[House Report 114-496]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
114th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { 114-496
======================================================================
UNITED STATES NAVAL STATION GUANTANAMO BAY PRESERVATION ACT
_______
April 15, 2016.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Royce, from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 4678]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Foreign Affairs, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 4678) to prohibit modification, abrogation,
abandonment, or other related actions with respect to United
States jurisdiction and control over United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, without congressional action,
having considered the same, reports favorably thereon without
amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Background and Purpose........................................... 2
Hearings......................................................... 7
Committee Consideration.......................................... 7
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 7
New Budget Authority, Tax Expenditures, and Federal Mandates..... 8
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................ 8
Directed Rule Making............................................. 9
Non-Duplication of Federal Programs.............................. 9
Performance Goals and Objectives................................. 9
Congressional Accountability Act................................. 9
New Advisory Committees.......................................... 9
Earmark Identification........................................... 9
Presidential Signature Page of the 1903 Lease to the United
States by the Government of Cuba............................... 10
Dissenting Views................................................. 11
Background and Purpose
For over a century, the United States Naval Station at
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, has been a critical asset for the defense
of the United States and our promotion of stability and
humanitarian welfare in the Western Hemisphere. The legal
history of the base has its origins in acts of Congress. United
States jurisdiction and control over the base is derived not
from a treaty, but from 1903 lease agreements with Cuba that
were both authorized and required by Congress, a fact that was
expressly recognized by the President who signed them.
For decades, the repressive Castro regime has publicly
demanded that the United States return the Guantanamo base to
Cuba, a demand most recently reiterated by President Raul
Castro during a March 21, 2016, press conference with President
Obama in Havana. During that meeting, President Castro again
demanded the return of Guantanamo as a ``necessary''
prerequisite to the normalization of relations with the United
States.
Although U.S. officials have stated that the United States
``has no plans'' to alter any of the arrangements regarding the
base, that is not the same thing as categorically pledging that
the United States will not do so. The Obama administration has
previously made dramatic shifts in U.S. policy toward Cuba
without prior consultation with Congress. For example, when
then-Deputy National Security Advisor Tony Blinken was asked in
November 2014 whether any policy changes toward Cuba were under
consideration, he assured Congress that ``anything that in the
future might be done on Cuba would be done in full
consultation'' with Congress, ``with the real meaning of the
word consultation.''\1\ Yet less than a month later, without
any such consultation, the administration announced the
reestablishment of U.S. diplomatic relations with Cuba and the
release of convicted Cuban spies, which apparently had resulted
from more than a year of secret administration negotiations
with the Castro regime.
H.R. 4678 does not categorically prohibit the return of the
Guantanamo base or the renegotiation of the lease, but makes
clear that Congress must affirmatively authorize any action
that would affect or impair the jurisdiction or control that
the United States has exercised over the Naval Station for more
than 112 years.
U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay Remains Indispensable
Senior United States military leaders have consistently
voiced strong support for maintaining U.S. Naval Station
Guantanamo Bay, calling it ``indispensable'' and ``essential,''
and noting its strategic value for military basing and
logistics, disaster relief, humanitarian work, terrorist
detention, and counter-narcotics purposes.
On February 29, 2016, Secretary of Defense Ashton B.
Carter, discussing the base, stated that ``it's a strategic
location, we've had it for a long time, it's important to us,
and we intend to hold on to it.''
On March 12, 2015, Commander of United States Southern
Command, General John Kelly, testified that the United States
facilities at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay ``are indispensable
to the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, and State's
operational and contingency plans.'' General Kelly noted that,
``As the only permanent U.S. military base in Latin America and
the Caribbean, its location provides persistent U.S. presence
and immediate access to the region, as well as supporting a
layered defense to secure the air and maritime approaches to
the United States.''
In testimony before Congress in 2012, then-Commander of
United States Southern Command, General Douglas Fraser, stated
that ``the strategic capability provided by U.S. Naval Station
Guantanamo Bay remains essential for executing national
priorities throughout the Caribbean, Latin America, and South
America.''
