenged the united states in regard to cuba. these external actors that have influence in the region. and in view of the events that i thought the jollity from florida -- the gentlelady from florida spelled-out, the u.s. must protect the u.s. national security interests and including maintaining u.s. permanent rights to the naval station at guantánamo bay. i yield back. >> i recognize the ranking member will also as the one other cuban born member of this committee. he was also born in havana. were you about 11 years old? >> yes. >> thank you. >> i did come to this country when i was 11 years old,

in 1962 and i experienced some , of this government tactics. my biggest disappointment with this process has been the night felt the embargo in the pressure we were putting on cuba would lead to some changes in cuba. i really do not see what we negotiated where it will lead to anything. just -- it is beyond me that a singer -- a signature on a piece of paper somehow released this dictator of this pressure. people are not going to benefit. you still have to go through the government for anything. even if you want to put a church in cuba you have to go through the government. do we think that we are going to be able to invest and do economic progress for the cuban people? i do not see that happening. i would like to associate myself with the chairman's comments in the ranking member. i do not see where we are headed with this. i know it is the last two years for the president and he has a history to build.

but i was disappointed in the fact that we are not using this as a pressure point on a government that has been so brutal. there are thousands of people in jail. i do with these people. my district has the second largest concentration of cuban-americans in this country. i could probably get more intel that i do from some of the briefings in this place. i thank you, mr. chairman. >> this morning we are pleased to be joined by witnesses from the departments of state and treasury and commerce. ms. roberta jacobson served as the deputy assistant secretary for canada and mexico. mr. john smith is the deputy director of the u.s. department of the treasury's office of foreign asset control. previously he served as an expert to the u.n. al qaeda and taliban sanctions committee from 2004 through 2007.

mr. matthew borman serves as the deputy assistant secretary of commerce for export administration. without objection, the briefers full prepared statement will be made part of the record. members will have five calendar days to submit statements and questions and any extraneous material that members want to put in the record. if you would please summarize your remarks in five minutes and then we will hear from the other witnesses. >> thank you. thank you for the opportunity to testify on a new approach to u.s.-cuba policy. i want to say that i appreciate this committee's engagement in the western hemisphere and i know all of your strong commitment to democratic values, human rights and social and economic opportunity in the americas and in cuba. i want to thank you also for support in a welcoming the long over to return of allen gross to his family.

during his five years of detention, the administration worked closely with mamie embers of congress in both houses in both parties to secure his release. as the president and the secretary said, we are grateful for the essential role of canada, pope francis, and the vatican in reaching an agreement that made his freedom possible. on december 17, the president announced a new policy toward cuba, one that will better enable us to effectively advance our values and helps the cuban people move into the 21st century. the previous approach to relations with cuba are rooted in the best of intentions, but they fail to empower the cuban people. it isolated us from our democratic partners in this hemisphere and around the world. the government used this policy as an excuse for restrictions on citizens and the most deprived

for the cuban people. the new approach is designed to promote every cuban's universal rights as well as our national interests and we're seeing signs that our updated approach gives us the greater ability to embrace other nations in the hemisphere in advancing respect for fundamental freedoms in cuba. ultimately, it will be the cuban people who drive economic and political reforms. we lifted restrictions to make it easier to travel and send remittances to their families and open new pathways were academic of our religious, and people exchanges. our new steps built on [indiscernible] nobody represents america's values better than the american people. increased contact will empower the cuban people and reduce their dependence on the cuban state. the regulatory changes will increase financial resources to support the cuban people and the

emerging cuban private sector. it will enable companies to expand telecommunications and internet access within cuba. u.s. policy will no longer be a barrier to connectivity in cuba. two weeks ago i made a historic trip to cuba, one that helped me understand the burden and hope in bodied in this policy. we agreed to continue dialogue and deepen cooperation. this administration is under no illusions illusions -- illusions about the nature of the cuban government. i also raised with cuban officials our concerns about they're harassment, use of violence, and arbitrary and

-- and arbitrary detention of cuban citizens peacefully expressing views and that they need independent media voice is to talk about what is needed from government and thus. we will we we will continue to use diplomatic efforts to encourage our allies, now more likely to work with us to take every opportunity to increase respect for human rights and fundamental freedom in cuba. as the president has said, the united states believes no cuban should face harassment or arrest or beatings simply for exercising a universal right to have there voice heard, and we we will continue to support civil society there. i encourage members visiting cuba to expand their engagement with independent civil society voices in cuba who offer valuable insight and a diversity of views. i raised several elements in havana that -- travel restrictions, limits on staffing, local access and problems receiving shipments. the successful resolution will enable a future us embassy to

provide services commensurate with our diplomatic missions around the world. i hope you we will not object to help seen our diplomats and -- action as i take this opportunity to salute they're -- their tireless effort to advance our interest on the island. we have only just begun this effort and appreciate their is a diversity of you -- views. we hope that we can work together to find common ground toward our shared goal of enabling the cuban people to freely determine there own future. thank you very much. >> thank you. mr. smith. >> thank you, chairman, ranking member, members of the committee, thank you for the invitation to appear before you today to discuss our recent amendments. i will be addressing the key changes we made to the regulations that treasury office of foreign assets control made january 16 to implement changes

to us policy toward cuba announced by the president the month before. these amendment ease sanctions related to cuba in a number a number of key areas including travel, remittances, financial services and trade and are intended to have a direct a nd positive impact on the lives of the cuban people. cuba is the only sanctioned program that restricts travel to a country. they generally license certain travel within the 12 existing categories of travel. this means that the travelers who satisfy the criteria of the general licenses may travel to cuba and conduct travel related transactions without requesting individual authorization. travel to cuba for tourist activities remains prohibited. these expanded general licenses

are intended to lessen the burden on authorized travelers making it easier for americans to travel to cuba to interact with cuban people, provide humanitarian assistance and engage in certain educational and cultural activities. the regulatory amendments also authorize airlines to provide air carrier services to, from, and within cuba in connection with authorized travel. air carriers will need to secure regulatory approval from other concerned us government agencies such as the department of transportation and homeland security. travel agents and tour group operators also may now provide travel services in connection with authorized travel. these changes are intended to make authorized travel easier and less expensive by reducing the paperwork burden for and increasing competition among those providing travel and carrier services. to improve the speed

fantasy -- efficiency, and oversight of authorized payments between the united states and cuba banks have been authorized to establish correspondence can and financial institutions and allow travelers to use credit and debit cards while in cuba. within the context of trade there has been modification of the regulatory financing requirement for trade between the united states and cuba imposed by statute. opec has now revised its interpretation of the term to allow the export of american produced agricultural, medical and other authorized goods to cuba, so long as payment is received by the us exporter prior to the goods arrival to the cuban port which should increase authorized us exports to cuba. cuba has an internet penetration of approximately 5 percent, one

of the lowest in the world. an better to facilitate the flow of information to, from, and among the cuban people, opec eased restrictions to better provide efficient and adequate telecommunications services between the united states and cuba and to increase access to telecommunications and internet -based services for the cuban people. as i conclude, i should make one thing absolutely clear. even with these changes i described most transactions between the united states and cuba, imports, exports, and other activities remain prohibited. as these recent changes are implemented we we will continue to enforce the sanctioned program vigorously using all available tools and take action against violators as appropriate. the president's december 17 announcement late out a new course for relations with cuba

driven by a hope for a more positive future for the cuban people. amendments to regulations in concert with the regulatory provisions my colleague at commerce will highlight, marks significant changes to our policy that implement new changes announced by the president. these changes are intended to directly benefit the cuban people and help them to determine there future. thank you, and i am happy to answer any questions. >> mr. chairman, ranking member, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear to discuss the cuba policy changes announced by the president on december 17. as the president noted, these are intended to create more opportunities for the american and cuban people, promote positive change and influence outcomes throughout the western hemisphere. i'm generally 16th, the department of commerce bureau of industry security amended the

export administration regulations to authorize the export to cuba intended to improve the living conditions of the cuban people, support private sector economic activity, strengthen civil society, and improve the free flow of information. regulations were amended to expand general light -- general licenses, create a knew license -- a new license exception, and discard a licensing policy. under the embargo on trade, all items subject to the regulations require license for export or re- exports unless authorized by an exception. these are consistent with the goals of the embargo and relevant law. they may issue licenses for specific transactions or make types of transactions eligible for exceptions that -- support the goals of united states policy. only items of lower

technology are eligible. the 1st license exception that was expanded is related to gift parcels. the change is to allow consolidated shipments of rift parcels -- gift parcels to go under this exception, previously requiring individual exceptions which we will allow more donations to the cuban people because individuals who wish to donate will no longer have to search for license consolidator. they also expanded license conception consumer communication devices to also authorize the commercial sale of commercial communication devices such as cell phones, mobile phones, computers, radios, previously only authorized if donated. now they can also be sold commercially. the new exception created is for the people and enables the

export and reexport of items intended to improve the private sector authorized items include building materials for private sector use, tools and equipment for agricultural activity and goods for use by private sector entrepreneurs. this license exception is intended to meet the president goals and to support the cuban private sector and facilitate cuban citizens to lower-priced access to consumer goods and gain greater independent axis -- independence from the state. others authorize others -- others authorize the temporary export of persons leaving the united states of items for cultural, ecological historic preservation, scientific, or sporting activities, authorizing the export and reexport of donated items to the cuban people and the export and reexport of items to human rights organizations,

individuals, or nongovernment organizations. these provisions implement the president's goals of harnessing people to people engagement. and helping the cuban people reach for a better future. as the president observed, nobody represents american values better than the american people. to implement the president's goal by increasing access to information primarily through the internet, license exception authorizes the export a cube of -- to cuba the extradition for the establishment and upgrade of telecommunication related systems. in addition to telecommunication devices a related division authorizes the export of certain items for use by news media personnel and us newsreels engaged in the gathering and dissemination of news. lastly we recognize this is not limited by national borders and circumstances may need to be changed to protect air quality

