Cuba thwarts U.S. efforts to help dissidents: The United States has spent $7 million to teach Cubans journalism and English and to educate children of dissidents. But the efforts have fallen short

By Oscar Corral, The Miami Herald

McClatchy-Tribune Business News

2,226 words

The Miami Herald (MCT)

Distributed by McClatchy - Tribune Information Services.

Nov. 16--John Virtue crammed everything a reporter needed to know into a clandestine workshop for independent journalists in Havana four years ago. But he just couldn't squeeze in the ethics lessons.

Manuel David Orrio, a student with a limp, eagerly volunteered to teach the ethics class for Virtue, director of Florida International University's International Media Center.

On March 14, 2003, Orrio taught the course at the Havana home of then-U.S. Interests Section chief James Cason. Four days later, the Cuban government launched its biggest crackdown on dissidents and independent journalists in years. Seventy-five were imprisoned -- including 26 independent journalists.

Among the communist regime's star witnesses: Orrio, who was really a Cuban agent.

"He'd been under cover, an independent journalist for 12 years," Virtue said.

FIU is among a handful of American universities that have received more than $7 million in the past decade from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to train Cuban journalists, teach Cubans English, study property-rights issues and educate the children of dissidents at U.S. colleges.

But USAID's academic effort has fallen short of its mark, according to federal records, university reports and interviews with dozens of academic and U.S. experts. For example:

--FIU has received $1.6 million from USAID since 1999 to train journalists. As many as 214 students have taken a 2 Â½-hour workshop or correspondence course or video conferencing. As of August, only four Cubans have completed all the required courses.

--Georgetown University has received $400,000 in scholarship grants to teach at least 20 Cuban students. USAID promised $400,000 more for other scholarships. In three years, Cuba has allowed only one student to leave for Georgetown.

--Loyola University in Chicago received a $425,000 grant from USAID in 2004 to teach English to Cubans on the island. It has yet to teach anyone under that program. Loyola suspended the program after its Cuban partners objected to the USAID connection.

--Creighton University in Nebraska received a $750,000 grant from USAID last year to study Cuba's confiscation of properties and create a model tribunal for property claims after Fidel Castro dies. Some Cuba experts say it's a waste of money -- because Creighton had no experience in Cuba-related property-rights research.

"I just want an opportunity for Cubans to come here, back and forth," said Adolfo Franco, the director of USAID's program for Latin America and the Caribbean. "But you know what? The standard should be applied across the board in a fair way and not dictated by the Cuban government."

Although its academic successes are few so far, USAID stands to garner up to $10 million more, thanks to the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba II, a group convened by President Bush and headed by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez.

The commission has recommended spending $80 million more in the next two years for humanitarian aid, education, exchanges and scholarships for Cubans studying in the states.

Peter Orr, the first director of USAID's Cuba program, said USAID funding to universities is a waste: "If you really don't want to achieve anything with the money, you throw money at a university who says we're going to have an exchange program, and they go ahead and give the grant, even though anybody who knows anything about Cuba knows it won't work."

FIU PROGRAM

Throughout the seven years that FIU has tried to train journalists, the Cuban government has routinely blocked educators from visiting the island. Virtue, who held classes in Havana just once, tried to train Cuban students in third countries -- only to have the Cuban government withhold exit visas.

FIU resorted to training by mail, and now also video-conferencing from the U.S. Interests Section in Havana, where independent journalists attend a live session.

"I think we have shown good results for it," Virtue said.

Among the successful graduates is Claudia Marquez, who left Cuba two years ago for Puerto Rico and runs her own website and publishes stories on other Internet sites.

Said Marquez -- one of the four independent journalists who completed the program after studying journalism, ethics and investigative reporting: "It was a huge opportunity, and I appreciate it very much."

But some of the would-be Cuban journalists say the program can be frustrating.

"I know many colleagues from the independent press in Cuba who registered [for the FIU course], sent in their work and nothing ever happened," said Juan Gonzalez Feble, an independent journalist in Havana, in a recent telephone interview. "We never heard from them again."

Virtue said many of the students may have sent in assignments and paperwork to be evaluated, but Cuban agents probably confiscated their work.

STICKING POINT

Because FIU's International Media Center is funded by USAID, it is not allowed to pay journalists in Cuba with government funding for their work, a policy that frustrates the program's directors. The center also edits work produced by independent reporters on the island and looks for publications outside Cuba to publish those reports.

"Many of the people dealing with Cuba, including many in the government, find it very frustrating not to be able to pay the journalists," Virtue said.

"It's great that the U.S. is helping the people of Cuba to achieve democracy," Feble said. "They have to remember that the theater of operations is the island of Cuba. It's not Miami."

UM PROGRAM

The University of Miami's Institute for Cuban and Cuban-American Studies has received more money than any other academic institution to promote democracy in Cuba, about $2.5 million.

