The Slow Unfreeze With Cuba

I'm happy to finally see this as a start to unfreezing relations with Cuba:

The Obama administration on Monday will lift travel and gift restrictions for Cuban Americans, allowing them to travel more freely to the island and send additional financial help to family members.

The policy change is the most significant U.S. gesture to Cuba in decades and comes amid efforts in Congress to lift all travel restrictions to the island.

"This is an effort to reach out to the Cuban people in an effort to support the Cuban people's desire to freely determine their country's future," a senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the White House has not yet made the official announcement, told McClatchy. "The president has said this is the most direct means to open up the kind of space that is necessary to see democratic change in Cuba."

The changes also include opening up greater communication to the island and expanding the items that can be sent to Cuba, including clothing, personal hygiene items and fishing equipment.

Realistically, lots of Americans already travel to Cuba. And only Congress can fully lift the travel ban. What's key here is the gesture, and the overture to finally have a serious conversation about US-Cuba relations in the 21st century. The Castro brothers are 82 and 77. They should no longer drive our policy with Cuba for the future. Obviously, human rights concerns on the island must be part of a comprehensive solution, but this is a very good start.

CA-32: My Calitics Interview With Emanuel Pleitez

The CA-32 race to replace Labor Secretary has less than six weeks to go until the primary. We know about the two major candidates; Board of Equalization member Judy Chu (not to be confused with Betty Chu, who will appear directly above her on the ballot and surely cause some errors among voters) and State Senator Gil Cedillo, whose extreme spending of campaign contributions on shopping, meals and lavish hotels made the LA Times this weekend and caused a stir.

Somewhat less remarked-upon has been the candidacy of Emanuel Pleitez, a product of East Los Angeles and Woodrow Wilson High School, who matriculated at Stanford, joined the advisory board of Voto Latino (a group that encourages voter registration and engagement for the Latino community), worked for Democratic lawmakers like Antonio Villaraigosa, Tom Daschle and Hillary Clinton, and worked on the Obama transition team at the Treasury Department. On Friday I had the opportunity to chat with Pleitez about his life experiences, the financial crisis, housing policy and a host of other issues. A paraphrase of that conversation follows.

(As a side note, this story about one of the volunteers on the campaign, who traveled all the way from Santiago, Chile to work on it, is pretty amazing.)

Calitics: Tell me about your experiences that have brought you to this run for Congress.

Emanuel Pleitez: You know, after college and working in the private sector at Goldman Sachs, I was able to travel a lot. And I think visiting 27 countries gave me a new perspective on what the challenges are out there in the world. When I would go to South Africa or India, China, Brazil, I would visit the universities, and the slums, and see their struggles, and it really made me think about the issues of global poverty. I even drove a taxicab in Myanmar! And what I took away from all that is that the best way to create change is to start in your own backyard. And that's what we're doing in this campaign.

Calitics: So how are things going?

EP: Well, we have 25 full-time staff working every day. And our main focus is door-to-door, face-to-face contact. We're out canvassing every day. A lot of people tell me that they think we're the only candidate in the race, because we're the only one they see. So we feel pretty good about our position.

Calitics: Now, you worked on the transition in the Treasury Department, and one central concern that a lot of people have had with Treasury is the lack of staffed positions at the undersecretary level, and the belief that Tim Geithner has basically had to go it alone over there. How should people look at the transition's performance in that respect?

EP: I agree with that criticism of Treasury. I had nothing to do with personnel, I worked in other departments. But there are many reasons for the lack of senior staff, and I wouldn't discount the ability and importance of the career civil servants working in the Department, who are doing a fantastic job.

Calitics: This week, the Congressional Oversight Panel released a preliminary report on the TARP program and Treasury's performance, and they were highly critical of the lack of transparency and clarity over some of these programs, as well as a lack of accountability for the big banks. How would you assess the various programs offered to this point?

EP: I don't have all the details of the COP report. My inclination is to defend Secretary Geithner, but I want people to be critical. I think what he's trying to do is return confidence to the markets and get credit flowing again, and we're seeing signs that the plans are starting to work.

Calitics: How would you approach the situation with the banks. Would you just recapitalize them forever, or seek a Swedish-style receivership or a liquidation of the insolvent firms?

EP: I would consider a receivership, but I wouldn't make that the first thing on the table because of the expense involved and the danger to the markets. But clearly, recapitalization alone won't work, that's just making capital disappear.

Calitics: What's the biggest problem in the economy that we're facing at this point?

EP: The biggest problem is the foreclosures right now. Some of them are in rural districts are suburbs and they're second, third and fourth homes, but for families in urban districts like mine, a foreclosure means the loss of everything you've got.