water quality, and coastlines. although pre-existing licensing allowed we have amended the , regulations to make explicit the general policy. in summary, these regulatory revisions consistent with the comprehensive embargo the united states maintains on cuba and support the president's goal of the united states becoming a better partner in making the lives of ordinary cubans a little easier. and more free. and is in line with u.s. national security interests. i am pleased to answer questions. thank you. >> thank you. i would like to go to assistant secretary jacobson with a question. because administration negotiators stated that they did not see human rights concessions in exchange for taking steps towards normalization. you know our concern about the

state department and you not being included in this. being kept in the dark on it. but the reality is that pro- democracy and human rights activists in cuba have lamented that human rights were not integral with these secret negotiations. in fact, the lead cuban government negotiator who would be now your counterpart said change in cuba is not negotiable. we have no indication here that the cuban government intends to give ground, and so if the -- if the regime refuses to ease its oppression on the people of cuba, how do our concessions advance the interest

s of the cuban people? >> let me be clear, mr. chairman, on part of this. i think it is crucial to understand that their really -- there really were know -- no concessions from the obama administration. moving forward with the establishment of diplomatic relations is not a gift or concession to government but a channel of communication. in fact, it is not necessary something that the cuban government wanted, but we think that the things announced on december 17 are much more effective ways to pursue our own national interest. we believe that we can more effectively pursue the human rights policy, the democracy

policies that we want in an empowering the cuban people, and having a direct channel with the cuban government to convey concerns and work with allies around the hemisphere of a policy they no longer support. >> well, i would just point out what you you are leaving out of the equation is the fact that under these initiatives that the white house took without the state department , the white house is now increasing the amount of dollars that flows into cuba, specifically into the regime and helps the regime bottom line at a time when the regime, as you could have told the white house, now faces being cut off in terms of a subsidy from venezuela. at the very time you would think we would exert leverage, you have a situation instead where you have got sort of a lifeline which is my concern.

, let me go to another question i had, and that is, last week castro stated normalizing unilateral relations with the us would not be possible until the us returns the naval station at guantanamo bay to cuba. is the administration considering transferring this military asset back to the cuban people? i remind you, when we talked with the state department before on negotiations on another subject, the state department spokesman said unequivocally that the united states is not considering the release of any member of the cuban five, one of whom was convicted for his part in killing four americans, for alan gross. so we have a little history of , hearing one thing and finding out another after the fact. on this question on guantanamo if you could --

>> the issue of guantanamo is not on the table in these conversations. i want to be clear, what we are talking about right now is the reestablishment of diplomatic relations, which is only one 1st , step in normalization. the cuban government has raised guantanamo. we are not interested in discussing that. we are not interested in discussing that issue or returning guantanamo. we also, i want to be clear, you know, we did not return the cuban agents for mr. gross. we returned the cuban agents for an intelligence agent that we wanted. >> let me ask you one more question. for years the castro regime has perceived broadcasting by our office of cuba broadcasting as a threat. last week the cuban government referred to these as illegal and castro has demanded the broadcast be stopped.

to what extent has our broadcast been discussed as part of these talks? >> the cuban government has always raised radio and tv marquee in immigration talks and again as part of a list a list of things that they object to in the normalization talks, but we have no plans to end those either. >> well, i know cuba is demanding they be shut down and i'm hoping to hear you say we are demanding that cuba dropped its chanting. i will go to mr. eliot engel because my time is up. >> thank you. sec. jacobson, let, let me give you broad leeway because you have answered some, but i want to hear some more of how do you answer critics who say that we gave away the store, that we had

leverage and just tossed it away, did not get concessions in exchange, and if we did not, doesn't that show you the true intentions of the castro regime? he reportedly said that he gave up nothing and essentially we made all the concessions. how do you answer that? >> i appreciate the question , congressman, i really do because i think it is important. there is nothing in what we decided on the 17th that we believe is a concession to the cuban government. it is true we have begun to talk about diplomatic relations. it is also true we we will try to move forward with embassies in each other's countries. we strongly believe that having an embassy in havana will enable us to do more things that help us more effectively empower the cuban people, not high necessarily on the cuban government list of desires.

we also believe that by allowing american companies to engage in telecommunication sales and acting to get greater information into cuba to work with the entrepreneurs who i sat down with while i was their, we -- there, we can begin to increase the pace at which people separate themselves from the state, also not something that the cuban government has on its list of priorities. i think that they may tout this as support for their government, but we have diplomatic relations with lots of governments around the world with whom we sharply disagree. it is a channel, a mechanism not, as somebody said yesterday on the senate side, the good housekeeping seal of approval. we will continue to speak out on human rights, support democracy

activists, but we believe this policy has become such an irritant in our work with other latin american countries, with our european allies that it also enables us to work more effectively with them in bringing about that support in cuba. >> well, thank you. i mentioned in my statement i was pleased with the release of prisoners but much more remains to be done on a human rights-based issue in cuba. the havana based conciliation reported 8800 short-term concessions, a 39 percent increase over 2013. what is the obama administration strategy for pushing the cuban government to improve its human rights record? are we working to put an end to short-term detention and

harassment of dissidents? >> i think that is a really important point. because i think this question of short-term detentions is a crucial one. we obviously, have seen a shift from longer-term sentences to short-term detention. that number has gone up in the last year. it is of enormous concern to us. and we have made it clear both to the cuban government directly in these talks and others but also with allies and international organizations that it is unacceptable. we believe and have had conversations already that the new policy enables us to work better with other governments. the reaction of many in the region was we strongly support your policy shift. it has changed the dynamic. what can we do to help? as we prepare for the summit of the americas, we believe cuban civil society activists will

have an opportunity to interact with latin american leaders for the 1st time. all of those things i think we -- will help. that same national commission has noticed a drop in short-term detentions in january, not a trend. i want to be clear about that. we cannot know whether it is the beginning of a trend and will be watching it carefully because it must end, not just come down. but it must and. >> you mentioned civil society. i want to ask my final question about to civil -- about civil society and some of the americas. what conversations have you had with your panamanian counterparts to ensure there is robust participation from cuban civil society and in your discussions with cuban government officials in havana did you urge them to allow civil society leaders to participate

encourage cuban political dissidents to participate? >> the answer to all of those questions is yes. we we have had extensive conversations with the panamanian government, with the civil society organizations, other ngos as well as making sure that the rules are not the same as in previous years. previously it had been you could only participate if you were an ngo registered with the oas , which would preclude cuban independent organizations. that will not be the case this year. >> thank you. >> thank you so much. as we know, the us has been negotiating in secret with this

sadistic dictatorship for now 20 months because it is still secret. for 18 of those months the white house negotiated in supersecret to trade three convicted spies for an innocent american, even if you say that was not a swap , that is just so disingenuous. this week in the senate just yesterday you testified, this policy is not based upon the castro -- castro regime changing. we have no illusions over that. so let me get this straight. we are telegraphing to the castro regime ahead of time that it does not have to change and we have no illusions it we will. so, we are going to get further concessions from this administration. then what is the reason to negotiate? now the media have been , reporting just this week arrests in cuba for last month

in january, decreased only 178 making it seem like the arrest of peaceful, pro-democracy activists, 178 of them is a low number. only in only in castro's cuba to the arrest of 178 people in one month be considered a victory. for the president's state of the union address last month i invited the daughter of armand alejandra who was kept in the dark about this trade, nontrade, swap, non- swap. her father was murdered by the castro regime when his brothers to the rescue plane was shot down over international waters. on december 17 the president released and pardoned a cuban spy who was convicted in a us court for conspiracy to commit

murder for his connection to the shoot down. the family wanted me to ask you these questions, assistant secretary jacobson. how will i explained to my two -- little girls their us marine three vietnam veteran grandfather was denied the only justice for his murder when he was set free, pardoned, and returned to cuba? next question, why was the us so willing to give him the opportunity to father a child while he was in prison , very interesting, when some of the victims of the shoot down will never be able to have children of there own? now, as if negotiating in secret is not bad enough, the castro regime continues to defy this administration setting preconditions publicly on the negotiations such as demanding the return of the land of wonton

-- guantanamo, which is so vital to us national security interest. it is so pathetic for this strong, wonderful, generous country to look so week when -- weak when negotiating with the castro regime. isn't it true that cuba owes american taxpayers at least $8 billion in certified claims for the unlawful taking of property, businesses, unpaid debt owed to the american citizens? isn't it true cuba has failed to pay these claims for close to 60 years and isn't it true that us law requires these claims be resolved before relations be normalized? i urge all of your departments to explain how illegally confiscated property we will be resolved. us claim holders deserve they're -- their claims to be protected don't you agree?

assistant secretary jacobson, it is important to note that what the castro regime we will do with this new assistance president obama will provide on , telecommunications. in 2012, -- he blocked the phones of the opposition leaders. as we know castro held in american for five years for trying to provide internet equipment to the jewish community in cuba. so the track record is clear about castro and his hatred of this telecommunication agreement. in this latest misguided talks the castro regime asked the u.s. to stop providing internet services for the cuban people. so his track record is clear, he has no intent of opening up the internet or telecommunications opportunities. in fact, if given that

opportunity, it will probably be used to further oppress the people of cuba. and then just one last thing come you can answer it whenever you want in writing. did secretary kerry live did secretary kerry lied to the united states congress when he told us it would not free up convicted spies, or was he kept in the dark of these negotiations? were you part of the negotiations from the start or did you enter them later on? >> out of time. >> i am going to suggest your response in writing. >> thank you. our policy toward cuba has failed. this comes from an american view that it is all about us.