The program has produced several forums and about 35 research papers on what a post-Castro Cuba might encounter.

Roger Noriega, former undersecretary of State for the Western Hemisphere, said the USAID program should focus on groups that are helping people inside instead of academic studies.

"Frankly, I'm less interested in studies," Noriega said. "My experience has been that these stacks of materials end up on people's bookshelves."

The Cuba Transition Project, as the UM grant is named, is headed by UM professor Jaime Suchlicki. He has been a key player in the USAID strategy to try to democratize Cuba, managing more U.S. pro-democracy money than any other person as of 2005 -- more than $7 million since 1999.

About $5 million of those funds went to Cuba OnLine, a venture that published a newsletter, Sin Censura -- Without Censorship -- and specialized in mailing anti-Castro material to the island.

Part of Suchlicki's salary at UM is reimbursed with federal funds from the Cuba Transition Project; he also received a $2,000 monthly salary from USAID-funded Cuba OnLine, a program he said expired in September. And he hosts a show called Opiniones on Radio Marti, for which he is paid $100 a show, earning about $18,000 the past three years, federal records show. Suchlicki said he began the program after he was paid between $1,000 and $2,000 as a subcontractor for a consultant, Herbert Levin, hired by the Office of Cuba Broadcasting to analyze proposed programming changes.

"Nobody is going to buy me for $100 or $1,000. I'm an independent thinker," Suchlicki said.

GEORGETOWN

In Washington, Georgetown University had picked 20 Cuban students out of almost 400 applicants for scholarships, but only one has attended -- because the Cuban government won't let anyone else leave the island to study.

Georgetown spokesman Erik M. Smulson said in an e-mail that the 20 students were chosen "on the basis of their leadership potential and academic aptitude."

Georgetown has spent about $112,000 of the $400,000 for the one student's expenses, plus administrative costs of the program. A typical Georgetown student spends $48,000 a year to attend. The rest of the grant is still active, Smulson said.

USAID and Georgetown refused to provide copies of the grant application or to name the student.

Franco, the director of USAID's program for Latin America and the Caribbean, said the agency should not cease trying to give scholarships to Cuban students because the government doesn't let students out.

"The [proof] of the pudding in here is that the government of Cuba is scared to death to give an opportunity to the Cuban people to come to the United States and return to Cuba," Franco said.

LOYOLA UNIVERSITY

At Loyola University in Chicago, government and university officials in 2004 hailed the signing of a two-year, $425,000 USAID grant, for an exchange program for Cuban students called the "Henry Hyde Program of People-to-People Development."

Attending the ceremony: U.S. Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., a Loyola alumnus and chairman of the House International Relations Committee, and Franco.

The goal: teach English as a second language to people in Havana.

Loyola's Cuban partners refused to participate because Loyola was getting U.S. government money -- even though the Chicago school pledged that its program was apolitical. By April 2005, Loyola dropped the program but kept the grant in hopes of reviving the program.

When there was no U.S. government money involved, students at the Jesuit university taught English for two-week intervals at Centro LaSalle, a Catholic center in Havana.

Loyola and USAID refused to provide copies of the grant application. Hyde didn't return phone calls and e-mails seeking comment.

CREIGHTON

At Creighton, USAID gave the law school in Nebraska a $750,000 grant last year to study the issue of property restitution for Cubans who lost land to Castro's revolution. USAID's Franco graduated from Creighton Law School.

USAID spokeswoman Jessica Garcia said Franco did not influence the award. She also said the agency seeks grant applications, and a government interagency committee reviews, ranks and recommends applicants.

"Creighton won the award through the competitive [bidding] process," Garcia said in an e-mail. USAID would not specify what other institutions bid for the grant.

A Government Accountability Office audit released Wednesday said, "the USAID Assistant Administrator for Latin America and the Caribbean authorized the negotiation of awards for both unsolicited and solicited proposals." The audit also said USAID's Cuba program office, which is overseen by Franco, "recommends USAID democracy assistance awards."

Creighton Law School Dean Pat Borchers acknowledged the university had no experience in Cuba property research but said the school is qualified to produce the report. Two of Creighton's seven grant researchers speak fluent Spanish, Borchers said. He said he wrote a law school case book that included "materials" on the 1996 Helms Burton law, which governs U.S. policy toward Cuba. And some in the research team also have experience in conflict resolution law, Borchers added.

Creighton researchers have traveled to Miami to consult experts, Borchers said. One of them is Nick Gutierrez, a local lawyer who has established a niche practice representing people who want their property back or compensation for their loss.

"I think they need some guidance," said Gutierrez, who said he met with Creighton representatives at a Cuban American Bar Association conference in June. "I am surprised that they [Creighton] got it [the grant]. I'm not so surprised when I see that Adolfo Franco from USAID is an alumnus."

Franco said through a spokeswoman that he "played no role whatsoever" in the award.