The utility of the base is not merely military, but also
humanitarian. Following a 1991 coup in Haiti that prompted a
mass exodus of people by boat, U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo
Bay provided a location for temporary housing and the orderly
adjudication of asylum claims outside of the continental United
States. In 2010, the base was a critical hub for the provision
of humanitarian disaster relief following the devastating
earthquakes in Haiti.
U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay is Rooted in Acts of Congress
The complex legal history of U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo
Bay is uniquely rooted in acts of Congress in the period
leading up to and following the 1898 Spanish-American War,
which freed Cuba from colonial domination by Spain. In
assessing that history, it is useful to recall the express
constitutional powers of Congress:
Lto provide for the common defense (Art. I,
Sec. 8, cl. 1);
Lto provide and maintain a Navy (Art. I,
Sec. 8, cl. 13);
Lto declare war (Art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 11); and
Lto make all necessary rules and regulations
regarding U.S. territory or other property (Art. IV,
Sec. 3, cl. 2).
In 1895, Cuban forces led by Jose Marti resumed the fight
for Cuban independence from Spain. The proximity of the violent
conflict to the United States, the brutality of Spanish
authorities toward the people of Cuba, and the distaste for
European colonial involvement in the Western Hemisphere
increased American sympathies for the Cuban cause. After the
U.S. battleship Maine mysteriously exploded and sank in Havana
harbor in February 1898, killing more than 260 U.S. sailors, a
reluctant President McKinley was pushed to demand independence
for Cuba.
By joint resolution approved on April 20, 1898, Congress
recognized the independence of the people of Cuba and
``directed and empowered'' the President ``to use the entire
land and naval forces of the United States'' to ensure that the
Government of Spain ``relinquish its authority and government
in the island of Cuba, and withdraw its land and naval forces
from Cuba and Cuban waters.'' A successful amendment offered by
Senator Henry Teller of Colorado to that joint resolution
(commonly known as the ``Teller Amendment'') disavowed any
intention by the United States to exercise long-term
sovereignty over Cuba, and expressed the determination that,
after the island was pacified, the government of Cuba would be
returned to its people.
The Government of Spain rejected the U.S. call for Cuban
independence, President McKinley instituted a naval blockade of
Havana, and Spain severed diplomatic relations with the United
States.
On April 25, 1898, Congress declared war against Spain.
After a decisive American victory in the months that followed,
the United States and Spain signed the Treaty of Paris on
December 10, 1898, which (upon ratification the following
April) ended Spain's colonial empire in the Western Hemisphere.
In that Treaty, Spain relinquished all claims of sovereignty
over Cuba, and United States governance of Cuba was
established.\2\
Nearly three years later, in an Act approved on March 2,
1901, Congress acted ``in fulfillment of'' the Teller Amendment
by granting the President the authority to return ``the
government and control of the island of Cuba to its people''
subject to eight express preconditions, in a statutory text
that was commonly known as the ``Platt Amendment.''\3\ Those
preconditions included securing a commitment from Cuba to sell
or lease to the United States lands necessary for naval
stations ``to enable the United States to maintain the
independence of Cuba, and to protect the people thereof, as
well as for its own defense.''\4\ That 1901 Act of Congress was
specifically cited, and its preconditions (including the naval
station leasing requirement) were incorporated verbatim, in
both the 1901 Constitution of the Republic of Cuba and the
Treaty of Relations between the United States of America and
the Republic of Cuba signed at Havana on May 22, 1903.