if cuba is not better it must be our policy. our policy is exactly different or has been than europe and canada's policy. maybe it is they're policy that failed to bring democracy to cuba. maybe it is ours. ms. jacobson, cuba got caught smuggling 240 tons of weapons to north korea, violated un sanctions, cuba is not cooperating in the un investigation. are these reasons to keep cuba on the state-sponsored terrorism list? >> congressman, we are undertaking a review of the state sponsor of terrorism list right now. we are evaluating all of the information. >> i know that. >> we also made clear when we were looking at that incident that we did not think -- we did think cuba's behavior violated the sanctions regime.

the only entity that was sanctioned, as you know, as a result of that investigation was a north korean company which can no longer operate. >> i have got to reclaim my time. ms. jacobsen, americans paid in blood for cuban independence. we have a base in base in guantanamo that is valuable to our national security. are are you prepared -- and hopefully this is a yes or no question -- to say right now this administration will not abandon, return, or fail to pay the modest fee so that we can have that naval base for the next two years? >> i do not see that discussion taking place. >> that is not what i am asking for. that was in your testimony. can you make a commitment? you have to see it from our side. we were shocked. you are telling me that you are not thinking of something which means i have to be ready to be

shocked tomorrow. the administration was so angry that they had not been consulted on bringing one guy to speak here. there was not a lot of consultation. would would the administration objects to language in appropriations bills designed to make it impossible for this administration to give back the naval base? >> that issue is not on the table. >> word the -- it could be on our table. would you object? >> i don't know the answer to that as a matter of -- >> we have the cuban liberty and solidarity democracy act. it does not allow us to deal with certain properties seized by americans, regulation on travel. how do you make sure american travelers are not breaking the law by staying at hotels

confiscated from americans or otherwise violating the cuban liberty and democracy solidarity act? >> one thing i should say at the start, the act, what that does is say you cannot provide a loan or credit or financing to further those transactions. it does not say you cannot stay at a hotel or engage in any other -- >> does the credit card company extend a loan when you use a credit card to pay for a hotel stay at a confiscated property? >> a credit card company may extend the loan to the traveler. >> extending alone to facilitate staying at the hotel and think that is in conformity with the act? >> we have the provision of the act replicated in our regulations and will follow to the letter what is in the act because we have it in our regulations. we will follow that.

nothing we have authorized would abridge those provisions of the act. >> i would close by saying, i might be more favorably impressed every policy if it had not been such a complete shock and if congress had been involved in this. this u.s. government works better and coordinate our national policy and have one national policy that reflects the views of both parties instead of an annoying party that must be consulted now and then. i yield back. >> we go to mr. chris smith from new jersey. >> thank you. the "washington post" has done several editorials. one, an undeserved bailout. pointing out the soviet union is less able to prop them up.

now, potentially u.s. funds will do that. secondly, president obama's betrayal of cuban democrats and the fact we should have listened to the ladies in white who we will be testifying here tomorrow. she along with two other individuals are going back. talk about bravery. speaking to the senate and now the house and they are going back. yet the post, hardly a conservative bastian talks about a betrayal. and another editorial said with no consequence insight cuba continues to crack down on free speech. i ask you in assessment, the publicity or visibility, are there any second thoughts? 2012 we had a hearing and heard from someone who spent 11 years in prison. the same type of scenarios

playing out, five have been rearrested. he was in and out of prison constantly. maybe you can verify some 100 to 200 additional prisoners have been arrested. is that true or not? some say they may get to go to cuba. that is not the issue. they need to go to the prisons. in 1990, in geneva when he secured that, representatives went into the prison, interview ed people and everyone was severely retaliated against. their must be unfettered access to the prisons. meeting under fidel castro does not got it. i would like to go again and

have tried repeatedly. maybe you can help facilitate. i want to go to the prisons and lead a delegation. i have been to prisons in the soviet union, east bloc countries, as well as asia. cuba is the one that will let me or others into the prisons. let me ask you, there are many convicted felons who gunned down an officer in cold blood, shot in the back of the head gangland style after he escaped from prison. a fugitive felon. asylum -- felon got asylum. was that part of the negotiation or not? finally, let me ask with regard -- with the time i have, please answer those and i will come back. >> let me say the whole point of

this new policy is not that we are telescoping to the cuban government that they do not have to change all we expect them to change right away. certainly we want those practices to change. we simply are not naive about how quickly they we will change. our efforts are to empower the cuban people to take their lives into their own hands. i had not heard that 100 to 200 people had been arrested. there were as many as 50 or more. to the best of my knowledge most, if not all, have been released. there are severe constraints on them and none and none of them should have been arrested. just just as their are still political prisoners who we will be released. i want to be clear about that. and a downturn in detention is not good enough. >> they arrest, rearrest, let out. seventeen years in prison, tortured.

a doctor testified by way of phone and said, do not lift the embargo because you have to get substantive -- >> and i saw ask her when i was on the island and have the utmost respect and admiration for he and his views. every time i talk with the cuban government and mentioned the case. i am a daughter of new jersey anger up with this case and other cuban cases. we have not gotten a positive response. they have said they are not interested in discussing her return. on other cases we have made more , progress. there have been accused felons expelled to the united states. this is a high priority for us and we are frustrated we have not made progress. there are other cases we we will continue, all of these cases we

will continue to pursue and have further dialogue on fugitives from law enforcement because it is critical to us and part of what we hope we will do better on and having conversations that are more expensive with our justice department colleagues, a critical part of having a channel. >> we all know the castro brothers have pushed this as a major diplomatic win for them. i would have hoped that human rights concessions would have been 1st before being recognized diplomatically. we go to mr. greg meeks of new york. >> let me go on record as saying i wholeheartedly agree with the president's change in direction. i think that it is clear that over 50 years nothing has , changed with the policy we had.

i wholeheartedly agree and think the time is finally they're for a change in policy. i should also say that i do feel the passing of, for example, my good friend, the ranking member of the western hemisphere and would hope the kind of questions -- because clearly the passion is for the people of cuba. i hope that kind of dialogue goes forward because this should be about making a better day for the cuban people. so in that regard, i have been down several times, and have found one of the major obstacles we have had in the region is on cuban policy and has caused friction. they have all said we needed to change. in fact, when i look at it and

think about multilateral relations as opposed to unilateral relations, we were the only country in the world, all our major allies, everybody that has sanctions against cuba, unlike this administration has been successful putting together sanctions. it is part of what is taking place. even in russia. it is when we work i would like closely with everyone. that to happen right here. we work more closely with our allies. i talked to them in latin america. i asked them what is the one thing we should do that would make it better for all of us? they said, change the policy. that being said can we now -- with the changing dynamics with

the new policy, will they work with us to make change in human rights an issue so we can make a difference in the lives of people living on the island? >> congressman, i think that is a critical point. the next the next part of the question, we support your policy on cuba. this is an important day in latin america. you can start raising the issue of human rights and democracy much higher on your agenda. we believe this will be an important turning point in countries engagement, especially those which have a history of working on these issues in the region. they have they have been afraid to work with us too closely for fear of not wanting to appear aligned with previous policy which has been evident in working on the summit where we were able to work strongly with

countries to highlight the democratic governance and citizen participation and accelerate planning on the civil society dialogue. it has it has been evident, even when i was in cuba two weeks ago and we invited ambassadors not from this hemisphere. i spoke with separately. we invited ambassadors from europe and asia. they never come to those receptions in the past. almost universally their are few countries that have routinely come. they they all came and were able to interact with dissidents. they had access to a wider range of diplomats than they ever had before. that is what we are hoping for. >> let me ask. i am limited on time. one, given that -- and i know there have been talks -- has there been any reaction directly

from the cuban civil society? when i was down there one of the , problems i had was getting on the internet. the internet now would be open and what, if any, impact would having an open internet have on the civil society? >> i mean, i think that would be huge. on cuban civil society, i think the thing that struck me in the small meeting with cuban dissidents and then a much larger one including 12 members of the 57 who were released 4.5 years ago are not able to travel. i was able to see many of them and that has to change. but what i was struck by, one of , the younger members of the group, i was struck by the diversity. some support these measures and some are obviously very strongly

opposed. that must be respected. reward to hear from and continue to support all of them. -- we want to hear from them and continue to support all of them. the second is, on the internet i think that is crucial, and i do not no whether the cuban government will allow that opening. they have said that they we will. it is critical to economic progress, but that is why we have to aggressively try and make it possible for our companies to provide that service and see whether they are willing without the excuse that the americans are the reason they cannot do it. >> now the gentleman from california. >> thank you very much secretary jacobson. this is a difficult task. i am only -- one of the main concerns we have is instead of

changing the castro regime into a more democratic regime the president is acting as if he has the right to rule by dictate. over his presidency, he is changing our country to be more like castro than having castro changed to be more like a free and open society. ruling by dictate and having secret negotiations is not what america is all about. that is not the way we make policy here. many of us are disappointed. this is not the first case but dealing with a regime as odorous -- is odorous a word? is that the word i want? there you go. we have a regime that stinks one

way or the other end is oppressive one way or the other. yet we have had secret negotiations and deals that are announced and you are here to explain it. let me ask, when you said their -- there are no concessions, you mean we go into an agreement with a regime and have had 50 years of american policy and there are no concessions from the cuban government? i do not think there were concessions from the u.s. government -- >> we had change 50 years of american policy. isn't that concession enough? with the changes we can expect is there any agreement that part

of this ending of u.s. policy of making a stand that there be a more democratic and open society before we have a more expanded relationship, is there any agreement that there will be independent unions, say we will have more economic activity? was there any type of concession? was there any agreement they will permit independent unions in cuba? there were no agreements -- >> we have also heard that maybe the money that is going into the pockets of the working people is actually going to be transferred directly to the government or that money might go directly to the government and then be handed out to be working people. is that right? we agreed to that? >> we believe it will benefit --

the cuban people will benefit more than the government will. >> do you think the cuban people want their government to take their pay? >> i am sure they don't. >> whose side are we on? on the side of the people taking the money from the central government? >> will there been opposition parties? we will continue to support those who want to have their voices heard -- >> but there have been no concessions. we have changed five decades of u.s. policy and they will still not have an independent unions opposition parties. i cannot imagine they will have opposition newspapers. listen, this is a regime, the

castro brothers came in and once they were in power, they murdered the patriots who overthrew the batista regime. they personally did. the people we were negotiating with took a pistol and took these patriots out and shot them in the head by the hundreds. after that, they decided to have a relationship with the soviet union, which was then our main enemy and encouraged the soviet union to put missiles that have nuclear weapons on them and encouraged them to use them on the united states. this is the regime we are dealing with, not to mention the criminals they had given safe haven to. how we can change five decades of holocene by dictate -- of policy by dictate from our president and then we hear there are no concessions on their side is a disillusionment on our part and upsetting. thank you very much. >> now we go to the gentleman from new jersey.

