User talk:Nerickson32/sandbox

Article Evaluation

Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act

Stub-level article

This article uses coded language to conflate democracy with a free market. It also alleges human rights violations against Cuba, yet provides no examples or evidence.

The article represents the points of view of those both for and against the Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act. It does not adequately represent the Cuban point of view, aside from mentioning the anti-US protests that occurred during Obama's March 2016 visit.

Another issue is the use of a quote by Al Fox, president of the Alliance for Responsible Cuba Policy. The citation is broken, and the link returns no address. Additionally, the quote is opaque due to its lack of context. Those who included it should not assume that the reader is well-versed in Chinese-Taiwanese relations; this background knowledge is necessary to understand Fox's analogy. Reference to a "South Florida family feud" is also opaque and goes unexplained. The text immediately following this quote does not provide further context, nor does it directly relate to or explain what Fox says. Finally, the text immediately following the quote does not relate to it.

The citation for the aforementioned quote [12] is also empty; the link is broken. This is true for many citations throughout the article: 1, 2, 3, 10, 11, and 13.

Overall, the article is written from a very US-centric point of view. It should include quotes and opinions from Cuban people and officials, as well as updated citations.

Nerickson32 (talk) 00:04, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Choosing possible topics

Trade sanction reform and export enhancement act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_Sanction_Reform_and_Export_Enhancement_Act)

At the top of the page, Wikipedia indicates that the article requires cleanup, but for no specified reason. No citations follow the correct format, and the writer only cites three sources. The article discusses the specifications of the law, but does not mention any significant effects that it had on the U.S., Cuba, or third-party nations. This is a short summary page that could use improvements in structure and depth of content.

Cuban-American lobby https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban-American_lobby This article is lacking in in-depth content, and mostly comprises lists of U.S. officials in the Cuban-American lobby. It does not discuss the effects of the lobby's actions. It also contains charged language that should be made neutral. For instance, it states that the lobby does work because of "a moral obligation to the oppressed people that suffer under the Communist regime."

Agreement for Democracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreement_for_Democracy Like the Cuban-American lobby article, this page is mostly a descriptive list and does not contain any analysis. There is no mention of the effects of the Agreement for Democracy, which is strange considering 120 organizations signed it. Additionally, it lacks in-line citations and therefore its credibility/verifiability are not strong. Nerickson32 (talk) 17:09, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Chosen Wiki article: Cuban-American lobby

History and formation

The Cuban-American lobby was formed by Cubans expatriated, mostly into Miami, during migratory waves throughout the latter half of the twentieth century. In the 1960s, many Cubans left the island due to fear of revolutionary reforms. They were often white, wealthy, and/or supporters of the Fulgencio Batista dictatorship(cite). Hardships in Cuba during the 1980s and 1990s also encouraged expatriation motivated by economic prospects in the U.S. The ideological makeup of the Lobby shifted drastically after Raúl Castro lifted travel restrictions in 2013; the group constituting this exodus was young and much more moderate than earlier groups.

In the 1980s, most Cuban expatriate interest groups were only active in southern Florida. These groups were splintered and their voice was poorly organized. The lobby became more powerful after many organizations pledged to change the inner workings of Cuban government. The Reagan administration strongly supported the Cuban American National Foundation, which formed the month the president took office. The lobby built institutional ties with the administration through their ideological sameness, giving conservative Cuban-American groups growing influence and increasingly early access to information through the 1980s.

While still influential, the Cuba Lobby appears to be weakening due to dissenting opinions within groups. Younger Cuban-Americans are more likely to be open-minded regarding relations between the two countries and the lifting of the embargo.

Makeup of the Lobby
The Cuban-American lobby is currently varies in its level of sympathy towards the Castro government and Cuban Revolution, although it has become much more moderate since the 1990s . In the political sector of the lobby, the most influential organizations and politicians advocate for punitive maintenance of the embargo. It should be lifted, then, only if Cuba shifts towards a more capitalist economy and makes strides in economic privatization. The most notable organization with this viewpoint is the Cuban American National Foundation (CANF). Less influential organizations advocate for an easing or lifting of the embargo before or regardless of whether Cuba changes its government structure and policies.

