Of course, American lawmakers have the right to defend the freedom of movement for their citizens, and American farmers understandably want to sell agricultural products to whomever they wish. But the assertion by lawmakers that they want to lift the obstacles to travel and trade for the good of average Cubans rings false.
"Unilateral sanctions stop not just the flow of goods, but the flow of ideas," said Senator Michael Enzi of Wyoming, a sponsor of the bill. "Ideas of freedom and democracy are the keys to positive change in any nation." The problem is that when it comes to Cuba, the flow of ideas, not to mention people, is hardly free. Sharing ideas can land you in jail, and one has to ask the government for a permit to travel abroad - and if you are a dissident, the chances of getting one are almost zero. My husband, Osvaldo Alfonso Valdes, has always been denied travel because he has headed the Democratic Liberal Party of Cuba.
In addition, freedom to trade with the United States is a privilege reserved for those who belong to the Communist Party nomenklatura. Merely selling newspapers in the streets or refilling cigarette lighters without a permit can get you arrested and fined.
My husband's party's platform calls for freedom of movement and free markets. For the next 18 years, however, my husband's movement will be reduced to the two square yards of his cell in the high-security prison at Guanajay. He was one of the first of the 75 dissidents detained in March, just weeks after he had met with Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota and his family in Havana to talk about the Liberal Party and about the chances of freedom and democracy in Cuba. The next day my husband met with staff aides to six other senators, including Mr. Enzi. Two other Cubans at these meetings were also condemned: Oscar Espinosa Chepe, an economist, to 20 years and Hector Palacios, founder of the Democratic Solidarity Party, to 25 years.
Senator Conrad is not the only American politician to have shown an interest in Cuba. In April, Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa came to promote agricultural products from his state. Senator Max Baucus came in September with farm leaders from Montana; Senator Evan Bayh came last month to sign food accords advancing the agricultural interests of Indiana.
Of course, all these senators voted in favor of easing the travel restrictions. Could they not see the irony in that meeting with Senator Conrad and with the Senate staffers were central accusations against many dissidents, because talking to American officials can be considered an "act against the security and the territorial integrity of the state"?***
Leaders of a House-Senate conference committee removed the provision on Wednesday before the bill reached the president, who had threatened to veto any legislation that lifted sanctions against Cuba, the officials said.
"You're not going to put a bill on the floor that potentially embarrasses the president," said a senior Republican staff member. Referring to the Cuba provision's bipartisan supporters, he added, "I'm sure there will be some gnashing of teeth."
The provision, which would bar Treasury Department authorities from enforcing a ban on travel to the island, was approved by the House in September 227 to 188, and by the Senate last month 59 to 38. Last week, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted 13 to 5 to scrap the ban outright.
Since the language of the Cuban travel provision approved by the House and Senate was identical, it would not ordinarily have been subject to action by the conference committee, which sought to reconcile differences in bills that finance the Treasury and Transportation departments, advocates say. But Republican committee leaders, including Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska and Representative C. W. Bill Young of Florida, were determined to remove the Cuba measure, aides said.
The legislation might have drawn Mr. Bush's first veto, and risked derailing important appropriations for highway construction, Amtrak, election reform and other programs.
Some Congressional officials said they were appalled that the will of Congress could be thwarted in the back-room negotiations that drive conference committees. Republican leaders have removed Cuba-related language at the same juncture in previous years, though never against such an overwhelming mandate from their colleagues.
"The fact that it could be undermined is mind-blowing, and more reminiscent of the Politburo than Congress," said Steven C. Schwadron, the chief of staff of Representative Bill Delahunt, a Massachusetts Democrat, who has been a driving force behind lifting the travel ban. "It suggests that a handful of people can vaporize the will of the majority." ***