Posted on 02/22/2006 3:54:45 AM PST by LouAvul
WASHINGTON - Lawmakers determined to capsize the pending sale of shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates said President Bush's surprise veto threat won't deter them.
Bush on Tuesday brushed aside objections by leaders in the Senate and House that the $6.8 billion sale could raise risks of terrorism at American ports. In a forceful defense of his administration's earlier approval of the deal, he pledged to veto any bill Congress might approve to block the agreement.
The sale's harshest critics were not appeased.
"I will fight harder than ever for this legislation, and if it is vetoed I will fight as hard as I can to override it," said Rep. Pete King, R-N.Y., chairman of the Homeland Security Committee. King and Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer (news, bio, voting record) of New York said they will introduce emergency legislation to suspend the ports deal.
Another Democrat, Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, urged his colleagues to force Bush to wield his veto, which Bush — in his sixth year in office — has never done. "We should really test the resolve of the president on this one because what we're really doing is securing the safety of our people."
The White House and supporters planned a renewed campaign this week to reassure the public the sale was safe. Senior officials were expected to explain at a press conference Wednesday what persuaded them to approve the deal, the first-ever sale involving U.S. port operations to a foreign, state-owned company.
The sale — set to be completed in early March — would put Dubai Ports in charge of major shipping operations in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia. "If there was any chance that this transaction would jeopardize the security of the United States, it would not go forward," Bush said.
Defending his decision, Bush responded to a chorus of objections this week in Congress over potential security concerns in the sale of London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co.
Bush's veto threat sought to quiet a political storm that has united Republican governors and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee with liberal Democrats, including New York Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Schumer.
To assuage concerns, the administration disclosed some assurances it negotiated with Dubai Ports. It required mandatory participation in U.S. security programs to stop smuggling and detect illegal shipments of nuclear materials; roughly 33 other port companies participate in these voluntarily. The Coast Guard also said it was nearly finished inspecting Dubai Ports' facilities in the United States.
A senior Homeland Security official, Stewart Baker, said U.S. intelligence agencies were consulted "very early on to actually look at vulnerabilities and threats."
Frist said Tuesday, before Bush's comments, that he would introduce legislation to put the sale on hold if the White House did not delay the takeover. He said the deal raised "serious questions regarding the safety and security of our homeland.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., asked the president for a moratorium on the sale until it could be studied further. "We must not allow the possibility of compromising our national security due to lack of review or oversight by the federal government," Hastert said.
Maryland's Republican Gov. Robert Ehrlich, during a tour of Baltimore's port, called the deal an "overly secretive process at the federal level."
Bush took the rare step of calling reporters to his conference room on Air Force One after returning from a speech in Colorado. He also stopped to talk before television cameras after he returned to the White House.
"I can understand why some in Congress have raised questions about whether or not our country will be less secure as a result of this transaction," the president said. "But they need to know that our government has looked at this issue and looked at it carefully."
A senior executive from Dubai Ports World pledged the company would agree to whatever security precautions the U.S. government demanded to salvage the deal. Chief operating officer Edward "Ted" H. Bilkey promised Dubai Ports "will fully cooperate in putting into place whatever is necessary to protect the terminals."
Bilkey traveled to Washington in an effort to defuse the growing controversy.
Bush said protesting lawmakers should understand that if "they pass a law, I'll deal with it with a veto."
Lawmakers from both parties have noted that some of the Sept. 11 hijackers used the United Arab Emirates as an operational and financial base. In addition, critics contend the UAE was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components sent to Iran, North Korea and Libya by a Pakistani scientist.
Sen. Susan Collins (news, bio, voting record), R-Maine, and Rep. Jane Harman (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., said they would introduce a "joint resolution of disapproval" when they returned to Washington next week. Collins heads the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and Harman is the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.
Bush's veto threat didn't stop local efforts to block the deal. New Jersey's governor, Jon S. Corzine, said the state will file lawsuits in federal and state courts opposing the agreement. Corzine, a Democrat, cited a "deep, deep feeling that this is the wrong direction for our nation to take."
It did take place. It just didn't take place in public.
If I hadn't I wouldn't have asked.
Did they all bid on the contract? Because if they didn't bid, it didn't matter. They weren't in the running.
Her nomination was not part of any "master plan" but W and Rove saw the possibilities very quickly when they saw the political right opposition growing lush. These fellows are astute if nothing else. Tin ear charges against Bush just don't make sense any more. They know what they are doing.Outside of this war and the court appointments I am NOT a Bush fan. He is a Keynesian in his economics and thus is a believer that the engine of the economy may be the Market but the instruments and controls are all best monitored and adjusted by the government.
Governing in secrecy gives me a woody.
Nothing will have changed except for the fact the new company is partly owned by the state of UAE which means it becomes a political tool for them.
Well, to be fair, if the President wants to wear the Republican tag then he should act like one. His out of control spending, his complete avoidance of the border issue, CFR, the ports... all of these do not inspire confidence.
Almost??
The 45-day review did NOT take place. Only the initial 30-day review took place.
I think a lot of the republicans are probably afraid to speak out.
The best part about governing without public accountability is that sinkspur can simply claim it did, but we were not privvy.
It's convenient AND festive, all at the same time!
Did P&O use ports for political purposes?
I don't have enough facts; I was referring to earlier posts. Thanks for clarification.
Again, this is a very worrysome situation. I wish we were not in it.
For the record, DP World handles 9% of the world's shipping, to state the obvious 91% is handled by other port companies/entities. The two largest competitors are PSA International of Singapore and Hutchinson Whampoa which is based in Hong Kong.
It's not a matter of bidding on a contract, if I understand correctly. What happened is BP World moved to acquire British-based Peninsular & Oriental that was already operating these ports. PSA also bid to acquire P&O but BP World won out.
It's actually unclear to me what role the U.S. plays in all this. Perhaps they need to approve the continued operation by BP World of those ports that P&O had previously operated before the acquisition.
...or he could just be...an arrogant ass..."these vartlets ain't gonna tell me what to do. What do they know...I am the President of the most powerful country on earth. Rain on 'em all"
No matter what...the political numbness of this astounds me...I am far from being a politician...but I am 99.9% sure that I could have seen the firestorm coming..and made different arrangements to educate the masses.
The results of the initial 30-day secret review must be made available to congress.
And given the national security implications, an additional 45-day investigation is mandated by law with findings to be made available to the President and Congress.
President Bush for some strange reason decided not to conduct the 45-day investigation even though it is mandated by law. I expect that investigation will now take place.
Too bad the profits go to a non-US company.
"The friendship of the UAE is so strategically important that we need to have them overseeing some of our major ports?"
(Sorry, I forgot the question mark at the end, as well as the "n" in friendship.)
Opps! Make that DP World, not BP World.
I'm mixing up my oil companies with my port companies. :)
Well, I guess that does it then. jimbo says it can't be done, so it can't be done.
As if a stock purchase it were a competitive bid government procurement.
This whole thing seems like just another case where everyone wants to be in charge and say who should run what --and nobody knows notttin'. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who wants to stop the DPW from buying P&O, is free to buy P&O with their own money. I object when they want to raise my taxes so they can buy it with my money against my will.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.