Louisiana – dwkcommentaries

U.S. State Officials in Havana Promoting Exports of U.S. Agricultural Products to Cuba

On February 18 a delegation of 13 U.S. state agricultural officials began a five-day mission to Cuba to promote Cuban imports of U.S. agricultural products. Their leader was Ted McKinney, the CEO of the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA).[1]

The NASDA press release for this mission said its purpose “is to identify and address trade barriers for U.S. agricultural products, gain a better understanding of trade rules and regulations as well as the political and economic environment in order to strengthen the United States’ trade relationship with Cuba. While in-country, NASDA will meet with government officials, as well as industry and private sector leaders, to learn more about how the U.S. and Cuba can collaborate in the future.” The delegation includes representatives of seven state agricultural agencies (Connecticut, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Montana and South Carolina) plus Ernesto Baron of FTA International and USA Poultry and Egg Export Council and Paul Johnson with FocusCuba.

February 19 Events[2]

On February 19, the delegation met with Cuba President Miguel Diaz-Canel, who offered the following official welcome.

”It is a pleasure and a satisfaction to have you present in Cuba in such an important composition, with Secretaries of Agriculture from several states and representatives of the US agricultural sector. “This is a sector with which we have a long-standing relationship, which has always had an understanding and sensitivity towards the Cuban people; a sector that has always worked to find paths that tear down walls, paths of greater rapprochement and benefit for both countries. If it were not for the blockade, there would be many mutual opportunities for work, to advance for the benefit of both peoples.” Cuba is “a small country, but not a negligible market” and his Government works “to ensure the food of eleven million Cubans.”

“This is a sector with which we have a long-standing relationship, he said, “a sector that has always had an understanding and sensitivity towards the Cuban people”; a sector – he added – “that has always worked to find paths that break down walls, paths of greater rapprochement and benefit for both countries.”

“if it were not for the blockade, we would have many mutual opportunities to work, to advance for the benefit of both peoples.”

“We are a small country, but not a negligible market; We work to ensure food for 11 million Cuban men and women,.”

“The activism of US farmers was fundamental for the Congress of the northern country to approve the Sanctions Reform and Expansion of Exports law in 2000, which allowed the Island to buy food there, although in disadvantageous conditions, imposed by anti-Cuban sectors and against the will of American farmers.”[3]

Afterwards Diaz-Canel said in a social media post, between the authorities of the regime and the US farmers “there has been a permanent dialogue,” which is why delegations from that sector are frequently received in Cuba.

February 21 Press Conference[4]

At the end of their Cuba trip, Ted McKinney, the NASDA CEO, several NASDA members and Ernesto Baron (USA Poultry and Egg Export Council) held a press conference at a Havana hotel on February 21.

McKinney said, “There may be new opportunities and we are optimistic about the possibility of future cooperation with Cuba” and they would convey to U.S. authorities the “positive and optimistic atmosphere” they saw during their stay in Cuba.” They saw the greatest possibility for cooperation in meat production, grains and food processing. And they thought if the U.S. embargo did not exist, bilateral agricultural exchange would be about $1 billion annually. But “we do not have that role of interceding to relax the (economic) sanctions of the embargo.”

Cuban Confession of Ineffectiveness of Food Law[5]

The day before the NASDA press conference, Cuba’s Prime Minister, Manuel Marrero Cruz, confessed that its Food Sovereignty Law of 2022 had not produced satisfactory results in that violations, corruption and lack of control have proliferated in “strategic tasks such as the delivery of land and livestock in usufruct,” according to Workers, and said that it cannot be allowed “that those who benefited from those embezzle state resources with them” and feel they are absolute owners.” Also needed review of “everything related to possible distortions in hiring, in exports and foreign investments as sources of foreign exchange earnings, in the application of science and technology, and in the attention to producers, to the productive bases, the mountains and the rural areas.”