Gutierrez said Creighton's distance from the exile community can help it come up with a credible report. If such a report came from a South Florida institution, Gutierrez said, "maybe people would feel it's not completely independent because it might be a mouthpiece for the Cuban exile community."

COSTLY OVERHEAD

Another U.S.-funded organization that helps promote democracy in Cuba -- The National Endowment for Democracy -- won't fund universities because administrative and overhead costs run as high as 65 percent at universities, said NED Vice President Barbara Haig.

"Is there a shortage of research on Cuba? I don't think there really is. It's just very painful to pay that kind of indirect cost rate," said Haig, adding that other programs keep administrative expenses at one-third those rates.

Georgetown declined to specify those costs, and Loyola did not respond to an e-mail request. Creighton officials said their program's indirect costs were 42 percent, and FIU's international media program's indirect costs were 24 percent.

Julio Aliaga Pesant, an independent journalist and former University of Havana professor expelled two years ago for his political beliefs, said the U.S. should spend the money inside Cuba.

"I think that with one-tenth of what the U.S. government gives to exterior projects, they'd subvert the government in Cuba if they got it to the right groups and people here," Aliaga Pesant said.

Read Oscar Corral's blog Miami's Cuban Connection in the blogs section of MiamiHerald.com or at http://blogs.herald.comcuban_connection/

---

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Business News

-------------

REPORT PROMPTS CALLS TO EASE CUBA RESTRICTIONS

By Vanessa Bauzá and Ruth Morris Staff Writers

16 November 2006

South Florida Sun-Sentinel

A federal report released Wednesday exposed mismanagement of tens of millions of dollars meant to promote democracy in Cuba and spurred renewed calls for lifting travel restrictions to the communist island.

Two legislators from the Cuba Working Group, a bipartisan congressional group that favors easing the embargo, called for the investigation by the Government Accountability Office and quickly seized on its findings to demand greater freedom of travel to Cuba -- this time with a Congress controlled by Democrats.

Between 1996 and 2005, the U.S. Agency for International Development paid $73 million to U.S.-based organizations, many based in Miami, to support Cuban dissidents, independent journalists and academics. In its report, the GAO found USAID had lax controls and poor oversight over how its grant money was spent.

"The U.S. has spent millions of dollars in democracy assistance to Cuba with little or nothing to show for it," said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., who requested the report with Rep. William Delahunt, D-Mass.

Flake pointed to the report's finding that USAID paid between $4 and $20 per pound to travelers known as "mules" who carry materials to Cuba, such as books, clothes, medication and other humanitarian aid. Part of the difficulty in shipping those items to Cuba stems from the U.S. government's restrictions. Allowing Cuban Americans to travel to the island more frequently than once every three years would be a more effective way to promote democracy in Cuba, Flake said.

"When people see what we're doing now and how taxpayers' funds are being misused, I think they will demand a change in policy, particularly if they understand we can accomplish the same objectives simply by allowing family members to travel more frequently and take with them goods," Flake said.

The GAO report comes four months after the Bush administration announced a plan to spend $80 million to spur political transition in Cuba over the next two years.

The report said that 95 percent of USAID's funding before 2004 was distributed to programs that were not bid competitively. Funding went to university research, anti-Castro radio and television transmissions, and materials destined for dissidents and journalists in Cuba. In one case, it said, a grantee had sold items provided by the United States to raise revenue. Another filed questionable travel expenses.

Some of the funding went to Miami-based groups that spent it on coloring books and literature -- including The Da Vinci Code and Harry Potter titles -- Godiva chocolates, cashmere sweaters and Nintendo Game Boys.

Guillermo Castilla, director of the Miami-based Acción Democrática Cubana, said his organization sent the chocolates and video games to Cuba to provide a distraction for the families of political prisoners and dissidents. However, he said clothing, medication and canned foods make up the majority of their humanitarian aid.

"We decided to send entertainment to these kids to help them overcome their situation," Castilla said.

Castilla said he was not sure how the GAO report would affect his organization's funding in the future. Over the past four years, it has received $1.5 million from USAID.

The GAO study reviewed 58 State Department and USAID awards from 1996 to 2005. It did not name the recipients.

USAID spokesman David Snider said he had not fully read the report and therefore could not respond to it.

However, he said that at the time the GAO stopped collecting data for its report, USAID had already taken some steps to provide more oversight, such as adding another employee to manage the Cuba program, bringing the total to three.

U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Miami, who supports Cuba sanctions, said USAID's programs should be improved but still constitute an important tool to bring a democratic transition to Cuba.

"In fact, based on what I know of the report, I would argue it seeks to reinforce our efforts by providing recommendations on how to improve the process," Ros-Lehtinen said.

There was wide consensus among policy experts that the newly elected Congress would likely move to roll back travel restrictions to Cuba, which have been tightened in recent years.

"I think there'll be an effort in Congress to repeal the ban on travel," said William LeoGrande, dean of the school of public affairs at American University. "Congress voted on several occasions in the early years of the Bush presidency to lift the travel ban ... and the president always said he would veto it.