Calitics: Would you support bankruptcy judges being able to modify the terms of a primary loan for borrowers? Isn't there a problem with modifying securitized loans, in that the people holding the securities that have been modified can sue the loan servicers for illegally changing the terms of the security?

EP: That is a problem. But as I understand it, cram-down is more of a threat to incentivize loan modifications and keep people in their homes. Which is what we have to do. Investors will get hurt anyway if the loan forecloses. Somehow, the lenders and the investors and the home-owners have to come to an accommodation, and in that process the primary goal should be keeping people in their homes. I wasn't initially open to principal write-downs, but I am more so now, because we're seeing that the interest-only modifications are not working, and people are being forced into foreclosure just a few months later.

Calitics: What are some of the other challenges facing the economy that you want to deal with in Congress.

EP: Obviously, we still need major stimulus to save jobs and transition into a new economic future. A large part of my district is at or near the poverty rate, and we need help in these tough economic times. I expect another trillion dollars to be spent by the government. In my district, we need investments in public transportation and clean energy programs to reduce emissions and create manufacturing jobs. There's a program here called "La Gausa," which targets the high school dropout rate, and gets those kids into vocational programs for green jobs, whether it's solar panel installation or something like that, so that they can be prepared for the 21st century economy. We need more of that. And we need investment in education, because any dollars spent get the greatest return in education.

Calitics: Do you plan on joining any ideological caucus in Congress?

EP: I haven't really given it much thought, but I don't think so. I think all political is local, and I'd rather focus on helping my local community and responding to the concerns of my district. Maybe I'll join the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, that should be safe for me. (Laughs.)

Calitics: Well, thank you for talking to us today.

EP: Thank you.

My Dream Of Seeing Hyman Roth-Era Havana Closer To Reality

There was some talk earlier in the week that Congress has the votes to lift the travel ban to Cuba for all Americans. There is compelling research that lifting the ban would generate as much as $1.6 billion dollars in economic activity, much of it in the United States, with boosts for airlines and cruise ships and travel agents. Plus it's a useless policy that hasn't worked for the 50 years of the Castro regime, and we might as well try something new like using tourists as ambassadors for the US.

Well, at least with respect to families, President Obama isn't waiting for the Congress.

President Barack Obama plans to lift a longstanding U.S. ban on family travel and remittances to Cuba, a senior administration official said Friday, in what could be an opening gesture toward more openness with the Castro regime.

The move will fulfill a campaign promise and follows more modest action in Congress this year to loosen travel rules.

The president has authority to loosen these rules on his own, and the move is likely meant as a signal of a new attitude toward both Cuba and other Latin American countries that have pressed the U.S. to alter its policy.

The Congress should still make good on lifting the ban completely. But this is an undeniably good signal, and may lead toward ending the embargo and restarting diplomatic relations with our Southern neighbor. Maybe we could actually have some leverage over their human rights record as a partner, leverage we have not had as an enemy.

If the President wants an early victory in foreign policy, he needs to look no further than Cuba

Stupid Hold Tricks

Robert Menendez has been a pretty sharp Senator, and I don't regret making calls for him in 2006. I do regret him falling back on failed tropes of the past to not only frustrate a new era of US-Cuba policy, but to inexplicably stop dedicated professionals from doing their jobs protecting the planet from pollution and climate change.

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), a strong supporter of the U.S. trade embargo against Cuba, is launching a full-on battle this week to remove several provisions from the 2009 government spending bill that would open a small crack in the slammed door of relations with Havana.

Menendez fired a broadside at the Obama administration yesterday for backing a provision buried in the $410 billion spending bill, which must become law by next week in order to keep the government running. The New Jersey senator, a Cuban-American, objects to language in the bill that would allow Cuban-Americans to visit relatives on the island once a year and end limits on the sale of American food and medicines in Cuba. [...]

The WaPo reports today that the senator has held up two Obama science nominees in an attempt to twist the arms of his fellow Dems.

First of all, Menendez is hopelessly behind the times. The majority of his fellow Cuban-Americans SUPPORT lifting the travel ban, because they understand that the policy of isolation has completely failed. So do wild-eyed liberals on foreign policy like Richard Lugar. But worse, Menendez is taking his temper tantrum out on two very qualified candidates who have nothing to do with this spat.

But Menendez isn't just making his case to continue with a failed policy, he's now blocking two White House nominees -- Obama's choices to be the head of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and the head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration -- to get the senators' attention on his Cuba-related concerns.

So, to summarize, Menendez supports Obama's nominees, but won't let the Senate vote on them until after he's done complaining about a subtle change in a foreign policy that hasn't worked after more than five decades of attempts.

