Port Security Blows Up in President's Face

[PalJoey]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 2:16pm

Like a battered wife, the American people stood behind the corrupt Republican Party through failure in Iraq, the abandonment of New Orleans and Mississippi and ethics scandal after ethics scandal after ethics scandal.

But Republican strategists are finally realizing that the party will go down because the American people have finally realized that the Republicans have subjugated port security (among other issues) to corporate profits.

The AP has a devastating summary--snippets:

===

With both parties eyeing fall elections that will determine who controls Congress, some Republicans acknowledge that the port issue is a tough one for them.

'For all of us who are believers in our president, these are trying times,' says Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Republican whose Florida district includes the Miami port.

'This ports issue has ricocheted around the country and made it to people's dinner tables like nothing I've ever seen,' said Scott Reed, a GOP consultant. 'It's now an out-of-control political problem.'...

'When it comes to protecting the ports, Republicans really do have a pre-9/11 mind-set,' said Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind.

Among the votes:

--In 2003, House Republicans, on a procedural vote, agreed to kill a Democratic amendment that would have added $250 million for port security grants to a war spending package.

--Two years later, nearly all House Republicans voted against an alternative Homeland Security authorization bill offered by Democrats that called for an additional $400 million for port security.

--Senate Republicans stood together in 2003 to set aside a Democratic amendment that would have provided $120 million more for port cargo screening equipment.

--One year later, all but six Senate Republicans voted to reject a Democratic attempt to add $150 million for port security in a Homeland Security appropriations bill.

That 'record of failure' presents 'an important opportunity for Democrats to argue that they are the ones who have the right approach to protecting the country,' maintains Geoff Garin, a Democratic pollster.

House Republicans were put on record again last week on port security when Democrats tried to force a debate and vote on legislation that would require congressional approval of DP World's takeover. The effort failed. Only two Republicans voted with Democrats....


Election - Year Politics Shadow Ports Issue

Updated On: 3/7/06 at 02:16 PM

[iflitifloat]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 2:59pm

Well, it's hard to play the fear card so cavalierly for years, and attack the wrong country and bad guy in the War on Terror, and then turn around and make a case that the Dubai Arabs shouldn't be penalized for a few bad apple extremists.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 11:49pm

And now the House Republicans have abandoned the sinking Bush/Cheney ship. Snippet:

===

House Agrees To Vote On Ports
Showdown With President Likely

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 8, 2006; A01

Efforts by the White House to hold off legislation challenging a Dubai-owned company's acquisition of operations at six major U.S. ports collapsed yesterday when House Republican leaders agreed to allow a vote next week that could kill the deal.

Appropriations Committee Chairman Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.) will attach legislation to block the deal today to a must-pass emergency spending bill funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. A House vote on the measure next week will set up a direct confrontation with President Bush, who sternly vowed to veto any bill delaying or stopping Dubai Ports World's purchase of London-based Peninsular & Oriental Steamship Co.

"Listen, this is a very big political problem," said House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), explaining that he had to give his rank-and-file members a chance to vote. "There are two things that go on in this town. We do public policy, and we do politics. And you know, most bills at the end of the day, the politics and the policy kind of come together, but not always. And we are into one of these situations where this has become a very hot political potato."

Ron Bonjean, spokesman for House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), said GOP leadership is "endorsing the viewpoint of our members and Chairman Lewis that we do not believe the U.S. should allow a government-owned company to operate American ports."...

The House is still boiling. Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), with bipartisan support, introduced legislation yesterday that would scuttle the deal; mandate that the owners of "critical infrastructure" in the United States, including ports, highways and power plants, be American; and demand that cargo entering U.S. ports be screened within six months of passage.

"This is a question at the heart of the security challenges we will be facing in this next century," Hunter said.

House Homeland Security Chairman Peter T. King (R-N.Y.) has been shopping around a compromise requiring DP World to team with a U.S. partner, which would have complete control of operations at the company's holdings at the ports of New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Miami and New Orleans.

But lawmakers from both parties suggested they could not accept that. Hunter said employees and management would remain obedient to the company's owners, no matter how walled off from operations those owners are. "It's difficult to come to the conclusion that security can be absolute and ownership can be irrelevant," he said.

Even King questioned whether it would be workable. If DP World were guaranteed a percentage of the profits from its U.S. holdings, it would have to have access to financial records that King wants to deny the company. Instead, King said, DP World would have to receive a flat annual sum from those operations, a contract that may be impossible to write.
House Agrees To Vote On Ports: Showdown With President Likely