>> mr. smith and mr. berman, can you tell us what percentage of cuban businesses are owned privately? >> i can't tell you a precise percentage, but certainly there are over 200 categories of private sector economic activity authorized by the cuban government. >> authorized by the cuban government? >> they are private businesses. >> i don't have any additional information. >> i can tell you 15%. 85% of businesses in cuba are owned by the military. the hotels are owned by the military. the bed and breakfasts are run by the families of the military. the umbrella agency that approves the business is the son-in-law of one of the castro s, so when you say to me that the cuban people which is what

i'm interested in, are going to benefit by doing business with the cuban people you are not , reaching very many people. the private sector that runs the hotdog stand maybe what we are talking about the big businesses which employ people is run by the generals. and if you want to put a business in cuba, you want to build a mcdonald's and you need 100 employees, you have to go to the government and they give you the rate and they give you the employees and those employees are people who are part of the government system. so the people that are fighting for liberty and fighting for democracy on the island are basically left out. these are the things you have to negotiate away from the cuban government so if your intentions are to help the cuban people of the ordinary cuban people you are not helping them. this is a society that has upheld themselves with this kind of business that they run.

>> just to be clear the regulations are designed exactly to get items to the 15%. that's the way the regulation works so it can be exported without individual licenses having to go to the true private sector. >> in terms of millions of dollars. what do you think is going to benefit the cuban government and millions? >> we don't have a figure that would benefit the cuban government. our changes have been focused on private entrepreneurs and small scale business private business that we are talking about and again i repeat that most of the transactions between the united states and cuba remain prohibited under these exchanges. -- changes. we just carved out a few areas as mr. subfour talks about their -- about that are focused on the private entrepreneurs.

>> if we go in dubai wheat from cuba, are we going to buy sugar from cuba? there's no real crop of sugar in cuba anymore. cuba used to be the worlds leading supplier of sugar. cuba does business with the rest of the world. this whole idea that you have to grow this in some sort of a corporate has ruined the entire economy. there is no real free business in cuba. even the people that you deal with that you say have 200 licenses, the cuban government can remove those licenses at a drop. >> if i could, i met with seven or eight of these entrepreneurs. people really trying to run their own businesses restauranteurs, a barber, a woman making soap, women doing decorations on clothing and you can see people beginning to separate their own economic

future from the government and having trouble because they can't get the supplies. the state doesn't want to provide them the supplies. that is who we are trying to help. >> but yet they have all the supplies and this is what i'm trying to bring. -- break. this is what runs the island. the generals, the people you see driving the cars, living in the houses that have been repossessed from people who have worked hard at their businesses before the castro takeover. i just don't see where we have any more leverage to get some of these changes to help the cuban people. i was just talking to my colleague. my aunt came over a couple of years ago. i don't have a birth certificate and i asked her when you go to cuba can you get me a birth certificate, i don't know what my mother did with it.

when she went to the menace of will building they said we can't , give you one because we have him classified as a terrorist. i left at the age of 11 so i'm a terrorist. and i don't want to share the story of what happened to my cousin who is her son who was educated in russia and had become an engineer and it's too tragic to even share the story with you. my feelings are that these people are just dictators. they are brutal dictators. people forget raul castro and che guevara set up a firing squad in cuba that killed thousands of people and i see people wearing a che guevara shirt. i'm sorry, thank you. >> thank you mr. sires. mr. chabot of ohio. >> thank you madam chairman and thank you for calling this very important hearing to discuss the administration's new

cuban policy. i believe president obama's announcement to unilaterally change u.s. policy toward cuba sets a dangerous precedent. in fact, it furthers an ongoing pattern of his utter disregard for congress but that's the way this administration operates. it gives a backhand to the elected representatives of the american people, treats congress like the proverbial mushroom. keep them in the dark and feed them manure. mrs. jacobsen, and you said there were new concessions and this wasn't necessarily something that the cuban government -- those statements on their face or just not credible. you also said the obama administration was under no illusion about the nature of the cuban government. i would submit that the administration is just about as naive about the nature of the cuban government apparently has

-- as it was about isis when the president famously described them jv or junior varsity. tell that to the families of those who have been brutally massacred by those barbarians. this cuban policy, this new policy is in my view tragically flawed. the way it was brought about with such utter disregard and you are hearing it on both sides of the aisle here, utter disregard for elected representatives by the american people is disgraceful and it's justice flawed. i would like to yield the balance of my time to the gentlelady from florida who was born in cuba and feels just as passionately about this as anybody in this place. >> thank you mr. chabot and following up on your thought about brutality wherever those victims are i wanted to give ms.

jacobsen the opportunity secretary jacobsen to answer that questions. how can marlena alejandra explain to their daughters how their grandfather who was , killed by the castro regime , and his life meant nothing and the person who is in jail as a co-conspirator of the murder of her father was pardoned, set free, and returned to cuba and received a hero's welcome. what does she say to her girls? >> let me start out by saying that i can never bring back her grandfather and i can never do more than express my sadness and my condolences to her. it's something that should not have happened. >> when she was told by you and others of the trade would not take place, this is a swap is it not? >> madam chair, i just want to say an exchange of intelligence

agents between two countries is something that this government and previous administrations have done many times. >> but had the state department not met with the family and didn't the state department time and time and time again tell her that heraldo hernandez would not be set free by this administration yes or no? >> to the best of my knowledge . >> secretary kerry said to us that such a swap would not take place. a swap for allen gross would not take place. we affirm that we did not do. >> just call it something else. >> we don't believe that's what took place.

>> the families under the impression because you gave it to them but that exchange would not take place that heraldo hernandez would serve the complete sentence. did you get that impression at any time? >> certainly i regret if the family felt additional pain because of an impression. >> an impression. that's all they had. they had a false impression that all this time you are meeting with them and while you were meeting with them you were already cooking up this swap whatever you call it that for all intensive purposes what happened was he was set free and pardoned by president obama. he was returned to cuba and given a cuba is welcome but that was impression they got it was a false impression because you were never going to do that. while you met with them. don't you feel a little bit bad that you are lying to them? >> in the first place no one who met with the family ever lied to

the family about what our understanding -- herardo hernandez was in jail. >> i'm going to enjoy listening to the families when they hear that testimony coming from you. it's just pathetic. thank you and now ms. bass from california. >> thank you very much madam chair. let me just say before i begin that i find it particularly difficult to talk about cuba because i want to acknowledge the experiences and the family situations of my colleagues mr. sires and ms. ros-lehtinen. but you know to talk about and understand and acknowledge what your families went through, i understand. i do though support changing our relations with the island and one of the things that i have always felt is that as an american i want to be able to

, travel anywhere in the world and i did recently go to cuba specifically looking at a drug that the cubans have invented for diabetes. i want to talk about that in a minute. i have a couple of questions. i know this april there is a summit of the americas and wanted to know what the reaction has been from the international community about cuba's participation and other world leaders rerding this policy change. >> congresswoman, we have really seen universally from the hemisphere and those participating in the summit that they strongly support the policy that they think it changes the whole dynamic in the hemisphere for the united states on other objectives that we have high priorities for us. the president of columbia called it historic and it changes the entire debate.

the president from brazil, they feel strongly that the policy of isolating cuba was not the right one. we obviously disagreed with them for many years but we found that was isolating us in conversations and impeding our ability to have conversations on human rights and democracy not just in cuba, because they would not really engage on that issue, but also our ability to engage with them on human rights and democracy issues broadly speaking throughout the hemisphere. we know that this is a concern and other countries in the hemisphere. >> about the trip that i mentioned recently because it was a congressional diabetes caucus and specifically because in cuba they have developed a drug and it's basically a drug that reduces the need for amputation in diabetics. as i understand it and i think

my question is directed to mr. smith. as i understand, this drug has been approved for clinical trials but because of our policy is not approved to be marketed in the u.s., which means a company is not going to invest in a clinical trial if they cannot market it. i'm wondering if the changes that have been made in the law would allow for this and basically what the cubans are reporting but we obviously half to test it to see if it's correct, they have been able to reduce the need for amputation by 70% and we have tens of thousands of people in the united states who are diabetic who wind up losing a limb or their feet because of diabetes. are you aware of what i'm talking about? >> i am. nothing changes are policy with respect to those types of drugs but they are not prohibited from coming to the united states flat out. those companies can apply for specific license.

we have a long history of evaluating those license applications. we receive them and refer them to other agencies in the government including the state department drug administration and we evaluate whether we import additional activity with respect to those drugs and then grant a specific license. >> the other pressure that i feel coming from california is from the agricultural industries and i'm wondering if the policy changes would lead to our ability to export. there is a number of companies in california that are interested in exporting agricultural goods as well as livestock. >> what we have heard over time is even though there are certain categories and transactions that have been authorized including agricultural products we have , heard from exporters and many members of congress that her previous financing rules didn't

help the situation and didn't help them to be competitive with their counterparts in other countries. so we made a change to provisions in a statute that deals with the term cash in advance and basically we have made it more advantageous for u.s. exporters to export their products. this is what they they have been asking for to make them more competitive and what many members of congress have been asking us to do. >> thank you so much, ms. bass. we will go to judge poe. >> let me start with the presumption that cuba is a violator of human rights. i think we all know that. especially the folks in cuba the -- in cuba. the policy of the president i think, i don't want to go into the issue of whether with or without congress approval the president makes a decision. i want to touch on one issue that i have a question about.

what is the purpose of the current u.s. policy or cuba? -- toward cuba? do we basically have no contact with them and we don't trade with them generally so the policy we have been talking about that has been implemented for 50 something years what is the purpose? what is the goal of the policy? is that clear? >> you mean the previous policy? >> the previous policy until it changed, tweaked a little bit. >> the goal of the previous policy was via isolation of cuba and keeping our distance from government, we would hope to bring about changes in the regime and simultaneously we would hope to empower the cuban people to be able to make that change. >> change the regime? change communism, change what?

