The GAO on Cuba


December 27, 2007


WASHINGTON TIMES EDITORIAL - A recent report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) on the embargo with Cuba is an unimpressive dossier instigated by two Democrats who commissioned the document in hopes of boosting their failed attempts to relax U.S. policies against the oppressive Cuban regime.

Requested by Reps. Charlie Rangel of New York and Barbara Lee of California, the report postulates that enforcing the embargo diverts government funding and manpower that would otherwise be spent on more serious counterterrorism efforts against countries like Iran and North Korea. It states that at Miami International Airport nearly 20 percent of passengers traveling to the United States from Cuba experienced secondary inspections by personnel from Customs and Border Protection (CPB). This happens much more frequently with passengers from Cuba than among the roughly 3 percent of passengers traveling from other countries. Released on Dec. 19, the report also says that such enforcement measures are "straining CBP's capacity to inspect other travelers according to its mission of keeping terrorists, criminals, and inadmissible aliens out of the country." Also, in baffling doublespeak, the report criticizes these same enforcement agents for being ineffective while earlier criticizing the intensity of their methods.

"It's a shame that regulators are being criticized for doing their jobs," said Roger Noriega, former assistant secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs and former ambassador for the Organization of American States. "I hope the answer is to give more money to keep an eye on North Korea, not less money for Cuba."

Mr. Noriega pointed out that Mr. Rangel has brought up multiple Cuba-related pieces of legislation — including one that would lift the trade embargo altogether — during this congressional session that have languished in committee and failed to advance even in a Democrat-held Congress. In July, Mr. Rangel's attempt to loosen U.S. banking policies surrounding Cuban payments for agriculture products failed (182-245). This comes barely a year after it was revealed Mr. Rangel had violated House ethics rules by taking his son on a junket to Cuba in April 2002, a trip that was financed by the Cuban government and a New York grocer. Mr. Rangel was forced to reimburse his benefactors, who also would benefit from his pro-Cuba legislation.

It seems that the conclusions reached by the GAO report were preconceived by Mr. Rangel and Miss Lee. Unfortunately, it sheds no light on how to make progress.

www.washingtontimes.com