There also were strong statements from Salvador Mesa (Cuba’s Vice President and member of the Political Bureau of the island’s Communist Party) and from Jorge Luis Tapia (vice prime minister) “about the need to review the organizational structure of the Ministry of Agriculture, hiring, confronting theft and slaughter of livestock and production plans.”

Reactions

As a U.S. citizen who wants the U.S. embargo of the island to end as soon as possible, this blogger is glad to learn about this U.S. agricultural group’s trip to Cuba and its voicing a similar opinion.

===================================

[1] A US state agricultural committee seeks to trade in Cuba despite the embargo, Diario de Cuba (Feb. 19, 2024); NASDA, Press Release: State agricultural officials to address trade opportunities between the U.S. and Cuba (Feb. 16, 2024)

[2] Leon, The United States agricultural sector “has always worked to find paths that break down walls,” Granma (Feb. 19, 2024);Diaz-Canel receives the US agricultural delegation and pushes it to continue skipping the embargo, Diario de Cuba (Feb. 20. 2024).

[3] In 1993 Cuba legalized micro-enterprises and established a tax regime for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. (U.N., The tax regime for micro-enterprises in Cuba.)

[4] U.S. agricultural officials. ‘optimistic’ about their visit to Cuba, deny that they can do business, Diario de Cuba (Feb. 22, 2024); Ballaga, The US agricultural sector is interested in doing business with Cuba (+Video), Granma (Feb. 22, 2024).

[5] The Government of Cuba admits that its Food Sovereignty Law does not have palpable results, Diario de Cuba (Feb. 21, 2024).

Implications of Reduced U.S. Population Growth

As noted in a prior post, “on December 30, the U.S. Census Bureau issued its official population estimates for 2019 showing, as expected, a slowdown in overall growth of population and reduced population in 10 states: New York, Illinois, West Virginia, Louisiana, Connecticut, Mississippi, Hawaii, New Jersey,Alaska and Vermont. In addition, the Census Bureau stated, “U.S. population is expected to grow 6.6% in the 2020s, a slide from 7.5% growth this decade” and “urban and rural areas across the country will divide further in the deceleration.”

The slow growth of U.S. population, as discussed in the prior post, is due to several factors: (1) the “U.S. fertility rate—the number of children each woman can be expected to have over her lifetime—has dropped from 2.1 in 2007 to 1.7 in 2018, the lowest on record.” (2) “Death rates, already rising because the population is older, have been pressured further by ‘deaths of despair’—suicide, drug overdoses and alcohol-related illness.” (3) U.S. immigration “has been trending flat to lower” and is subject to anti-immigration policies of the Trump Administration.

An editorial in the Washington Post notes that this may cause a positive reduction in the demand for resources. However, the reduced population growth “may mean less economic growth and a diminished support base for a large retired cohort” as well as a warning that “starting a new life in the United States has come to seem less attractive, both to prospective parents already living here and to prospective arrivals from abroad.”[1]

This, said the Post, “is a warning” that “the need for more [immigration] is real,” which “this country cannot afford to ignore.” [2]

Lower population growth is not the problem in rural America. Declining population is its problem. This situation recently was examined at the Regional Economic Conditions Conference of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis by Beth Ford, the CEO of Land O’Lakes, the Minnesota-based, member-owned agricultural cooperative.[3]

She said this population problem was exacerbated by problems in the agriculture economy. “Consolidation was happening across agriculture because of oversupply.” The average age of farmers was rising, and it is awfully difficult for young want-to-be farmers to get into the business, resulting in widows owning 60% of Iowa’s farmland. Many dairy farmers are surviving by taking jobs off the farm. Conventional corn and soybean farming will continue although the farming incentive structure will have to change over time. “Farmers are raising wages for help, but can’t find people who want to do the work.” Consolidation of farms continues because of economies of scale. The rural communities where farmers live are struggling to survive. Under these conditions, government subsidies for agriculture are necessary.