>> certainly change their behavior towards their own citizens. >> so that's our goal so cuba internally changes the treatment of cuban citizens? >> certainly -- the. >> i'm not trying to catch you on semantics. i am just trying to see what our goal is. the goal is to do this so cuban people are treated like they should be? >> in terms of international human rights standards and that sort of thing, yes. >> would you say that has not worked? >> i would, yes. >> 50 years doing something and if it doesn't change that policy or goal has not been achieved because the cubans are treated better than i ever have been. >> i believe so, yes sir. >> let me ask you this. is our goal ever to do what

relationship, whatever that may be in the future, is that for the americans benefit or cuba's benefit? as we look at changes toward cuba is this because we want to , help american businesses for example or for americans to be able to travel. is that the goal that we are moving door or is it a goal to do what is the best for the cubans? >> our goal is to do what is in our national interest and to help the cuban people to be able to do what they wish to be able to make their own decisions. >> so it would be both. >> i would say the first priority would be to do what is in our national interest which includes our core values of democracy and universal human rights. >> ok. would our policy has anything to do with helping trade from the united states? >> certainly. >> let me give you an example. i'm from texas and we represent

not as many as we used to, but a lot of rice farmers and when i got elected to congress i thought that rice came in a box i have learned a lot about rice farming. there as long grain and short grain into seasons and all that stuff. and historically, texas rice farmers traded internationally with iran, iraq, and cuba. you can see that hasn't worked out so well. they want to trade long grain rice to cuba. the cubans want to buy long grain rice. they want to that as opposed to california short grain rice. set aside all the other issues would that not be in the best interest of the united states and american exporters that we would facilitate trade with you? -- cuba?

>> you are going to get me into some trouble because i can't set aside all of the other issues, but if i really put it in a vacuum, it would be in our interest so we always do those things in a vacuum. >> i understand that. what i'm saying is having this barrier of trade hurts americans. i don't know about the cubans. they get their rise from vietnam . i'm out of time. i have some other questions that i would like to submit for the record. >> without objection. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> and we will go to mr. sweeney from rhode island. >> thank you madam chair and thank you to the witnesses. i too want to begin by balancing the experiences and passionate leadership on cuban-american relations by the chairwoman ros-lehtinen and mr. sires and i thank you for being so open with your experiences to the

committee. i think it adds to our understanding of these complicated issues. i think all members of this committee are equally committed to helping the cuban people achieve freedom and democracy i think -- and i think a difference in opinion is what the best strategy for bringing that about. i think the witnesses for being here today and i expect he will -- you will continue to keep congress informed throughout these discussions with the cuban government. i am hopeful and i think most americans are hopeful that the president can engage in real and substantive negotiations with the cuban government will ultimately pass and eventually help the cuban people. like most americans, i remain deeply concerned about the long records of human rights abuses that have been caused at the hands of the cuban dictatorship.

while our current policy brings about change cuba as we update our policy or think we have to make sure we are doing it in a measured, comprehensive, and thoughtful way that aligns with the current reality. my hope is that the president efforts are met with honest engagement by the cuban government toward a more open free and tolerant society for the cuban people. i have three questions and i invite you to respond. the first is there has been a lot of talk about what the neighbors or allies in the region have identified a problem with it cuban u.s. policy so what is really the best way we can engage some of these partners in the region who now can point to a change in policy to use them in a way to help bring about liberties and democracy in cuba that we all want? what's the strategy for effectively engaging others in the region to be partners in this work now that the policy

has begun to change? the second is how can we as a congress best advance this issue of human rights which continues to be a very serious issue. how do we play a role in enforcing real progress in helping with the human rights issue? and finally to build on mr. sires question how do we ensure that this economic engagement that is intended here intended to support the cuban people does not instead fortified the government at a particularly critical time? how do we protect against unintended consequence when we think we are helping entrepreneurs in the private sector strengthened but at the same time are in fact, helping the government while others are beginning to retract some of their support. >> thank you. a couple of things.

on engaging our allies, there are a couple of thoughts i have about that. one is that all of the countries in the region as well as our european allies and others, many of them were hesitant if not outright refused to engage with many of the democracy activists for years. i am very optimistic not having seen concrete results already that they have lost that fear with our change in policy. i think that's usually important. the rhetoric outside the country is important in dialogue, but engaging with these activists and supporting them on the island i think is just as important. and i think others need to embrace them openly and talk and engage with them and hear from them. we are all saying that to them. the other thing is in terms of

congress, i hope as many as possible will have real congressional delegations that will go to the island and see in cuba civil society and that includes in the arts in the area as well as entrepreneurs , and hearing from the ones that i heard from how they are trying to keep those funds from going to the cuban government but how they believe they are making their own way independently even if some of those funds are going to the cuban government. i think the psychology of those entrepreneurs is breaking away from the states that is worth that price. the cuban government went through the period of decline in the soviet union where they dropped gdp by 30% and they survived. i think it's important to support those. >> thank you so much.

we turn to mr. salmon of arizona. >> thank you. ms. jacobsen, when specifically and i'm looking for a date did he find out about the white house cuban negotiations in the context of the president's announcement? >> what i can tell you representative salmon is that i was aware from throughout that the nsc and the white house was undertaking efforts to secure the release of allen gross because we were working on the gross case with the family. >> i under stand that but when did you find out specifically about the negotiations going on for this past year? what date did you find out about those? >> it was about six weeks or two months before the announcement that i knew more of the content. >> when did you find out about the announcement itself? >> when the actual date of the announcement was decided i knew about it.

>> you find out that she found out some upon if a -- found out simultaneously the announcement being made? >> no, no, no as that was being decided i knew about that. in other words they knew about the decision to announce the new policy about six weeks as it was being decided before and so the date of the announcement i knew about as that was being decided at the white house. >> ok. can you tell me what resources what u.s. resources were used to ensure that herardo hernandez could artificially inseminate his wife? what u.s. resources were used for that? >> what i can tell you on that is that we at the state

department from my perspective have always facilitated the visit of his wife to the prison in california when he was incarcerated. so those were the resources that we expended in terms of her visit. >> by transferring and i understand that he was able to artificially inseminate his wife and that was done, facilitated by the u.s. government. >> beyond our efforts to facilitate her visit, the rest was done by the department of justice and i would have to defer to the department of justice. >> i would like to know that. i think it's incredulous that a u.s. priority would be to make sure that he fathered a child while he was in incarceration. i will wait for the answer on that. last question, the secret negotiations went on for over a year and reportedly consisted of seven meetings, so when you went to havana last month the cubans made it clear they would not allow it diplomat to speak to

dissidents and normalization was not possible without the return of our naval base in guantanamo bay as well as other nonstarters that we talked about today. so what did we really accomplish other than a t-shirt that i had meetings for a year ago i got was this t-shirt. >> i guess i would start out by saying we got an intelligence asset out and we got allen gross home and you know that but beyond that the beginning of this process of normalization starts with diplomatic relations , which is only the first part. normalization will take years and we made it very clear that it includes things like property claims, which has to be part of this discussion, judgments against the cuban government , which has been adjudicated in u.s. court, which has to be part of it. that's a much longer process and we have not ceded to anything things. >> and i don't expect that we

will acquiesce to any of those -- >> it is the start of the process. >> i understand that but what was your response when they said we are not going to do anything on normalization? >> what they meant by normalization is the end of the year-long process not restoration of diplomatic relations which is the first , part. i'm presuming that they mean they won't have full normalization until all of those things are done, but they will have restoration of diplomatic relations. >> thank you. i yield back my time. >> thank you very much. mr. connolly of virginia's recognized. >> i thank the chair. ms. jacobsen, i believe in politics and diplomacy and a

very simple adage, "don't give it away for nothing." i'm very troubled by the abrupt change is precisely a moment where we actually have leverage. for 50 years, one could argue the castro brothers have loved policy because it's helped keep them in power. fair enough. but that was then and this is now and we need a change. they're hurting. the economy is hurting. their oil supplier is hurting and if they look out to the future, it's very difficult to see a viable cuban economy without major change including a change in their relationship with us. now i take your point about diplomatic exchange and i put that aside. but the liberalization of trade and tourism and indeed the person's call to begin the process of dismantling the embargo that has been in place

for half a century. i need to understand what we got in return. where's the reciprocity? why wouldn't the united states good offices and its leverage with respect human rights and press freedoms and with respect to religious freedoms with respect to political dissidents? we are not doing that. that's shocking and i think a disappointment to many that we wouldn't use the leverage we finally have to some good point. i wonder if you would address that because i think we have squandered leverage. >> first i want to start out by saying what liberalization there has been in regulations and my colleagues would certainly specify on all of this is very specific and i think mr. smith repeatedly noted that most

transactions still remain prohibited. >> if i may, fair enough but the promise of the president, he said explicitly we are going to start the process of dismantling the embargo. the cubans see promise not just here now, but a pathway towards the dismantlement of the policy in place for half a century. >> the cubans keep demanding this in part because it still there. and they know this is not a big liberalization yet. in addition, i think the most important thing that we have made clear to them is we are not letting up on human rights. if you want to be transactional with this with the cuban government the problem with that , is that they won't trade for anything. and we will end up still not

helping the cuban people. the goal of these policies is not to do something that relies on the cuban government agreeing to give us something for a human rights concession. we want to try and go directly to the cuban people. now it's true they may not like the telecommunications companies work or more internet access, but what has been news in oliver -- news all over cuba would be every cuban knows as we are starting relations and the bogeyman of the u.s. being their problem is no longer, it's no longer credible. >> again and my time is limited i appreciate that and i wouldn't deny there are lots of people who see lots of hope in what has now been started, but my question is more specific. what is the reciprocity?