"The finding does not surprise me. The money that Congress has allocated for aid to promote democracy groups in Cuba has almost always been spent more in the U.S. than in Cuba, and has really been more a form of political patronage than anything else," LeoGrande said.

Andy Gomez, a senior fellow at the Institute for Cuban and Cuban American Studies at the University of Miami, said his organization had spent USAID grant money to fund study projects on a future transition, sponsor lectures and establish an online research engine. Of the GAO charges of USAID mismanagement, he said, "We stand on the merit of the academic credit we've established over the years."

He acknowledged that the institute has little feedback on how its studies are received, or used, in Cuba.

Like others, Gomez said he expected Congress to "take a shot" at lifting the travel ban to Cuba, and maybe even the embargo, although he said, "I don't think President Bush will approve it."

Camila Ruiz-Gallardo, director of government relations at the Cuban American National Foundation, said stricter oversight of Cuba programs should be implemented, but added that easing the travel ban could not substitute for federal support of Cuba programs.

"It's too bad that people who advocate for a soft line on Cuba or lifting of sanctions are going to try to utilize this to their advantage," Ruiz-Gallardo said. "This shouldn't discount the work of the groups who have followed the procedures and have provided assistance. We don't want the few rotten apples to poison the ability of the federal government to assist pro-democracy advocates in Cuba."

-------------

GAO Audit Finds Waste In Cuban Aid Program (DeYoung, WP)
Thursday, November 16, 2006; A12
The Washington Post
By Karen DeYoung

Nearly all of the $74 million a federal agency has spent on contracts to promote democracy in Cuba over the past decade has been distributed without competitive bidding or oversight in a program that opened the door to waste and fraud, according to a report released yesterday by the Government Accountability Office.
In one of the more extreme cases of apparent abuse, the GAO said a Miami-based group used government money to purchase "a gas chainsaw, computer gaming equipment and software (including Nintendo Game Boys and Sony PlayStations), a mountain bike, leather coats, cashmere sweaters, crab meat, and Godiva chocolates."
The group said in its grant application to the U.S. Agency for International Development that it would use the money "to provide humanitarian assistance and information to [Cuban] dissidents and their families." The director of the grant recipient, Accion Democratica Cubana, told the Miami Herald that all the luxury items -- but not the chainsaw -- were sent to Cuba. But GAO author David Gootnick said the lack of documentation made that impossible to determine.
Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), who requested the audit along with Rep. William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.), said the lack of oversight and the failure to follow government rules led to creation of a money trough that existed largely to provide jobs and operating funds to Miami-based activists who oppose Cuba's communist government.
"I think that this administration and to some extent the last wanted simply to curry favor with the Cuban American exile community," Flake said. "It's been kind of a bipartisan thing, and you haven't had anybody really challenge it. We just kind of turned away."
Delahunt, currently the ranking minority member of the House International Relations subcommittee on oversight and investigations, said at a Capitol Hill news conference that he would hold hearings on issues raised in the audit when the new Congress convenes under Democratic leadership.
Flake and Delahunt chair the bipartisan Cuba Working Group, which has pushed unsuccessfully for changes in long-standing travel restrictions and economic sanctions -- tightened by the Bush administration -- that prohibit sending virtually anything to Cuba. "What is striking about this," Flake said of the democracy program, "is we're basically spending money to beat our own embargo."
Under Clinton-era legislation, USAID distributes money to U.S. groups to send surreptitious aid -- including food, medicine and office supplies -- to Cuba and non-monetary assistance to political dissidents and independent journalists trying to operate within the island's tightly controlled communist system. The administration has promised an additional $80 million in funding over the next two years and expanded the program to include detailed plans for a transition to democracy in Cuba. Planning has accelerated with President Fidel Castro's relinquishment of power to his brother, Raul. Although the official Cuban government position is that Fidel Castro is recovering from surgery and will return to office, U.S. intelligence officials have said they believe he has terminal cancer.
In its official response to the 59-page GAO report, USAID said that it was "taking issue" with unspecified findings but that it would "seek to improve agency performance in managing, monitoring and evaluating this assistance."
GAO auditors began with a cursory examination of the 50 grants that were made under the program from 1996 to 2005. Twenty-eight of the grants, it said, were "modified" after the fact in ways that extended agreed-upon completion dates by an average of one to three years and "increased the aggregate value of these agreements nearly eight-fold -- from about $5.9 million to nearly $50.1 million."
Auditors then conducted an in-depth examination of 10 grantees that account for more than three-quarters of the aid money. Although the GAO acknowledged the difficulty of operating effective aid programs in Cuba, it found that many of the grantees lacked records that would make it possible to determine how the aid money was used and what it accomplished.
Proposals for funding for virtually all the 10 grantees had been unsolicited and not offered for competitive bids by USAID. The government in most cases failed to comply with its rules requiring pre-award examinations, contract specificity, monitoring and formal audits at the end of a program. The GAO said it had referred three of the contracts for further investigation.