According to the ``views of the Executive Department of our
Government'' at the time, the Acts of Congress incorporating
the Teller and Platt Amendments provided authority to the
President that he did not otherwise possess, and also
established ``limitations upon the power of the Executive'' in
exercising that authority.\5\ The Teller Amendment ensured that
United States could not annex Cuba, as it did Guam, Puerto Rico
and the Philippines at the conclusion of the war that Congress
had declared.\6\ The Platt Amendment established prerequisites
(including securing a commitment from Cuba to sell or lease
lands for a U.S. naval station) ``which Congress has made a
condition precedent to the President's leaving the government
and control of the island of Cuba to its people.''\7\
The essential role of Congress is manifest in the case of
the Platt Amendment, where the executive branch recognized
Congressional action as necessary, even though the draft text
of the amendment had been written by Secretary of War Elihu
Root, was approved by the President and his cabinet, and was
personally handed by President McKinley to Senator Platt, who
then offered the amendment at the request of the
administration, with minor changes.\8\ Not only was action by
Congress necessary but, once taken, it was binding upon the
executive branch, to the extent that the President disclaimed
the ability to end U.S. military governance of the island until
those conditions had been satisfied. In a message approved by
President McKinley, Secretary Root made this clear to the Cuban
Constitutional Convention:
``[L]et me recall the relation which the President
bears to the so-called Platt Amendment. That statute
having been enacted by the law-making power of the
United States, the President is bound to execute it,
and to execute it as it is. He cannot change or modify,
add to or subtract from it. The executive action called
for by the statute is the withdrawal of the army from
Cuba, and the statute authorizes that action when, and
only when, a government shall have been established
under a Constitution which contains, either in the body
thereof or in an ordinance annexed thereto, certain
definite provisions specified in the statute.''\9\
Pursuant to article VII of the Platt Amendment, the United
States and Cuba negotiated and concluded lease agreements in
1903, which specified the area and the terms of United States
jurisdiction and control over what became United States Naval
Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.\10\
When approving the Guantanamo naval station lease on
October 2, 1903, President Theodore Roosevelt\11\ cited the
1901 Act of Congress as providing his authority to do so:
``I, Theodore Roosevelt, President of the United
States of America, having seen and considered the
foregoing lease, do hereby approve the same, by virtue
of the authority conferred by the seventh of the
provisions defining the relations which are to exist
between the United States and Cuba, contained in the
Act of Congress approved March 2, 1901, entitled `An
Act making appropriation for the support of the Army
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1902.'''\12\
Today, the United States continues to exercise jurisdiction
and control over Naval Station Guantanamo Bay pursuant to those
1903 lease agreements with Cuba. While the 1934 Treaty of
Relations between the United States and Cuba (ratified with the
consent of the Senate) did away with other, controversial
aspects of the Platt Amendment as part of President Franklin
Roosevelt's ``Good Neighbor Policy'' toward the Western
Hemisphere (see note 3), it deliberately did not supersede,
abrogate, or modify the Guantanamo lease agreements, which Cuba
and the United states chose to leave intact. Article III of
that Treaty expressly notes that the stipulations of those 1903
bilateral agreements ``shall continue in effect'' until the
United States and Cuba agree to modify them.\13\
In sum, the Act of Congress approved on March 2, 1901
required the acquisition of U.S. naval basing rights as an
express condition of the authority that Congress gave the
President to return governance of Cuba to the people of Cuba in
the years following the Spanish-American War. The President
made use of that authority, and completed his obligation to
fulfill that condition by negotiating and executing the 1903
lease agreements, pursuant to which the United States continues
to exercise jurisdiction and control over U.S. Naval Station
Guantanamo Bay.
Any action by a subsequent President to impair that
jurisdiction and control--such as by returning or abandoning
the Guantanamo base--without express congressional
authorization would nullify the U.S. naval station requirement
of the Act of Congress approved on March 2, 1901, an
institutional injury for which no legislative remedy exists.
For this reason, H.R. 4678 clearly states that:
``No action may be taken to modify, abrogate, or
replace the stipulations, agreements, and commitments
contained in the Guantanamo Lease Agreements, or to
impair or abandon the jurisdiction and control of the
United States over United States Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, unless specifically authorized or
otherwise provided by----
(1) a statute that is enacted on or after the
date of the enactment of this Act;
(2) a treaty that is ratified with the advice
and consent of the Senate on or after the date
of the enactment of this Act; or
(3) a modification of the Treaty Between the
United States of America and Cuba signed at
Washington, DC, on May 29, 1934, that is
ratified with the advice and consent of the
Senate on or after the date of the enactment of
this Act.''