what did we get out of this other than aspirations that things will get better with this change because they weren't getting better under the old regime? i can't think of a single thing but in terms of a policy shift a concession. i can't think of a single one. >> i believe that we also will get some things that matter in opening our embassy and hopefully the ability to travel throughout the country and support more people. we can't move outside of havana right now. >> that is what you hope to negotiate. >> that is necessary for opening an embassy. that part of it. i also think we will have all of these dialogs that they want to have for cooperation. that will be part of those

discussions as well. it is to come, i agree. your >> madam chairman, i know my time is up but i want to , underline i always make the mistake in foreign-policy to give it away for nothing. >> thank you mr. connolly and now we turn to mr. duncan they chairman -- >> trade in lifting sanctions is seen as a cure-all foreign-policy with regard to oppressive regimes like cuba. in light of the sanctions in venezuela the same week in cuba regimes? >> the sanctions imposed on venezuela this past week were in fact additional visa sanctions. >> in december, the same week the president started normalizing relations in cuba, he normalized regulations in cuba? >> passed by congress, that

includes asset freezes. >> are there going to be other surprises? when are we going to see north korea or any others? >> i cannot csi the region, but i do not see you outside of venezuela. nor any surprises in cuba will continue to result on that. >> you were surprised with the cuba toss and did not read into it until late into the discussions there lets move on. many of the people i speak with about this policy shift on cuba, some on congress talk about and .2 the freedom afforded to americans to travel to cuba. it is the same free of him -- freedom to travel the united states. in the policy shift, all american travelers really stay at hotels by the pew -- owned by

the cuban military. only home enterprises can accept credit cards. the cuban constitution requires all foreign commerce to be controlled by the state. how does increasing commerce with monopolies help the cuban people? >> let me start out by saying, we are looking at it very carefully since the 2013 decision by the cuban government to allow him -- allowed to travel. you are able to speak in front of his house who have never been able to before. it is by far not good enough ear there are still people who cannot travel and they should be able to. understand there will be some benefits to the cuban government. we really do believe again because of people we talked to who are entrepreneurs, because of activist, because of artist, because of the small actor deck

agricultural folks, they will benefit more than the government well if they are able to implement regulations and get them the equipment they need. >> they will benefit from transactions. how about other -- from the cuban people? economic freedom freedom of assembly and protest? i point to the testimony yesterday. i think chris missed -- chris smith talked about it. she says the government oppresses our right so we go out to state and religious activities on sundays and then are detained. the government constantly -- to gather again -- together. to rightfully protest against an oppressive government, it is still there. what did the u.s. barter in exchange for the u.s. policy

shift other than alan gross's relief that benefits the cuban people and ultimately gives them more freedom? that is what i want this to be about. i wanted to be about the cuban people. policy to normalize relations it ought to be about the cuban people and not the castro regime . the castro regime is the only one i have seen that benefits through this. i do not see where private property rights -- maybe. you mentioned that earlier. private property rights and the claims by american cubans, cuban-americans, and cuban people in general that own the property nationalized by the federal government. how will we address that? i think private property rights is so important and is so -- is left out of this discussion and we talked about this in the office the other day. i think that is critical. we talk about the freedoms for the american -- the cuban people in the remaining 20 seconds i have. >> thank you. i agree with you all of those things are what we are seeking

as an end. we agree that is the goal here. >> tell me how the policy gets us to the goal. >> number one by having a lot more people able to work with us on it from outside cuba than ever before. we were alone, we were not joined by anyone else. more effective with allies. number two we believe there were no concessions here. some of the things are things we are doing that deeply worried the cuban government because they may not be able to control them. we do not believe anything we did on december 17, as the president and secretary said were concessions to the government. >> my time is up. i yield back. >> thank you. we yield to mr. lowenthal of california. >> thank you. i would like to preface my remarks by saying i have been touched listening to both the experiences of those who have been most affected by the

repressive regime, and i join with the congressmen and congresswoman in saying i have been touched by the testimony of both congressmen who talk about their families and some of the impacts. having said that, i am very supportive of our re-engagement than the restoration of diplomatic relations. i say that not because i support many repressive issues that take lace, but as someone who represents one of the largest if not the largest vietnamese american communities in the united states. people who escaped also an entire -- intolerable situation, who i believe while certainly very against the existing regime in vietnam, have benefited by having, i think, a greater

ability to communicate some of their concerns there they had it by having the u.s. ambassador to vietnam come to a community not at all supportive of that government and really have dialogue and express concerns. i see that as a positive step emi questions are, as we go forward, will there be a movement to reach out to americans in the united states? that is my first question there it >> absolutely. we have begun to do that knowing the views in that community are diverse as well. seeing that activists within cuba, among the point they could agree on was what has to be taken into consideration. >> i really think that is very

important. i would also like to know what we see as we move forward. there's more trade and more tourism. how will we deal, what many of those first go back to cuba and speak out against their government in cuba, have we talked about some of those issues? wesley certainly considered that in terms of cubans coming to the knife and. when that policy was liberalized, there was enormous concern among activists that if they left and spoke freely, they would not be able to go home, or to a did, they would never be able to travel again. the fact that some of them have been able to travel repeatedly is a good sign and everybody is though fearful. >> as i am. actually raised that issue. >> does anyone else have issues or want to on as the policies begin to change, what you see as

the policy change. what do we need to look at as the policy has changed now? >> two points i would make are one, the treasure are doing a lot of outreach to all segments of the american public. to understand what the new changes are. secondly, we will be watching very carefully to see how they actually play out in practice because coming back to the 15% of the cuban population, the cuban economy, the private sector, we're really looking to strengthen and grow that. that is something we're looking at very carefully. >> i would echo those comments. i think the implementation is what we're going to be looking at over the next four months and

years actually to see what the effects are and what we need to do. >> as a member also, because of my own concerns and the communities i represent, i have been a very active member of the human rights commission. i have adopted prisoners of conscious in vietnam. actually put pressure on the vietnamese government to begin to release some of these prisoners. i would like to see some of the same as we go forward with a change policy in cuba. thank you and i yield back. >> thank you, mr. lowenthal. we go to mr. brooks of alabama. >> thank you, madam chairman. i believe that america's policy should be consistent throughout the globe as best that we can do so. by way of example, i would like to just make a quick comparison between cuba and saudi arabia, looking at some of the similarities between countries. some of the differences and also the ways in which each is treated by the united states government.

on trade, american-cuban trade is very limited, as we all know. less than $500 million per year in exports by america to cuba. but america-saudi trade is very robust. roughly $80 per year, perhaps higher. on travel, travel to cuba, very limited by the united states government. saudi arabia, quite the opposite. on embassies and diplomatic interaction. in saudi arabia, we have an embassy and very significant diplomatic interaction. in cuba, we have no embassy and little to know diplomatic interaction. i can go on and on, but i think it is fair to say that the united states treats cuba substantially different than saudi arabia. as i have listened to the witnesses and member comments concerning cuba and why cuba

must be treated differently, i can't help but emphasize some of the similarities and differences that have been pointed out. on the issue of freedom of religion, as bad as cuba may be, and we have heard some comments as to how bad it is, the question is saudi arabia worse? in saudi arabia, open worship by christians is a criminal offense as is missionary work. if a muslim dares question whether islam is a true religion, he is severely punished. a recent example facing 1,000 lashes and six-10 years in prison, assuming that the lashing does not kill him. on the issue of dictorial governments, one would be hard pressed to determine which

family government, that of cube i's or the saudis is more is -- cuba's or saudi arabia is more dictorial. terrorism. 15 of the 19911 terrorists were saudis. bear in mind that terrorism funding originates in saudi arabia. in fairness, moach of it opposed by the regime. nulls, a lot of the money for terrorism comes from saudi. one can have a lively debate concerning whch is a greater threat to world peace. given so many similarities and also some differences. with saudi arabia being treated so much better by the united states of america, what factors in your mind justify treating cuba so much worse than saudi arabia that supports the 50-year policy that the united states has had with respect to cuba? >> thank you. congressman, i think that our own view has been pretty clearly laid out by the president on the 17th and the secretary certainly

made a number of comments that we believe that cuba, not on its merits, necessarily in terms of ilingts behavior, but on -- -- its behavior, but on the policy argument and the change in that policy. it was announced in december. i can't necessarily make that comparison between saudi arabia and cuba but i will say that we believe very strongly that the values and the ideals of the united states need to be pursued aggressively all over the world and that they are best pursued and you could expect this from a diplomatic at the state department, via diplomatic relations and having embassies. we do them effectively when we have a presence. that's why we want to have that presence in cuba.