===================================

[1] Editorial, America’s dip in population growth is a warning we shouldn’t ignore, Wash. Post (Jan. 4, 2020)

[2] Recent letters to the Post disagreed with the conclusion that lower population growth was a problem. Instead, one letter argued that a “decreasing population would naturally buy the United States more time to use the limited amount of resources we have, to find a bipartisan plan of attack against climate change and to create legislation to protect the environment.” Another letter said that “slower population growth provides an opportunity for us to lift up the next generation so we can have a healthy, skilled, productive workforce” by focusing resources and attention on “the 13 million children trapped in poverty.” (Letters to Editor, Slow population growth is a good thing, Wash. Post (Jan. 9, 2020).

[3] Belz,Land O’Lakes CEO calls for investment in rural America , StarTribune (Jan. 9, 2020).

Another Update on States’ Consents to Refugees Resettlement

President Trump on September 24, 2019, issued Executive Order 13888, entitled “Enhancing State and Local Involvement in Refugee Resettlement” that required state and local governments to submit to the Department of State written consents for resettlement of refugees as a precondition for such resettlements.[1]

The deadline for providing those consents, however, has been confusing in the primary and secondary sources. But it now appears that the key date is January 21, 2020, which is the deadline for local refugee resettlement agencies to submit applications for funding of those efforts by the State Department’s Bureau of Population Refugees and Migrations (PRM) and that such funding applicants must submit to PRM such “consent letters from state and local officials on a rolling basis both before and after submission of their proposals.” (Emphasis added.) Thus, there is no explicit deadline for submitting the consents.[2]

List of Consenting State & Local Governments

PRM now is publishing on its website a list of state and local governments that have submitted letters of consent, copies of most of which are hyperlinked to the list.[3] However, there is no “as of” date for the PRM’s list which will be updated from time to time. In any event, here is the latest PRM list consolidated with lists from other sources identifying 34 states (15 Republican governors and 19 Democrat Governors) that have consented.[4]

State	PRM	Other Sources	Local Entities	PRM	Other Sources
Arizona (Rep. Gov.)	X	X	Phoenix (City), Tucson (City) Maricopa (County), Pima (County)		X
Arkansas (Rep. Gov.)		X
Colorado (Dem. Gov.)	X
Connecticut (Dem. Gov.)	X	X	New Haven (City)	X
Delaware (Dem. Gov.)	X	X
Illinois (Dem. Gov.)	X	X	DuPage County, Chicago (City)	X	X
Indiana (Rep. Gov.)		X
Iowa (Rep. Gov.)	X
Kansas (Dem. Gov.)	X	X
Louisiana (Dem. Gov.)		X
Maine (Dem. Gov.)	X
Massachusetts (Rep. Gov.)	X	X	Easthampton (City)	X
			Holyoke (City)	X
			Northampton (City)	X
			Salem (City)	X
			West Springfield (City)	X
Michigan (Dem. Gov.)	X	X
Minnesota (Dem. Gov.)	X	X	Minneapolis (City)		X
Montana (Dem. Gov.)	X	X
Nebraska (Rep. Gov.)		X
New Hampshire (Rep. Gov.)	X
New Jersey (Dem. Gov.)	X	X
New Mexico (Dem. Gov.)	X	X
North Carolina (Dem. Gov.)	X	X	Durham County	X
North Dakota (Rep. Gov.)	X	X	Burleigh County		X
Ohio (Rep. Gov.)		X
Oklahoma (Rep. Gov.)
Oregon (Dem. Giov.)	X	X
Pennsylvania (Dem. Gov.)	X	X
Rhode Island (Dem. Gov.)	X
South Dakota (Rep. Gov.)		X
Tennessee (Rep. Gov.)		X
Texas (Rep. Gov.)	X[i]		Bexar County	X
Utah (Rep. Gov.)	X	X
Vermont (Rep. Gov.)		X
Virginia (Dem. Gov.)	X	X	Alexandria (City)	X
			Richmond (City)	X
			Roanoke (City)	X
Washington (Dem. Gov.)	X	X
West Virginia (Rep. Gov.)		X
Wisconsin (Dem. Gov.)		X

Finally no state so far has affirmatively rejected such resettlements although there is no requirement to do so. Rejection is implicit if there is no affirmative consent.