___
NOTES
\1\Nomination of Mr. Antony Blinken of New York, to be Deputy Secretary
of State: Hearing before the Committee on Foreign Relations, United
State Senate. 113th Cong. (November 19, 2014).
\2\As a consequence of the Joint Resolution of April 20, 1898, which
incorporated the Teller Amendment, Cuba was treated differently than
the other colonies relinquished by Spain. In contrast, the United
States asserted unqualified sovereignty over the Philippines, Puerto
Rico, and Guam at the conclusion of the War.
\3\The provisos governing the return of sovereignty to Cuba were added
by an amendment offered by Senator Orville Platt of Connecticut that
was incorporated in the Act of March 2, 1901, ``An Act Making
appropriation for the support of the Army for the fiscal year ending
June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and two'' (Chapter 803; 31 Stat. 898).
Certain aspects of the Platt Amendment--such as the limitations on
Cuba's ability to conclude treaties with foreign powers, and Cuba's
prospective consent to future intervention by the United States to
preserve Cuban independence--were controversial among those who viewed
them as undue constraints on Cuban sovereignty. Eventually, those
provisions were abrogated by the 1934 Treaty of Relations between the
United States and Cuba, as ratified with the consent of the U.S.
Senate, as part of President Franklin Roosevelt's ``Good Neighbor
Policy'' toward the Western Hemisphere. As discussed below, Cuba and
the United States expressly chose to continue the Guantanamo leasing
arrangements, which the 1934 Treaty expressly left intact.
\4\The Act of March 2, 1901 (Chapter 803; 31 Stat. 898) states in
relevant part:
``That in fulfillment of the declaration contained in the joint
resolution approved April twentieth, eighteen hundred and
ninety-eight . . . the President is hereby authorized to `leave
the government and control of the island of Cuba to its people'
so soon as a government shall have been established in said
island under a constitution which, either as a part thereof or
in an ordinance appended thereto, shall define the future
relations of the United States with Cuba, substantially as
follows:
. . .
VII. That to enable the United States to maintain the
independence of Cuba, and to protect the people thereof, as
well as for its own defense, the government of Cuba will sell
or lease to the United States lands necessary for coaling or
naval stations at certain specified points, to be agreed upon
with the President of the United States.''
\5\Instructions from Secretary of War Elihu Root to Major General
Leonard Wood, Military Governor of Cuba (February 9, 1901), reprinted
in Annual Reports of the War Department for the Fiscal Year Ended June
30, 1901 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1901), 43.
\6\As directed by Secretary Root, Governor Wood explained to the Cuban
Constitutional Convention that ``The limitations of the power of the
Executive Department of our government by the Resolution of Congress of
April 20, 1898 [i.e., the Teller Amendment], are such, that the final
determination upon the whole subject may ultimately rest in Congress,''
and thus no views of executive branch officials ``can be construed as
in any way committing the United States to any policy which should
properly be determined by Congress.'' Letter of General Leonard Wood,
Military Governor of Cuba, to Dr. Diego Tamayo, President of the
Committee on Relations of the Cuban Constitutional Convention (February
21, 1901), printed in Civil Report of Brigadier General Leonard Wood,
Military Governor of Cuba, for the Period from January 1st to December
31st 1901 (Government Printing Office), 10.
\7\Report of the Secretary of War (November 27, 1901), printed in
Annual Reports of the War Department for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30,
1901 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1901), 49.
\8\Editorial Comment, ``The Origin and Purpose of the Platt
Amendment,'' American Journal of International Law 8 (1914), 585-91.