-------------

Posted on Thu, Nov. 16, 2006

WASHINGTON | AID TO CUBAN DISSIDENTS
Congressmen want inquiry on U.S. aid to dissidents
Two congressmen criticized U.S. aid to Cuban dissidents after a report uncovered poor management of democracy grants.
By PABLO BACHELET
pbachelet@MiamiHerald.com

WASHINGTON - Two congressmen who oppose sanctions on Cuba said Wednesday they will push for an investigation of U.S. programs to promote democracy on the island after a report uncovered poor oversight and indications of wastefulness.

''The conclusions are disturbing, to say the least,'' Rep. Bill Delahunt, D-Mass., said of a report by the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress.

The GAO report said more than 95 percent of U.S. Agency for International Development programs for Cuba were handed out without any competitive bids and were then subject to only perfunctory reviews. It cites questionable purchases of items like cashmere sweaters and crab meat for dissidents on the island.

The Miami Herald on Wednesday published the first part of the results of its own lengthy investigation of the Cuba democracy aid programs' problems. The second part is running in today's newspapers.

Delahunt is set to become chairman of the Oversight and Investigations panel of the House Committee on International Relations when the Democratic-controlled Congress reconvenes early next year.

He also is co-chair with Arizona Republican Rep. Jeffrey Flake of the Cuba Working Group, a bipartisan caucus that opposes many U.S. sanctions against Cuba. The two lawmakers requested the GAO study.

Delahunt recognized that it was a ''challenge'' getting democracy-promotion material to Cuba given the communist dictatorship that operates there.

''But our concern is the program's efficacy,'' he said, ``in terms of what is occurring here in the United States, both in Washington and in Miami.''

Delahunt told a news conference Wednesday that he expected his subcommittee to convene hearings as soon as January and hoped to get testimony from U.S. government officials as well as grant recipients.

The U.S. government has spent more than $73 million on promoting democracy in Cuba since 1996, with the bulk of those funds being channeled through USAID. Flake said the problems highlighted by the GAO report show that the programs do little to advance democracy in Cuba.

''I simply don't know how we can continue with the current individuals who are running the programs and the current structure after this report,'' Flake said. ``Maybe this also calls for a change in policy.''

Defenders of the Cuba democracy programs say the report may actually help improve the initiatives.

''From what I understand, the report does not question our goal and overall policy to bring freedom and democracy to Cuba,'' said Miami Republican Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. ``In fact, based on what I know of the report, I would argue it seeks to reinforce our efforts by providing recommendations on how to improve the process.''

-------------

Report Cites Flaws in Cuba Aid Program

By JIM ABRAMS

15 November 2006

WASHINGTON (AP) - A Democratic critic of the Bush administration's Cuba policy on Wednesday promised hearings next year on a report citing weaknesses in the U.S. program promoting democracy in Cuba.

"The conclusions are disturbing to say the least," Rep. William Delahunt, D-Mass. The report by congressional investigators said the U.S. Agency for International Development did not always properly oversee Cuban aid grants and that coordination with the State Department was sometimes ineffective. Cashmere sweaters and chocolate were among the items bought with agency money, the study found.

Delahunt requested the study with Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., another strong advocate of ending the four-decade-old policy of opposing the Castro government through economic penalties and restrictions on travel and personal contacts.

"To continue the current level of funding given the results and given the disarray this program seems to be in would be a tremendous waste of taxpayer dollars," Flake said.

When Democrats gain the majority in the next Congress, Delahunt will be chairman of the House International Relations oversight and investigation subcommittee, putting him in a position to convene hearings on Cuba.

The report by the Government Accountability Office found that in the past decade, USAID awarded 40 grants or cooperative agreements totaling $65 million and the State Department four grants worth $8 million to support democratic progress in Cuba. USAID provided 385,000 pounds of medicine, food and clothing, more than 23,000 shortwave radios and millions of books, newsletters and other informational material.

It said dissidents interviewed by the GAO in Cuba said they appreciated the assistance.

But investigators also found that 95 percent of USAID's total awards were made in response to unsolicited proposals; that reviews of grantees were not always finished before awards were granted; and that the agency did not adequately follow up on grants to ensure accountability.

Some USAID money, the report said, paid for a gas chain saw, computer gaming equipment, a mountain bike, leather coats, cashmere sweaters, crab meat and Godiva chocolates.

"Under the Bush administration's Cuba policy, it is illegal for Cuban-Americans to fly to Havana for a family funeral, but legal for the State Department to pay smugglers to bring chocolates and cashmere sweaters onto the island," said Sara Stephens, executive director for the Center for Democracy in the Americas.

Flake and Delahunt, while acknowledging the difficulty of delivering material to dissidents in Cuba, cited one finding in the report that it takes anywhere from $4 to $20 to get humanitarian or material assistance to the island.