Markos and Kevin Drum have more. The worst part of this is that you have a liberal Democrat abusing the ridiculous Senate holds process, which encourages others to do the same:

And he's not alone. It seems that multiple anonymous senators are now holding up Holdren and Lubchenco's nominations, as Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) told CQ:

"It's infuriating," said Rockefeller, who backs Holdren and Lubchenco's hiring. "They're brilliant scientists."

Science advocates said they are frustrated by the blocking of administration officials they argue are needed now more than ever. The holdup could slow timely science and environmental policy work between Congress and the administration, particularly the spending of roughly $21.5 billion dedicated to science in the economic recovery package.

Thanks a lot, Sen. Menendez. I hope it's worth it.

(Hey, maybe he and Fidel Castro can do a Bloggingheads about it...)

This Would Be A Legacy

A bill was introduced last week in Congress that would end the travel ban to Cuba and restrict the ability to reimpose the ban in the future. This type of legislation has been offered in the past but went nowhere. However, the new President has been supportive of lifting the ban (and possibly the embargo), and Cuba's new President has returned the love:

The Obama administration has taken note of remarks both by Cuban President Raul Castro and by his brother, former President Fidel Castro, expressing, in part, positive sentiments about Barack Obama and the significance of his presidency, according to a senior State Department official. Both Castros, using somewhat different language, have said they view Obama as intelligent and sincere in wanting to change U.S. foreign policy and see his presidency as historic.

The Castros' remarks have come since the U.S. election and have continued occasionally in interviews, comments to the media, and, in the case of Fidel Castro, his frequent articles in the Cuban press. "I think the statements are important. They've registered," said the State Department official.

U.S. policy toward Cuba, including the various restrictions that flow from a 47-year-old economic embargo, will be reviewed by Obama administration agencies. During the campaign, Obama said that he intended to remove restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba by Cuban-Americans and that he favored well-prepared "direct diplomacy" with the island's communist government.

Cuba is moving forward, albeit gradually, with some economic reforms, and there are signs that the Cuban people are pushing for additional political and social reform from the bottom up. There's nobody better positioned to capitalize on this than President Obama. Robert Farley notes:

Nothing says EPIC FAIL more than the 47-year policy of disengagement and embargo that the United States has pursued toward Cuba -- even strong Castro foes would be well advised to seek an alternative approach. As Doherty notes, Obama doesn't appear to be afraid of the Cuban-American vote in Florida. The community is becoming more politically diverse, and in any case is losing its demographic grip over the state's electoral votes. Cuba has real "legacy" potential for Obama; 10 presidents have failed to dislodge either Castro or his opponents in the United States.

Absolutely. And while the economic benefit during this downturn would be small, certainly there would be increased regional stability in South Florida to come with a more vibrant system of trade and rapport with Cuba. I think it would be an excellent thing to focus on diplomatically in the first term.

Can Arnold Pass The High School Exit Exam?

The fallout from Gov. Schwarzenegger's demeaning comments about small-town Californians continue to reverberate. Chairman Torres weighed in, and noted that rural Californians don't exactly use a horse and buggy to get around, and some of them even have the teevee and the Internets!

“The Governor’s comments are insulting,” Torres told PolitickerCA.com today. “California does not have villages. This is not Austria, this is California. Voters in Central California and others from small towns have more on the ball than Arnie!”

State Senator Dean Florez, from the small Central Valley town of Shaffer, went a step further, introducing a resolution to have the Governor take the high school exit exam.

Like every other kid around the state, small town students take the same graduation tests as big city kids to show competency. Rural kids can make the grade. Given the Governor’s distasteful comments, what’s unanswered is whether he can make the grade.

That’s why, today, I’m introducing a senate resolution asking the Governor to take the high school exit exam. If the Governor fails the test, then we certainly have a capable Lt. Governor who can assume his duties until the Governor successfully passes the exam.

I hope that he accepts this challenge and that he doesn’t cower behind some excuse. This is a serious effort to bring attention to the divisiveness of placing labels on people based on who they are, how they live or where they come from -- or even how well they do on a test.

If it is a good enough test for our twelfth graders, then certainly it is a good enough test for the Governor to demonstrate his competency.

And after he takes the exam, maybe he’ll think twice about the massive cuts to education funding he's proposing -- he just may have to return to school to brush up for the test.”

I would pay money to sit in while Arnold fills in the bubbles on the Scan-Tron sheet. Can we get this on television? It'd be the first time local news covered state politics all year!

Schwarzenegger: You Hicks Know What An Air-O-Plane Looks Like?

I almost get what the Governor was trying to say, but the fact that it was a proud endorsement of lobbyist-paid junkets, as well as the demeaning stance toward small-town Californians, doesn't come off well:

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Wednesday encouraged lawmakers -- especially those from small towns -- to do more globe-trotting on the dime of special interests.

