US House to vote on ports despite company promise

Reuters ^ | Friday 10 March 2006 | Steve Holland and Susan Cornwell

[Stellar Dendrite]

The U.S. House of Representatives will forge ahead with a vote on blocking an Arab-owned company from managing U.S. ports, to ensure the firm sheds its U.S. holdings as promised, a leadership spokesman said on Friday.

The Republican-run House's refusal to back away from the showdown vote was another blow to President George W. Bush, who suffered a stinging defeat on Thursday when Dubai Ports World said it intended to back out of the deal his administration had approved.

Reverberations from the political earthquake continued on Friday. The United Arab Emirates broke off talks on a free trade pact with the United States, although a spokeswoman for the U.S. Trade Representative's office said delays are common.

Bush said he was concerned the opposition sent a worrying message to Middle East allies.

"In order to win the war on terror, we have got to strengthen our relationships and friendships with moderate Arab countries in the Middle East," Bush told newspaper editors.

State-owned Dubai Ports World surrendered to unrelenting criticism from both Republicans and Democrats in giving up the management of some terminals at six major U.S. ports.

The UAE company said it would transfer the ports to a U.S. entity at the behest of Dubai's ruler, to allay concerns the deal posed a threat to American national security. Details of the transfer were not outlined.

The White House had hoped the announcement would resolve the unprecedented crisis between Bush and a Congress run by his own party in open revolt.

But Ron Bonjean, spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert, said the House vote on a provision to bar the deal would go ahead on Wednesday or Thursday anyway.

"It's a smart move to keep it (the legislation) in there, in case the Dubai thing doesn't work out," he told Reuters.

NATIONAL SECURITY

The outlook for a Senate vote was less clear. Senate Republican leaders have been trying to avoid one in the near future. Deal critic Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, wants more information from the White House.

"If things are as they appear, this is a great victory for national security. But make no mistake, we are going to scrutinize this deal with a fine-tooth comb to make sure the separation between American port operators and Dubai Ports World is complete and security is tight as a drum," he said.

Dubai Ports Chairman Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem, asked if the firm would sell the U.S. port management rights, told Reuters: "All this is being worked out by our parties in the States."

But David Hamod, president of the National U.S.-Arab Chamber of Commerce, said it would be hard to find a U.S. company to step in.

"The advantage that the overseas company has is economies of scale. They're doing this on a global level and so it will be very difficult to find a U.S. company in this business large enough to take over the operations," Hamod said.

He also said his group was hearing calls for retribution, including keeping Americans out of Arab markets. "But it's a tiny minority of people who are arguing that," he said.

Bush, who had vowed to veto efforts to block the deal, praised the UAE as a committed ally in the war on terrorism.

"I'm concerned about a broader message this issue could send to our friends and allies around the world, particularly in the Middle East," Bush said.

Treasury Secretary John Snow said his department's lawyers were in contact with DP World about its intentions. He also said the political furor was an isolated case, as he tried to limit damage to the U.S. free-trade image.

Larry Sabato, a political science professor at the University of Virginia, said congressional Republicans are running away from Bush this election year.

"In a way, the port deal was a godsend to them," Sabato said. "It allowed them to put a lot of daylight between themselves and a very unpopular president."

A new poll Friday registered another low of 37 percent in Bush's approval rating.

(Additional reporting by Thomas Ferraro, Doug Palmer and Tim Ahmann)

[clawrence3]

That's not an "attack" - now, can you answer my question: are you saying a massive global trade war is not even possible?

[indcons]

"That's not an 'attack'"
Really? Okay, I'll take you at your word.

"now, can you answer my question: are you saying a massive global trade war is not even possible?"

I answered your question, the answer was NO. What part of my post did you not understand? Tell me and I'll explain again. This time though, I'll do it s-l-o-w-l-y.

[Earthdweller]

This has gone further then can be possibly be justified. The pubbies and the Dems are together on his...I smell blood in the water.

They are traders to the public.

Watch out rulers of Rome...the new long knives have their eyes on you.

[Txsleuth]

Boy, I don't know...I would have to study each congressweinie to find out..

But, I think that they are looking at polls too much, and their constituents may have been listening the MSM and SOME talk show hosts too much...LOL

[Earthdweller]

traders = Traitors

[rodguy911]

lets hope not.

[unfortunately a bluestater]

Very well said.

[rodguy911]

I'm baffled, it's politcal hackism at its worst hour.

[CFC__VRWC]

Frankly, right now I'm less worried about possible business retribution by the UAE than I am about our spineless, panicked, slobbering-with-hysteria Republican Congresspeople and Senators being stampeded by the media into finishing their job of completely destroying George Bush. If you want to see everything go completely to hell in a flash, just wait and see what happens if the Congress manages to back themselves into the corner of driving a sitting President out of office in disgrace when we have 140,000 or so troops overseas fighting a war.

[clawrence3]

So, if we kick out every foreign-owned company, no trade war either? That's good to know - I guess I have no problems with the House vote then - thanks for the guarantee.

[Bubbatuck]

Why is it unconstitutional? Does the Constitution claim that foreign governments have the right to buy any US asset they want?

[CFC__VRWC]

Everyone involved in this thing just needs to back off and take a few deep breaths. Unfortunately the GOP Congress is too friggin' stupid to realize this, and the Dims are just standing off to the side having orgasms as the worst case of Republican autocannibalism in decades, maybe ever, takes place before their eyes.

[rodguy911]

My pint is that it appears, by what little info we have been privy to, that UAE offered up lots of valued intel. To toy with that over some leases of ports that threaten us very little in the scope of things, is ridiculous.
The bottom line is that we will probably lose what intel they were providing and that endangers the troops.
That is my main beef although there are certainly other aspects of the deal that are extremely bizarre..

[Hardastarboard]

Lord help me... I actually have gained respect for McStain on this issue.

But only this once... I promise.

OK, but don't let it happen again.

[Mo1]

Nice going Republicans

You deserve to lose in November!

[rodguy911]

It's a definite cluster...

[Candor7]

Watch the RINOS RANKS EXPAND.

We have no merchant marine.

We need massive shipping capacity for the reconstruction og Afghanistan and Iraq.

Those who do not get that context have sopld out their president and the Republican chance for success in those countries.

The Dems have ACED those Republicans who have not supported the president.

What a sorry lot of fickle loosers our Republican Party has become.

Now its cryin' time, as we watch the whorish RINOs ranks expand

God I wish we had some more Republicans like Tom Delay.

This bleating lot of RINOS we have in congress now make me wat to puke!!!!!

Screw all you RINOs. Our president will get the shipping capacity we need, despite the DEMS and RINOs, one way or the other.

Put your Quarters in the Democrat party's Slot , you disloyal RINOs who have joined the Democrats, and crank the handle to get your Dimocrap candy!!!!

[Earthdweller]

This all because Bush broke the code.

Republicans are supposed to be such and such and Dems are supposed to play the opposite role. Bush wanted to make Pubbies look human. He crossed the line. Skull and Bones and such stuff.

This is not a game you silly frat boys...We are in a war!

[bayourant]

Isnt that the truth. I though the Honorable Rep KIng from New York said yesterday the issue was over after he did his part in this bloody mess. Has he changed his mind? If not will he hog the tv like he has done the last few weeks and try to stop this.

[CFC__VRWC]

Are this guys in tough relection campaigns?

Not many of them, and that's just the biggest irony of all. They've so thoroughly picked their voters by gerrymandering their districts that less than 10 percent of the seats in the House are even remotely competitive.