"It may be closer to four cents a pound," if the administration lifted its restrictions on family visits and travel to Cuba, Delahunt said. "This really cries for a more thorough review of policy as opposed to just simply focusing on the findings and looking at it as an auditing problem."

USAID chief financial officer Lisa Fiely, in a letter to the GAO, said her agency has acted to comply with the recommendations. The agency took issue with some findings, she said, but pledged to better manager, monitor and evaluate the U.S. assistance.

On the Net:

Government Accountability Office: http://gao.gov/

-------------

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07147.pdf Reporte completo

U.S. REPRESENTATIVES WILLIAM DELAHUNT (D-MA) AND JEFF FLAKE (R- AZ) HOLD A NEWS CONFERENCE ON U.S. AID TO CUBA - NEWS CONFERENCE

15 November 2006

Political Transcripts by CQ Transcriptions

REPRESENTATIVES DELAHUNT AND FLAKE HOLD A NEWS CONFERENCE ON U.S. AID TO CUBA

NOVEMBER 15, 2006

SPEAKERS: U.S. REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT (D-MA) U.S. REPRESENTATIVE JEFF FLAKE (R-AZ)

[*] DELAHUNT: Let me introduce myself. I'm Bill Delahunt, and I am the Democratic co-chair of the Cuba Working Group, which is a bipartisan group of members of Congress who are pushing for changes in U.S. policy vis-a-vis Cuba. I also serve as the ranking Democrat on the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House International Relations Committee.

Last year, Jeff Flake and I -- and Jeff, of course, serves as the Republican chair of the Cuba Working Group -- requested the Government Accountability Office to examine U.S. funding for democracy programs in Cuba.

We did so because we wanted an objective analysis of the programs' operations, controls and efficacy. Given the context of what is transpiring in Iraq in terms of waste, inefficiency and abuse, we felt that it was an appropriate time to make this request.

According to the report that was issued today, the United States has spent roughly $73 million on promoting democracy in Cuba since 1996. And this July the administration announced that it plans to request an additional $80 million to promote democracy in Cuba over the course of the next two years, which makes this report particularly timely, since none of these programs have ever received a comprehensive audit or review, until now.

To the report itself. The conclusions are disturbing, to say the least. Poor management and inadequate oversight. Ninety-five percent of the USAID grants were issued without a bid. A range of $4 to $20 a pound for material to be sent to Cuba. And three years late in review of the various programs.

Let me read what I think are some pertinent excerpts from the report.

DELAHUNT: "The Cuba Program Office of the USAID did not adequately manage at-risk grantees and lacked formal review or oversight procedures for monitoring grantee activities. Internal controls, both over the awarding of Cuba Program grants and oversight of grantees do not provide adequate assurance that the grant funds are being properly used and that grantees are in compliance with the applicable laws and regulations.

"The weaknesses in agencies, policies and procedures and in program office oversight allowed the significant internal control deficiencies we found at three grantees to go undetected and increased the risk of fraud, waste, abuse and noncompliance."

Now, Congressman Flake and I have been to Cuba on multiple occasions, and we're familiar with, obviously, the challenges of Cuba that are posed to those that would disseminate material and assistance intended to promote democracy.

But our concern is the program's efficacy in terms of what is occurring here in the United States, both in Washington and in Miami.

And let me conclude, again, by reading what I think is a particularly germane excerpt: "We conclude that the U.S. government's efforts to support democratic political change face several significant challenges. Some of these challenges stem from the difficult operating environment in Cuba" -- and this is, I would suggest, the most significant part of this quote -- "while others are the result of weaknesses in the managerial oversight the program has received to date."

DELAHUNT: Let me now turn it over to my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Arizona, Jeff Flake.

FLAKE: Nice to take a break from washing Bill Delahunt's car, you know. It's a whole new world in here.

(CROSSTALK)

FLAKE: Got to take his laundry out after this.

But I just want to thank you all for being here and just echo a few of Bill's comments, and to say that this was not something we just willy-nilly, all right, let's request a GAO report. Bill and I have been concerned about anecdotal reports and what we saw on the ground in Cuba for years.

And we have asked AID to come and explain the programs. We asked for a written response. They said no, they'd rather do it verbally.

They came in, but still didn't answer the pertinent questions that we had. And we had no other recourse but to request a GAO report, which we eventually did.

And as Bill mentioned, what came back is very disturbing. There are provisions that do allow at times for no-bid contracts for the federal government, but those are supposed to be the exception to the rule.

In this case, 96 percent of the contracts let out were no-bid contracts, responding, most times, to unsolicited proposals. And the controls, as Bill mentioned, simply weren't there. This went on for years.

I simply don't know how we can continue with the current individuals who are running the program or the current structure, after this report. If this doesn't call for change in direction or personnel, I don't know what will.