Conclusion

Many of the current letters of consent contain inspiring words about welcoming refugees that will be discussed in a subsequent post while another post will cover religious justifications for welcoming refugees.

Now we wait to learn what the other 16 states (11 Republican (Alabama, Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, South Carolina, Texas and Wyoming) and 5 Democrat (California, Hawaii, Kentucky, Nevada and New York ) will do.

It should be noted, however, that the official website of New York’s Democrat Governor Andrew Cuomo on September 17, issued a statement criticizing the Trump Administration’s new lower cap on refugee admissions and saying, “We believe that our diversity is our greatest strength, and we are proud to be home to refugees across the state who are breathing new life into their communities as members of the family of New York. While President Trump undermines the values that built this state and this nation, New York will always welcome immigrants and refugees with open arms.”[6]

==================================

[1] See these posts to dwkcommentaries.com: U.S. Sets 18,000 Quota for New Refugee Admissions to U.S. for Fiscal 2020 (Nov. 4, 2019; U.S. Senators Oppose U.S.Reduction in Refugee Admissions for Fiscal 2020 (Nov. 11, 2019);Latest U.S. Struggle Over Refugees (Dec. 11, 2019); Minnesota and Minneapolis Say “Yes” to Refugees (Dec. 14, 2019); Updates on States’ Consents to Refugee Resettlement (Dec. 16, 2019); https://dwkcommentaries.com/2019/12/16/update-on-states-consents-to-refugee-resettlement/ Tennessee Consents to Refugees Resettlement (Dec. 20, 2019).

[2] State Dep’t, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM), FY 2020 Notice of Funding Opportunity for Reception and Placement Program, Funding Opportunity Number: SFOP0006252 (Nov. 6, 2019) FY2020 R&P FINAL NOFO.

[3] State Dep’t, State and Local Consents Under Executive Order 13888.

[4] See prior posts listed in footnote 1. See also Assoc. Press, Oklahoma governor give consent for refugee resettlement, koco.com (Dec. 22, 2019); Assoc. Press, GOP Governors Grapple With Whether to Accept Refugees or Not, N.Y. Times (Dec. 23, 2019); Assoc. Press, 15 GOP Govs Request Refugee Resettlement in Their States, NEWSMAX (Dec. 26, 2019); CBSChicago, Mayor Lightfoot Issues Letter To U.S. State Department Authorizing Refugee Resettlement in Chicago (Dec. 24, 2019); Assoc. Press, John Bel Edwards to Trump: Louisiana will keep taking refugees, Advocate (Dec. 23, 2019); Carson, Evers says Wisconsin is open to refugee resettlement in response to presidential order requiring states, counties to consent, Milwaukee Sentinel (Dec. 18, 2019); Stoddard, Gov. Pete Ricketts says he’ll consent to refugees continuing to resettle in Nebraska, Omaha-World Herald (Dec. 19, 2019).

[5] It appears that Texas is on the PRM list only because Bexar County has submitted a consent. On December 26, 2019, a Texas newspaper reported that Texas Governor Greg Abbott has not submitted such a consent letter and that his spokesman “did not return multiple calls, texts, and emails seeking comment.” On the other hand, “Mayors and county leaders of all Texas’ biggest cities —including Houston, San Antonio, Dallas and Austin — sent letters opting in,” but those consents are effective only if the state consents. (Kriel, Trump give states power to admit refugees. As other GOP governors sign on, Abbott is silent, Houston Chronicle (Dec. 26, 2019).)

[6] Statement from Governor Andrew M. Cuomo on the Trump Administration’s New Refugee Cap (Sept. 17, 2019).