>> i'm running short of time. let me ask this final question. on one hand we can be open hoping that our relations with this country will cause them to accept freedoms that we cher niche america or we can be very restrictive as we have been with cuba, north korea and other countries and hope that the punishments are sufficient. what do you think is best for cuba? >> i think we're most effective when we have allies with us and we are alone via a vis cuba. i believe allies, not the cuban government will be affected. >> thank you for working so quickly to make sure this economy was able to work on this policy shift. let me first say in the immediate term, i have serious concerns about the castro's concerns about human rights abuses and i hope that we expect and demand more of them. coincideing with the administration's announcement one of the major newspapers published an article called plundering america. how networks have exploited u.s. policy toward cuba. they opened their doors to the queue cuban people so they could have a better life and the overwhelming majority of those who have come here have made incredible contributions to this country. the great examples we have here on this panel. my league colleagues and friends. policies that were put in place to ensure those sought renew jersey u.s. would still be able

to see their families or send remitances are taken advantage of by a small minority for criminal gain. it has turned our humanitarian policy into an underground criminal enterprise using their ability to and from cuba for fraudulent activities. sending cash back to the island. they have turned our open door policy into a revolving door enabling and i quote crooks from the island to rob american businesses and taxpayers by $2 billion over two decades. as the administration rebalances, i hope we're not ignoring the years of criminal activity that the castros have turned a blind eye to at best. we need to know to what extent the people connected to the regime have been or will continue to be involved in these illegal crime rings. i would like to know if your initial round of talks with the cubans included any zugs of -- discussion of fugitives from cuba? >> thank you. it did include the question of fugitives. it did not include extradition. we have an old extradition treaty. i have no idea whether we'll get back to actually using it but it questioned fugitive issues. >> can you elaborate a bit on the extradition you referred to, the situation that we have now but in the talks. >> let me -- how did the talks focus?

>> i just want to be clear. the morning of the talks that i had were on the diplomatic restoration. the afternoon were on a whole series of subjects on which we are going to have experts who are not me, have much more substantive conversations about what we want, right? that is one of the subjects. >> and when -- what will be the context of those discussions and when will they take place? >> right. we're going to try to set those up as quickly as possible. part of that conversation began in the migration talks because we take with us our lawyers and the department of justice and we talk about fugitives in the context of the migration talks. so we have actually begun that one. we'll ve a separate conversation on law enforcement and fugitives and basically as we can set these up in the time schedule, the cubans are a little bit overwhelmed by our new wanting to have dialogues on lots of different subjects. they have accepted the idea of having that and will get them set up as soon as we can our

justice department colleagues. >> thank you, mr. smith. i have no idea whether we'll get back to actually using it but it questioned fugitive issues. >> can you elaborate a bit on the extradition you referred to, the situation that we have now but in the talks. >> let me -- how did the talks focus? >> i just want to be clear. the morning of the talks that i had were on the diplomatic restoration. the afternoon were on a whole series of subjects on which we

are going to have experts who are not me, have much more substantive conversations about what we want, right? that is one of the subjects. >> and when -- what will be the context of those discussions and when will they take place? >> right. we're going to try to set those up as quickly as possible. part of that conversation began in the migration talks because we take with us our lawyers and the department of justice and we talk about fugitives in the context of the migration talks. so we have actually begun that one. we'll ve a separate conversation on law enforcement and fugitives and basically as we can set these up in the time schedule, the cubans are a little bit overwhelmed by our new wanting to have dialogues on lots of different subjects. they have accepted the idea of having that and will get them set up as soon as we can our

justice department colleagues. >> thank you, mr. smith. understanding that much of this falls under law enforcement agency's purview, has your agency looked at where the money is coming from interest these cuban criminal networks? where that money goes or the role of the cuban government of response oring or training these individuals or what is being done to impede their activities? >> that works on a variety of issues with respect to sanctions. with respect to particular issues with regard to money flow or anything that might impact the u.s. law or sanctions, i couldn't talk about anything that we would actually be looking at. >> can you speak to the specific situation that was described at great length in these newspaper reports? >> i think most of what you

described at great length from the newspaper reports and the details from the newspaper reports, i would refer to the department of justice. i think it would have the primary equities there and the primary statutes that would be vovet. what we would do is enforce the sanctions laws and very little to impact our regulations that we would enforce. >> thank you. gentleman's time has expired. mr.s do santos from florida. >> thank you. later in your answers you conceded that tin creased economic activity will have some

benefit to the cuban government. that is a concession, is it not? >> it is a benefit they may receive. >> especially given their two main patrons, venezuela and russia, they are reeling with a change in world oil prices and i think the castro government very much wants any type of patronage they can get. i think as mr. sires pointed out, money that goes into that country is going to be controlled by the government. and if you are going to argue differently, why is it that really we're the only country that has had these restrictions. you had open relations with switzerland, australia. how come with all of those ties the cuban people have not benefited? you said in your testimony and response to mr. poe that the

cuban people are not better off after 50 years of our policy. if all the other countries in the world are so good, why haven't the cuban people benefited from those policies? >> i think part of problem in term of the actual economic policy in cuba is that they have not modernized their system, opened their system, made a foreign investment law that adequately attracts investment to have those other countries be part of it. >> they said they are not going to change. he said they are not changing. he said this is a victory for the cuban revolution and we're not going to change. i don't see where you get that the people of cuba are somehow going to benefit more than the regime. i think the regime will benefit from this, but until there is a change i think the benefits are going to be bottled up at the top. >> remitances also go directly to cuban people. we have raised the remitance amount. one of the reasons they have not rushed to us to implement the telecommunications proinvitations, the internet provisionings, they know full well that they probably won't be

able to control it and that the benefits may well reach the cuban people. they are probably not likely to do this. let me ask you this. when you took your trip, were you given access to any of the place where is political prisoners were being held? >> i was not. >> ok. is therity -- is there any discussion, they were -- when castro took power, including cuban citizens who were exiled? >> properties have to be part of normalizeation. >> what was their response? >> they agreed that that has to be part of conversation and responded that they had issues they wanted to raise with us

about losses under the embargo. >> one of the issues is get moe. -- gitmo can you say that january 20 degrees, that it will still be under u.s. control? the naval base? >> i am certain that guantanamo bay will still be a u.s. base but i can't tell you a hypothetical about what may be part of these normalizeation talks but it is not only the table for us right now. i don't envision that. i'm not a high enough ranking person to know and i'm not from the department of defense, etc.,

to know whether it could be in the future and -- but -- >> i'm just talking about over the next two years that this administration is in power. >> i can't vision that. >> cuba is a state sponsor of terrorism. the federal statutes in order to be removed from that list are certain criteria. one of them is that the government has to provide insurances that they will not support international terrorism. has the cuban government provided those insurances stand so, are they credible? >> cuba has rejected international terrorism and we're in the process now as we review this of also looking at their statements and evaluating

whether they have or whether they will give such a -- >> i'm concerned. if they say they are not going to change and they have been a state sponsor of terrorism to, me that is a declaration to the contrary. my final question is does the administration believe that the president has the authority to lift the embargo? >> clearly not or he wouldn't have welcomed or encouraged the debate in congress. >> we have been down this road before. he said he could continue the things a number of times and then turns around and does nefment i thinks it is important

to get this on the record. the statute is very clear about what would have to happen in order to have a waiver on these restrictions. there is no evidence any of that criteria has been met. is that accurate? >> i'm sorry. a waiver of what kind of restrictions? >> that can be waved requires there are certain provision s that arelisted that must occur in order for the president to act. >> to act to lift the embargo, the president was clear in the state of the union that he wants that to be debated in congress. >> gentleman's time has expired. mr. castro of texas. >> thank you, chairwoman. like many of my colleagues, i have been muferede by the testimony and my colleague, a cuban american and many cuban americans, particularly the more senior generation lost their

family members and property and lost their livelihoods in their country and more many years, i think much of our foreign policy towards cuba was in great donchese that fact. when you -- deference to that fact. when you hear the story, that is understandable. i think with the president's change in normalizeation and diplomatic relations towards cuba that the power of american culture and the power of technology and our democracy will ultimately win out. i think in many ways, this was the start of a new revolution in cuba. as the castro brothers are in the winter of their reign, i see this as positioning the united states for when they are gone. let me ask you how does it position our country once these folks are no longer in power?

>> thank you, congressman. i think, you know, this really is the question, one of the things a is critical is the next generation of activists, of leaders, we want to keep base with them. i thought one of the most important things in this policy is how we work with the current human rights activists and democracy leaders, the new entrepreneurs and artists and expand civil society. how do we encourage them, when brugera wanted to have performance art in revolutionry square and asked cubans to speak openly, 300 artists wrote in support of her effort. many had never made a political statement before. so it is the idea of expanding people's engagement in civil society. which is novel and is important in preparing for what comes next in cuba. >> sure. and i know in places like china, for example, they can't access social media sites but they have access to the internet. many cuba have no access, even to the internet. is that right? >> absolutely. >> also, i don't know, i got here a little bit late. like many of my colleagues here, i have two committee meetings at the same time. let me ask you what become turnovers wet foot, dry foot

policy? >> at this time we have no intent to change that law. the law is obviously on the books. that would have to be changed by congress. we have no plans to request such a change. >> ok. thank you. i yield back. >> thank you. >> thank you, madam chair. thank you, panel. it is interesting, i hear often in the past few weeks that if something hasn't been working for 50 years, you should look at changing it. but nobody seems to go directly to the issue, except some of the comments that i have heard today about how nothing has changed within the country. and i'm interested in a couple of things because much of it has been covered already. the president broke with policy by appointing a couple of white house aides to construct the secret negotiations. i'm interested and i think it is probably ms. jacobson because you seem to have at some point been brought in and made aware of what was going on. what happened that caused that moment in time where the

president decided to appoint these two to negotiate secretly with the cubans and why? why did he break from policy? >> i can't -- i can't answer that question on behalf of the president. what i can tell you is that one of the two people engaged in those discussions is a foreign service officer online to the white house. a foreign service officer who is one of our foremost experts on cuba having served there and on the cuba issue at the state department. >> but you don't know what suddenly sparked now is the time that this has to happen? >> i think there has long been a concern within the administration that the policy was not effective in empowering the cuban people. >> let me ask you this, then ms. jacobson. many of the questions are -- i heard from representative connelly and others. what did we get? if i understand your testimony today, these secret negotiations included, for instance discussions about the brute alliesation of families. how you're going to compensate

these families for their personal loss during the castro takeover and since. there has been a promise that that will be part of the negotiations before actual -- there will be a proposal to dismantle the embargo. >> what has to be part of full normalizeation of relations, that is making the relationship with cuba look like every other normal one, and that is the full range of things. not just diplomatic relations, is a process and a resolution of this long standing issue of

claims, which the foreign claims settlement commission has. >> i just wanted on the record so i understand because you separated between diplomacy and complete normalizeation, which would be lifting the embargo and things that president says he cannot do as an executive. only congress. when we talk about the diplomacy, opening an embassy and hopefully getting to travel across the island, which right now as not been assured. that is diplomacy. these few things that the administration can do without congressional approval. the next step, my understanding from your testimony today is there has been a promise that there will be as part of any agreement moving forward, any final agreement, an understanding as to how these families will be compensated not only for their personal loss but for their property losses. is that correct? >> there will be a process with the cuban government to come to resolution of those issues. >> so you may not require that they be reimbursed or compensated for loss? >> i think in all of these kind s of cases and i'll ask my colleagues if they have any comment but it may be the department of justice that would be a better place to answer this. in all of these kinds of things it has to be agreed mutually between the two countries. >> i understand.