So with that, throw it open to any questions you might have.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

DELAHUNT: My own instinct is we had nothing to operate on.

DELAHUNT: That was the rationale for the request to GAO. Now that we have the report in its entirety, and I'm sure we will continue to have conversations, both with the appropriate representatives of AID and DOS, as well as GAO follow-up, from my perspective, I think we're at ground zero. Let's begin to do a review, if you will, ab initio.

You know, come January, I would expect that the subcommittee on which I currently serve as ranking member will have hearings on this report and invite grantees and others who participate in Cuba democracy promotion to come before the committee and answer the kind of questions that Jeff and I and others -- again, on a bipartisan basis -- have raised.

Jeff?

FLAKE: Let me just say that, to continue a current level of funding, given the results and given the disarray this program seems to be in, would be a tremendous waste of taxpayer dollars.

And I think Bill's exactly right: We have the report now; now we have the basis to question that, with the appropriations cycle next year, and to force AID to come in and explain why there are no controls, why we have these no-bid contracts, why it is that we are actually spending a good portion of this money to, you know, spend up to $20 a pound to ship goods, to actually beat our own treasury agents.

FLAKE: The irony can't be lost here.

We're actually paying about $20 a pound to mules and others to take goods and money down to beat our own treasury agents.

Maybe this also calls for a change in policy. Maybe it might be easier to allow individual family members to actually take remittances down; to take goods, food down to their family members and other oppressed people in society there.

So this raises a whole lot of questions.

DELAHUNT: I would just echo Jeff's sentiment.

I mean, the administration saw fit to restrict family travel. Opposition and that of the Cuba working group has been clear.

We have opposed that particular policy but, as Jeff indicates, when you have a cost per pound, up to $20, to deliver assistance, materiel, through this program, I wonder how much it would cost for a family member or a friend who had the right to travel, unrestricted, to Cuba?

I'm sure it would be considerably less than $4 a pound. It might be closer to 4 cents a pound.

But, I mean, as Jeff has indicated, I think this really cries for a more thorough review of policy, as opposed to just simply focusing on the findings and looking at it as an auditing problem or an accounting problem.

QUESTION: Does the report address at all whether the state actually did anything to promote democracy? Or did it just focus on the process?

FLAKE: We have very, very sketchy information there.

FLAKE: The report noted that -- you know, most of this is run through AID. AID -- or what we are looking at here -- AID doesn't even have an agent in the interests section in Havana to actually see how this is received.

Is it offloaded by Cubans working for the Embassy? Is it offloaded by Embassy officials themselves? How is it distributed?

They mention that all we have, at best, is anecdotal information, stories that they might hear from a family member or others on how this is going out or how it's being distributed or what good it is doing.

There were no controls on the front end, and unless the nonprofit agency that contracted -- and some of them did -- felt the need to write a report to close out the contract, there's no information on the back end. That's how bad it is here. That just speaks to how much disarray this program is in.

DELAHUNT: There clearly was no coordination between -- or minimal coordination between USAID and the interests section in Cuba.

You know, there was a reference in the report itself that some dissidents that were interviewed expressed gratitude for moral support and said that the assistance was welcome. But again, that's anecdotal information.

I don't think that those questions have been asked. And as Jeff just indicated, it would appear that the program, from the unsolicited bid to the conclusion, is rife with unanswered, and maybe unanswerable, questions.

So it's clearly problematic. And, as Congressman Flake indicated, maybe this is a launch for a thorough review of the entire policy, particularly the policy of this administration, vis-a-vis Cuba.

QUESTION: The conclusions of this report may lead you to ask for finishing this program aid to Cuba. But on the other side, you also have billions of dollars flowing from Venezuela, in favor of the backed Cuba government.

So would you suggest, according to this report, to finish this aid to Cuba from the U.S. government or instead increase the aid?

FLAKE: Well, I think -- Bill said we'll have some hearings now and start from ground zero here, and say, "All right, where do we go? Here's what we know about how the program's been run in the past. What kind of programs would be best for the transition?"

Bill and I have always -- we made no bones about our position that we ought to allow family, ought to allow Americans to travel there. And in my view -- I don't want to speak for Bill; I know he feels the same way -- you get a lot more bang for the buck by allowing individuals and family members to travel and to take items and cash and to allow a little bit more freedom that way.

And so I think we'll discover a little more in these hearings than we've discovered in the past. I, speaking for myself and for my party...

(LAUGHTER)

... we haven't exactly been all that great at oversight lately. And this is one area where it really shows. And we can do a lot better and, hopefully, we will from here on out.

DELAHUNT: I think the question you posed is how do we increase the influence of the United States in a positive way in Cuba. And I think that is the fundamental question that ought to be posed during the course of this coming session of Congress: How do we increase our influence in Cuba?

And, clearly, as an American, we have repeated again and again to officials in the Cuban government at every particular level that we are advocates for democracy and openness. And the freedoms that we enjoy here, we believe they are universal principles.