Speaking at a forum on global economics held by the nonprofit Milken Institute, the governor suggested lawmakers would be more willing to embrace his plans to privatize the building of roads, schools, high-speed rail systems and other public works if they could see how effectively it has worked in other countries.

"Some of them come from those little towns, you know what I am saying, they come from those little towns and they don't have that vision yet of an airport or of a highway that maybe has 10 lanes or of putting a highway on top of a highway," Schwarzenegger said. "They look at you and say, 'We don't have that in my town. What are you talking about?'

"So they are kind of shocked when you say certain things. So I like them to travel around."

Remember, folks, it's Barack Obama who's the elitist. Arugula!

What shouldn't get lost here is that Schwarzenegger made this little comment to justify what he has done multiple times since entering public office - jetsetting around the world on trade missions paid for by shadowy interests who expect a return on their investment.

There's a virtue and value in world travel, and the country could go a long way to fostering it by providing grants for international study, for example. If he wants to build a program like the "overseas experience" they have in New Zealand for California's young people, great. But Schwarzenegger isn't really endorsing that. He just wants his secret free trips. The "y'all are hicks" part is just frosting on the cake.

Schwarzenegger: Lifestyle of the Rich And Entitled

The most sickening thing about Paul Pringle's excellent LAT story on Governor Schwarzenegger's little non-profit scam is that we're talking about a very rich man, one who prides himself on not drawing a salary for his public service, one who has boasted that he can't be bought. But yet he willingly sucks up all kinds of goodies and treats on the public dime. I'm going to excerpt Pringle's report on the flip, but first, a little story. Plenty of people I've talked to in Santa Monica have encountered Schwarzenegger, and I honestly can't say that even one reaction is a good one. Of particular note is the story of one employee at a Starbucks in a ritzy area of town, one that receives celebrity customers all the time. When Arnold came in and asked for a couple beverages, he scoffed at the notion that he would have to pay for them. "I'm the governor," he said. The employee told me that he was pretty much the only celebrity customer that's ever pulled that move. But it makes perfect sense in the context of this article:

California's larger-than-life governor is unabashed about living large, but keeping him in luxury sometimes depends on the same taxpayer subsidies granted to hand-to-mouth charities.

Arnold Schwarzenegger, a millionaire many times over, bills much of his overseas travel to an obscure nonprofit group that can qualify its secret donors for full tax deductions, just as if they were giving to skid row shelters or the United Way.

So rich donors give in to a fund that Arnold uses to finance his lifestyle, and the donors can both hide their identity and receive a tax deduction, robbing the state coffers of tax revenue.

Nonprofit watchdogs say using charitable write-offs to pay for sumptuous travel is an abuse of tax codes.

"Wow, that's a problem," said Daniel Borochoff, president of the American Institute of Philanthropy. "Why should our tax dollars subsidize his lavish lifestyle?"

Making matters worse, Borochoff and others say, is that the nonprofit that finances Schwarzenegger's globe-trotting, the California State Protocol Foundation, could be a vehicle for interests that hope to curry favor with the governor.

By giving to the foundation, donors avoid having their identities made public, because charities are not governed by the disclosure rules that apply to campaign contributions. And they can donate unlimited amounts to the nonprofit, which is not subject to contribution ceilings the way campaign accounts are.

This is unbelievably wrong. A multi-millionaire governor, first of all, shouldn't be living large off of any kind of donation fund. Second of all, it shouldn't be a back door around campaign finance laws. And the nonprofit that runs this fund refuses to open their books and disclose their donor lists.

But this is all too typical. It's the same sense of entitlement that a rich man uses to demand free lattes at Starbucks.

Here's a fun anecdote about Schwarzenegger ripping off the Simon Weisenthal Center:

Schwarzenegger has tapped at least one other charity for some of his travel. The Simon Wiesenthal Center, celebrated for its Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles and far-flung Nazi-hunting efforts, paid more than $51,000 to help send the governor to Israel in 2004, a year when the charity ran a deficit, records show.

The trip carried a steep tab because of the private jet, said people familiar with Schwarzenegger's travel [...]

The governor could easily pick up outsized travel bills himself, and a spokesman said Schwarzenegger does pay for his private jet when he flies domestically on state business.

But trips abroad are something else.

The argument Arnold always makes against this is that a foundation bankrolling his travel means that the public sector doesn't have to. That's a load of garbage. We all finance this travel through bad legislation and payouts to the donors who pay into this slush fund in secret. In addition, by allowing these donors to write off their donations for hotel suites and Gulfstream Jets and caviar, taxpayers ARE footing the bill, at least in part.

All of this is to say that the Arnold of the "I can't be bought" days was never telling the truth. His outsized celebrity ego actually has instilled a sense that he shouldn't operate under the constraints of, you know, having to pay for stuff.