Secretary Root's original language, which closely tracks the eventual
text of the Platt Amendment, also can be found in his February 9, 1901
instructions to Major-General Leonard Wood, the Military Governor of
Cuba, reprinted in Annual Reports of the War Department for the Fiscal
Year Ended June 30, 1901 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office,
1901), 46.
\9\Letter of Secretary of War Elihu Root to Major General Leonard Wood,
Military Governor of Cuba (May 31, 1901), printed in Civil Report of
Brigadier General Leonard Wood, Military Governor of Cuba, for the
Period from January 1st to December 31st 1901 (Washington, DC:
Government Printing Office), 18. See also ``The Cubans Were Warned:
Advised by Secretary Root Their Action Would Be Rejected.'' The New
York Times, June 2, 1901.
\10\Specifically, the Agreement Between the United States of America
and the Republic of Cuba for the Lease to the United States of Lands in
Cuba for coaling and naval stations, signed by the President of the
United States on February 23, 1903, and the Lease to the United States
by the Government of Cuba of Certain Areas of Land and Water for Naval
or Coaling Stations, signed by the President of the United States on
October 2, 1903.
\11\After the assassination of President McKinley, his Vice President,
Theodore Roosevelt, was sworn in as the 26th President of the United
States on September 14, 1901.
\12\Lease to the United States by the Government of Cuba of Certain
Areas of Land and Water for Naval or Coaling Stations, signed by the
President of the United States on October 2, 1903.
\13\Treaty of Relations between the United States of America and the
Republic of Cuba, 48 Stat. 1682, TS 866 (1934).
Hearings
March 23, 2016, full committee hearing on ``The
Administration's Plan to Close the Guantanamo Bay Detention
Facility: At What Foreign Policy and National Security Cost?''
(Mr. Lee Wolosky, Special Envoy for Guantanamo Closure, U.S.
Department of State; Mr. Paul M. Lewis, Special Envoy for
Guantanamo Closure, U.S. Department of Defense); and
February 25, 2016, full committee hearing on
``Strengthening U.S. Leadership in a Turbulent World: The FY
2017 Foreign Affairs Budget.''
Committee Consideration
On March 16, 2016, the Foreign Affairs Committee marked up
H.R. 4678 pursuant to notice, in open session. After committee
debate, H.R. 4678 was agreed to by voice vote, and was ordered
favorably reported by unanimous consent.
Committee Oversight Findings
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of rules of
the House of Representatives, the committee reports that
findings and recommendations of the committee, based on
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of House Rule X, are
incorporated in the descriptive portions of this report,
particularly in the ``Background and Purpose'' section.
New Budget Authority, Tax Expenditures, and Federal Mandates
In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of House Rule XIII and
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (P.L. 104-4), the committee
adopts as its own the estimate of new budget authority,
entitlement authority, tax expenditure or revenues, and Federal
mandates contained in the cost estimate prepared by the
Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, April 11, 2016.
Hon. Edward R. Royce, Chairman,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4678, the United
States Naval Station Guantanamo Bay Preservation Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Sunita
D'Monte, who can be reached at 226-2840.
Sincerely,
Keith Hall.
Enclosure
cc:
Honorable Eliot L. Engel
Ranking Member.
H.R. 4678--United States Naval Station Guantanamo Bay Preservation Act.
As ordered reported by the House Committee on Foreign
Affairs on March 16, 2016
H.R. 4678 would prohibit the President from modifying,
repealing, or replacing the current lease agreement for the
U.S. Naval Station in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, unless authorized
to do so by the Congress through legislation, a new treaty
ratified by the Senate, or a modification of the existing U.S.
treaty with Cuba that would be ratified by the Senate. The
Administration has stated that it does not intend to leave the
naval base or alter the terms of the current lease agreement;
therefore, CBO estimates that implementing the bill would have
no effect on the federal budget.
Pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply because enacting H.R.
4678 would not affect direct spending or revenues. CBO
estimates that enacting H.R. 4678 would not increase net direct
spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive
10-year periods beginning in 2027.
