I am in total agreement with U.S. Rep. Tom Emmer's proposal that the U.S. lift the trade embargo on Cuba ("Emmer is at odds with party on Cuba," Jan. 18). I visited Cuba in November on a cultural exchange. We visited the cities of Camaguey, Trinidad, Cienfuegos and Havana, riding through the countryside and through many small towns.
We were shocked to see a man walking behind a plow pulled by a yoke of oxen in his field. Nearly all fieldwork is done with horses. Only 30 percent of the people own cars, so much transportation is on bicycles or in horse-drawn wagons, even out on the paved highways. Men cut hay for their livestock in the ditches using machetes. Rice is dried on the edge of the paved highways. There is no fresh milk, only powdered milk, even in the finest hotels. The water is not safe unless boiled, so we were supplied with bottled water for the entire trip.
In every town, there were deteriorated abandoned buildings, and nearly every structure needed repairs or paint. Children attend school in an unfinished cement-block building. The government owns nearly everything and pays such low wages that many people seek work as a tour guide or other work in which they can earn tips. Food is still rationed, and quantities given are small — six eggs per person per month, one tube of toothpaste for a family of five per month, two pounds of beans and very little meat of any kind. Wi-Fi is available only in a few areas scattered across the country.
But the people are warm and welcoming. We were entertained by a ballet company, a city choir, flamenco dancers and a small band playing Cuban traditional music, often in humble studios. The musicians wished that they could order replacement parts for their instruments from the U.S. Others wished they could buy clothing, food items, electronics, automobile parts and many other items from the U.S. that aren't available to them now. They begged us to ask our representatives to lift the embargo. So that is what I am doing. Good luck to Rep. Emmer.
Kathy Brown Dodds, Lonsdale, Minn.
BICYCLES AND CARS
Sharing the road at city speeds is actually the easier problem
I fully support lower speed limits in inner-city neighborhoods, not just for bicycle safety but also for the safety of children and walkers ("Bicyclists to drivers: Let's slow down a bit," Jan. 19). In areas where there is curbside parking, it is harder to see pedestrians at a crosswalk, vehicles entering the street from driveways and, of course, bicycles. We need to drive more slowly so we can react to unexpected entry to the roadway.
We need more cooperation and consistency from bicyclists. They are under the same rule of law as an auto or motorcycle. That means drive on the right, obey stop signs, signal turns, etc. The fact that bicycles don't follow the rules of the road is actually another big reason for a lower speed limit, but bicycle safety lies mostly in the hands on the handlebars.
With education and cooperation, city streets can be made safe for bicyclists. Highways are another matter entirely. Motorized traffic going 55 or 60 miles per hour and bicycles is a combination for disaster. Drivers are not primarily looking for bicycles. The speed differential leads to unsafe passing and passing too close to a cyclist. The only way for bicycles and motorized vehicles to coexist on highways is with bike lanes. This is easy to understand but difficult (and expensive) to do.
Do we need to allow bicycles on certain highways only during the daylight hours? Only on roads with bike lanes? Only for bicyclists older than 12? Is there a need for a license that certifies that a bicyclist knows the traffic rules and can handle a bicycle safely?