The academic circles within the lobby, though not monolithic in opinion, generally believe that the U.S. and Cuba should more readily exchange scientific information and advances. Some organizations within the intellectual wing of the Cuba Lobby advocate for travel as a human right, and have affected change on U.S. travel policies towards Cuba.

Business interest lobbies often advocate for lifting the embargo so as to increase trade between the two nations. They believe trade with Cuba would be beneficial for the U.S. economy, and usually point more to financial than humanitarian reasons for their stance. Lobbies outside the Cuban-American community have also advocated for liberalization of trade between the two nations, most notably the agribusiness lobby .

Political influence

Organizations within the Lobby have affected public policy by collaborating with both Republican and Democratic lawmakers. One of the most notable collaborations occurred in 1992 between the Cuban American National Foundation and Democrat Robert Torricelli. Torricelli, whose liberal views on the embargo characterized his early career, sought election campaign funds from the CANF. He adopted a stronger anti-Castro, pro-embargo stance, secured CANF funds, and was reelected to Congress. Torricelli subsequently sponsored the Cuban Democracy Act, often referred to as the Torricelli Act, which was signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1992.

The conservative Lobby’s influence waned when Jorge Mas Canosa, founder of the CANF, died in 1997. The international custody case of Elián González, which lasted from November 1999 to June 2000, also had negative effects on conservative influence within the Cuban-American community. The rise of moderate and liberal influence within the community are often partially attributed to Canosa’s death and González’s repatriation into Cuba.

Rising influence of moderate voices allowed room for the agribusiness lobby to push for reforms that softened the embargo. The lobby campaigned for the Trade Sanction Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000, with success partially due to conflict within the Cuban-American community after the death of Canosa and the case of Elián González. The law allowed for the trade of some agricultural and medical goods between the two nations.

A more persuasive reason for the agribusiness lobby’s success and the rise of moderate and liberal voices is the recent economic reforms instituted by Raúl Castro. For instance, the proportion of state-owned agricultural land has fallen from 75% in 1992 to 20.7% in 2012.

Possible next steps

Further detail lobby's past political influence

TV/Radio Marti
1988 Lieberman elected: "Joe Lieberman defeat incumbent Sen. Lowell Weicker, whom Lieberman accused of being soft on Castro because he visited Cuba and advocated better relations. Weicker’s defeat sent a chilling message to other members of Congress: challenge the Cuba Lobby at your peril." (http://bit. ly/2FZtvww)
Opposing the Cuba lobby ends careers and affects legislation
- "Dem Robert Menendez voted w GOP to block passage of a $410 billion omnibus appropriations bill (needed to keep the government running) because it relaxed the requirement that Cuba pay in advance for food purchases from U.S. suppliers and eased restrictions on travel to th e island. To get Menendez to relent, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner had to promise in writing that the administration would consult Menendez on any change in U.S. policy toward Cuba."
-Confirmation of Arturo Valenzuela: "Senate Republicans also blocked confirmation of Arturo Valenzuela as Obama’s assistant secretary for Western Hemisphere affairs until November 2009. Senator Rubio (R-Fla.), whose father left Cuba in the 1950s, held up confirmation of Valenzuela’s replacement, Roberta Jacobson, until the administration agreed to tighten restrictions on educational travel to Cuba, undercutting Obama’s stated policy of increasing people-to-people engagement."

Add media

Nerickson32 (talk) 21:48, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Unit 2 Peer Review

I think you've done a great job with adding more information to the article considering the current article is more of a list of government officials. I think that if you liked, you could improve the lead of the article just to beef it up a little, but still keep it brief don't make it too long. I think that by using some of the research you've done, you would be good at contributing to the lead in regards as to why these individuals have been important or how they have served purpose. You did a nice job citing your sources and making sure you used language that wasn't opinionated or just fluff. This looks like a good article to me so the only thing I could suggest is maybe find more examples to support your portion of the political influence in the article. I would just make sure that if you do this, to make sure the other sections are still cohesive after the new material is added and that they all relatively have the same amount of information dedicated to them. Lythammari (talk) 01:15, 2 March 2018 (UTC)