H.R. 4678 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and
would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal
governments.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Sunita D'Monte.
The estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
Directed Rule Making
Pursuant to clause 3(c) of House Rule XIII, as modified by
section 3(i) of H.Res. 5 during the 114th Congress, the
committee notes that H.R. 4678 contains no directed rule-making
provisions.
Non-Duplication of Federal Programs
Pursuant to clause 3(c) of House Rule XIII, as modified by
section 3(g)(2) of H.Res. 5 during the 114th Congress, the
committee states that no provision of this bill establishes or
reauthorizes a program of the Federal Government known to be
duplicative of another Federal program, a program that was
included in any report from the Government Accountability
Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-
139, or a program related to a program identified in the most
recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.
Performance Goals and Objectives
H.R. 4678 is intended to ensure that Congress plays its
proper constitutional role in any decision affecting the
disposition of the United States Naval Station at Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba, which has its origins in acts of Congress. It states
clearly that no action may be taken to modify the Guantanamo
base lease agreements, or otherwise impair the jurisdiction or
control of the United States over that base, unless
specifically authorized by Congress, either by statute or by
Senate consent to a new treaty.
Congressional Accountability Act
H.R. 4678 does not apply to terms and conditions of
employment or to access to public services or accommodations
within the legislative branch.
New Advisory Committees
H.R. 4678 does not establish or authorize any new advisory
committees.
Earmark Identification
H.R. 4678 contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as described in clauses
9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of House Rule XXI.
Presidential Signature Page of the 1903 Lease to the United States by
the Government of Cuba of Certain Areas of Land and Water for Naval or
Coaling Stations
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
(Courtesy of the National Archives)
Dissenting Views
H.R. 4678, the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay
Preservation Act, is unnecessary legislation. I respectfully
dissent and urge opposition to the bill.
While I agree with both President Barack Obama and
President George W. Bush that the United States must close the
detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, I believe that the Naval
Station at Guantanamo Bay serves a number of worthy, national
security purposes. As just one example, after the devastating
earthquake in Haiti in 2010, the Naval Station was used as a
critical logistical hub for our response.
This legislation prohibits any changes to existing United
States control over the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay
without congressional action through (1) legislation; (2) a new
treaty ratified by the Senate; or (3) a modification of the
existing treaty also ratified by the Senate.
This bill is unnecessary as President Obama has made it
clear that he has no plans to alter the current lease agreement
over the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay with the Cuban
Government.
In preparation for committee consideration of H.R. 4678, I
sent a letter to President Obama asking if his administration
had any plans to return the Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay to
the Cuban Government. On March 11, 2016, I received a response
from Department of State Assistant Secretary for Legislative
Affairs Julia Frifield stating that, ``The Administration has
no plans to alter the existing lease treaty, payments and other
arrangements with Cuba related to the Guantanamo Bay Naval
Station.'' This letter is attached.
The letter further explains that the Guantanamo Bay Naval
Station will continue to serve an important role for the United
States, even after the detention facility closes, including in
support of ``U.S. Coast Guard and other agency counter-drug and
migrant interdiction activities.''
The Committee on Foreign Affairs considered H.R. 4678
immediately prior to President Obama's March 20-22, 2016, trip
to Cuba with a goal of politicizing the issue. During this
trip, President Obama continued to ignore tired, decades-old
demands from the Cuban Government that the United States return
the Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay. There is no plan nor has
there ever been any plan to return the Naval Station at
Guantanamo Bay to the Cuban Government.
Democrats and Republicans in Congress agree that the United
States base at Guantanamo Bay serves several key, national
security purposes. But, that does not mean that we need
unnecessary legislation solely intended to undermine our
President. President Obama has been clear that he does not
intend to return the Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay to the
Cuban Government, and we should take his commitment at face
value.
For the above reasons, I strongly oppose H.R. 4678 and urge
my colleagues to join me in opposition.
Eliot L. Engel.
----------
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]