How do we achieve our agenda in Cuba today? Do we do it through programs such as this? Do we do it by conducting a thorough and open review of existing policies?

DELAHUNT: Nothing's really changed in Cuba in 50 years. Is this a moment in history where change, in terms of the bilateral relationship between Cuba and the United States, can positively impact the people of Cuba?

And I think it's clear that our policy here is one, you know -- and Jeff is -- we've heard each other sing this song for a long time.

The right -- the constitutional right to travel of Americans to Cuba we believe would enhance dramatically American influence and American values on that island.

The American people are clearly our best ambassadors. And when one examines the various programs that are part of our public diplomacy effort, it's the people-to-people approach that is the most effective.

QUESTION: I have a question about a different subject, which is immigration. I know that both of you represent different points of view on this issue. Just yesterday, a newspaper report said (OFF- MIKE)

FLAKE: I'll be very quick.

I know that's not the subject of the conference, but don't be surprised if we agree on more than you think there.

I, along with John McCain and Jim Kolbe and Ted Kennedy, authored the bill last time, so I believe in broad, comprehensive reform. And I think it's a lot more likely now.

We knew up in the House that if we wanted comprehensive reform, it needed to be bipartisan. We just weren't willing to do that as the majority in the House. Now I think we will.

DELAHUNT: And I supported the Flake amendment in the Judiciary Committee.

(LAUGHTER)

FLAKE: Again, I think this is an area where hearings are important, and the kind of debate and discussion that is respectful and civil in tone and exhaustive, to determine the facts.

FLAKE: If we can agree on facts, I believe there is opportunity to achieve a policy that makes sense to just about every element, right, left and center, in Congress.

I mean, I've always believed that we should begin the debate by examining the demographics. What is happening demographically in this country today in terms of population?

One only has to observe the trends in Europe, where there's such a decline in the replacement rate that you have nations like Russia and Italy, where if the trend doesn't change, at some point in this century they will disappear as nation-states.

So I think it's time to have, again, a discussion, a public discussion, and to move forward.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

DELAHUNT: I think you're probably directing that at me.

FLAKE: Go ahead.

(LAUGHTER)

DELAHUNT: I think we examined all of these issues on an ad hoc basis. Let's get the facts together.

DELAHUNT: My concern -- and I know it's shared by many Democrats -- is there's a recognition that there are significant benefits, in terms of economic benefits, with more trade, with the ability of nations to engage in trade with minimal impediments and what have you.

I guess the question that I would pose is how are those incremental benefits diffused throughout society?

There was a report that was issued several months ago by the World Bank, that questioned whether those incremental benefits were in fact helping reduce poverty.

And I believe that's the question, in terms of public policy, that we should be asking. In other words, we can talk about the growth in the economy, but is that growth only for the investor class, if you will, or is it more diffused and benefiting people all throughout a particular society?

I think all of us want to encourage, particularly in Latin America, the emergence and strengthening of a middle class, because it will benefit the United States in terms of our commercial interests, and I dare say will go a long way to strengthen democratic institutions in Latin America.

DELAHUNT: So I'm starting from that particular perspective, but let's see what happens. Let's get the facts out. And let's have a thorough review of trade agreements with the perspective that the worker has to be treated with -- there has to be assurances that the benefit goes to every level in a particular society.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

DELAHUNT: I honestly...

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: Very briefly?

DELAHUNT: I can't -- I don't have the knowledge -- and I don't think we've all sat down -- I'm talking about Democrats -- and reached any kinds of decisions on that kind of an issue.

I just -- my own assessment of where Democrats are on the issue is reflected in what I just said: my concern about the environment and about the benefits of free trade and how they are allocated throughout society; not just here, but elsewhere.

FLAKE: Trade, trade, trade. Benefits everybody. We shouldn't reopen negotiations, move ahead with every agreement under consideration. And open one with Cuba.

(LAUGHTER)

Thanks.

END

-------------

THE AMERICAS

Cubans adjust to new life without Castro and his rhetoric.

By MARC FRANK

15 November 2006

Financial Times

Four months into Fidel Castro's convalescence from an illness that is one of the world's best kept secrets, the Cuban government, which controls almost every aspect of life, is under new management.

"It really doesn't matter what Fidel has, or if he lives a few months or a few years. Politically he will never return as before," a foreign official said after his latest video appearance. Miffed by rumours of his imminent death, a gaunt and frail Mr Castro was filmed late last month barely able to walk, but defiantly insisting he was far from dead. That convinced foreigners and Cubans alike that whatever ails him is grave indeed and the US that he will not live through 2007.

Cuban officials insist that Mr Castro is recovering from surgery for intestinal bleeding and consulting on important questions of state.

However, they have backtracked on whether he will be fit enough to attend a postponed birthday celebration scheduled for the end of the month.

Felipe Perez Roque, foreign minister, gave a rare glimpse of what is going on.