but you led us to believe or led me to believe that when these discussions were taking place these are issues that were being raised and discussed. there are things that are going to be required if the congress is ultimately going to approve full normalizeation? >> right. and that means the sats factory resolution, which means that we have to be satisfied but the cuban government will have to be satisfied too for an agreement. >> and that would include this harboring or murderers and thieves and criminals by the castro regime? >> the question of fugitives. if you mean the question of fugitives? >> i added it to it. you put all of these together today. my time is running out. you made it sound as though these are going to be necessary requirements to a final agreement if it is actually going to be fully normalize. i believe my time is expired. >> thank you so much. mr. clawson of florida. >> thank you for coming today. i would like to ask a question or two about this deal's impact

on religious freedom. in cuba. i represent south florida, southwest florida. and of the 49% of the jewish folks left after the revolution, some of them came to my district so this is a question i'm sure that is on a lot of their minds of those that remain that are family members. but there is also other religious folks that have been persecuted in cuba. christians. we don't talk a lot about mormons much but there are two mormon branches i understand in cuba and other religious minorities as well. i'm wondering about the impact of this deal on tolerance for religion in general and will missionaries and other folks from different sects be allowed to go now and help their brothers and sisters on the island?

>> i think it is really important, congressman, the regulations, i could let my colleagues -- this really ebs panneds the ability to have religious groups to go because what we have done is make the religious missions part of it. the religious opportunities, general license. and so we're hoping that there are a lot more religious group s that areable -- are able to go and be counterparts in cuba and have that interaction. in term turnovers tolerance for religious freedom in cuba, i certainly hope there will be an impact certainly by having their brethren come and work with them and support them. i visit the jewish community every time i go to cuba and i visited this time with the commutch and there was recently -- church, and there was recently the announcement of a new church to be built. a new catholic church to be

built in cuba. it is a very important part of what we're hoping to stimulate as part of civil society. >> i could just add to that, in the past, many americans had to come and seek what is called a specific license to go to cuba

and engage in religious activities. one of the changes we made was to authorize that in our regulations, which means that people may now go to cuba for religious activities for religious purposes without coming to this government agency to seek approval first. >> there is two pieces on our side. one is that for those trips that are generally authorized for religious purposes, the things that the travelers want to bring with them also can be done under general authorization rather than coming and waiting for a speffings authorization from us and another piece of our licensing allows materials to be exported for private sector use, including building of churches for example. without a general license. >> i hope that we will have measurables here. i'm always worried about bait and switch. and using some other aspect of the law to really get around things that are uncomfortable and i personally just think it is hard to have a meaningful life for a lot of folks if they don't have a meaningful religious experience. i'm hoping that the administration will follow up here to where we actually see meaningful opening, meaningful religious awakening on the island for so many who want it. >> thank you, sir. >> i have no more to say. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. clawson. mr. weber of texas. >> thank you, madam chair. i apologize. are you going to be ok while i question her? >> yes, sir. >> ok. thank you very much.

ms. jacobson, let me start off by saying i really appreciate your professionalism and demeanor and your attitude. you have done a good job and i appreciate that. are the state and treasury regulations now fully in compliance with congress when it passed the trade sanctions reform and export enforcement act of 2000? >> yes, sir. we believe they are. >> you believe that they are. going forward, and i understand you said the president wants -- he does want the day that is happening in congress. i appreciate the remarks from my colleague from texas about moving past the regime. i have rice farmers in texas in my district and other producers as well in five ports. they are very interested in the trade part of this. will the trade of ag products be able to be conducted without a lot of input and interfreerns the administration? >> i think that is a great question and we know there is a lot of interest in that. i actually may defer to my colleagues on some of this. >> they will feel good about that. >> they will. it will give me a chance to have a little bit of water. >> yes, mr. smith? >> we made changes in the current set of regulations that changed the financing terms in terms of what ag had requested. it should be easier. >> without a lot of red tape. >> without coming for any retirements. >> good. any input? >> one thing that we were not able to address in our changes were the requirement that there be a license in a 12 day process. clicks ok. then changing the cash in hand, what other change in opec anybody? >> other than -- >> please products of the

together. >> what helps with that in the rate right now, and american exporter has to get payments from human exporter and it has to go to a cuban country in the united states. your thinking exporters more competitive. >> ok. the travel of general license is now for people who want to invest in business opportunities . >> in many of the bases, and others have to come in to seek a specific license to travel down there. now they do not have a for a variety and they would use associated with trade, marketing, or in the delivery. the whole of that without an

interest sleeve that license. that is an improvement. comeback you the wet foot policy. you -- >> who arrived on u.s. soil are permitted to adjust here for -- printed by the coast guard. -- predicted by the coast guard. >> that is my question and i thank you all for the testimony. >> thank you. we will go through a second round of questions. you want to ask another question. the foreign claims commission has found to thousand u.s. claims judged to be qualified for compensation. the adjudicated value of the

claims by adding 6% simple interest makes the total principal value of american claims to $8 billion today. i don't think the state department will enforce i investigating, confiscating u.s. property, nor enable u.s. route 30. to secure conference agent. for unauthorized use of the subject very do you think you will or will not question mark i worry the administration would implement shared we tried to help cuba get membership into the world they, the ims, of the -- other multilateral development next. will we prevent any assist us, any financing, or any it from these institutions until you as a party claims have been

resolved to the satisfaction of american owners? lastly, if you could tell us what are the three conditions according to u.s. law for the embargo to be lifted? i know the president is going to present us legislation to free up the embargo. what of those three conditions have it met that would satisfy or justify the embargo date listed? what we're going to do if we're going to help cuba dated to the organization, and then the three conditions. >> let me start off by saying, i have an kindness and of the importance of the resolution of the claims issues and judgments from the very beginning of this process. it is very important those get resolved.

the state department and other agencies, the justice of, settlement commission acted to adjudicate and is i'm value to those claims. we believe strongly that has to be a part of future conversations over the next years. those are extremely difficult to have with any foreign government have those commission dealings have proven. we are to pursue that as part of our discussion. i raised that in our first conversation, knowing we would not talk about it that they deep we, but it must be a part of full normalization. on the financial situation there is a civic language in the law about this. we feel we are not in a position right now where cuba is eligible

for membership certainly >> when you say right now, do you foresee? will the in that direction? >> i think we all hope for the day when there would be logical membership because it would be a free and open cuba with an open economic system and illogical member. but i do not know exactly what point. we also hope that some point in the future, they may ask for help opening the system cannot right now. but just as we said, we were not going to slot, and we did. will we be advocating for cuba's inclusion in the international organizations that would allow us to give it credit? >> lee are not advocating for their membership, but we also want to make sure that at some point in time, it may be useful

to have organizations like the imf not give them help, but help them open their economy. >> these institutions are keeping them from opening the economy. >> no, no, no. >> let's go to the three conditions paired what are the three conditions that would allow the lifting of the embargo ? >> i do not have them in front of me hear it >> the three conditions in the legislation? >> i hope when you are negotiating with the regime keep in mind u.s. law. the act of 1996. the president is calling for the lifting of the embargo. these go and check that out.

>> it is even more important. it seems to bypass a normal conversation with all stakeholders with respect to cuba. family members and others, they got surprised, as you did with the stakeholders who worked on the from line. i think when we bypass stakeholders, we make decisions that are narrow in their bandwidth. this decision does not feel fair because the lack of process we went through to get here surprising people that have stakes in a game of cuba.

maybe you see that different, but i do not know how that is not the case. thank you for hanging in there. i think your job just got tougher and that easier and i want to express my appreciation for you, to do my -- in times more different in leadership and along those lines, i want to say thank you for hanging in there today. it is not easy. you get it from both sides, in our case. you seem to have done with humor and hung in there and kept your sense of humor here. i expressed my appreciation for you making time for us. thank you. >> i yield back.

i request unanimous consent to submit for the record the letter from south florida state from officials to president obama over the december 17 announcement, an agreement for democracy in cuba, a 10 point road map from the people of cuba toward a real transition to democracy. that's from the former staff director of the committee, and questions from a congressman. with that, our committee is adjourned. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> q and a, david brooks, columnist for the new york times on writing an old for the times and the award he gives out at the end of the year, the sidney awards. >> they can be in journals and new yorkers and the atlantic and

magazines. the idea is they always come out during the week that is a good week to step back and not read into stuff and tweets and newspaper articles, but to step back and read something deeper and longer. it is to celebrate those. and the republic, until its recent destruction, the most influential american clinical magazine of the country, it really created -- a voice for modern liberalism. it gave it a voice. >> tonight, on c-span's q&a. >> the week ahead in congress, the houses back on tuesday at noon eastern for morning species, 2:00 p.m. -- morning speeches. 2:00 pm for legislative work. a measure