Posted on 04/24/2008 12:43:15 PM PDT by SmithL
WASHINGTON - The House has overwhelmingly passed an $8.4 billion Coast Guard bill despite a threatened veto from President Bush.
The bill would make the Coast Guard enforce security zones around eight liquefied natural gas terminals. The White House objects to the bill saying Coast Guard assets would be diverted from other high-priority missions.
The measure was approved Thursday 395-7, a veto-proof margin.
The bill also sets stricter crime reporting requirements for cruise ships and mandates double hulls on large cargo ships to prevent oil spills. It also requires oceangoing ships to install ballast water treatment equipment to protect the Great Lakes and other U.S. waters from invasive species.
Isn't it a little late for that?
unbelievable. And all but seven republicans voted for it.
Late by a few decades.
STATEMENT OF ADMIRAL THAD W. ALLEN, COMMANDANT OF THE U.S. COAST GUARD, REGARDING H.R. 2830 - COAST GUARD AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2008
WASHINGTON - “I am deeply concerned about a number of provisions contained in H.R. 2830 (Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2008) that I believe would have a detrimental effect on the Coast Guard’s ability to carry out our many vital maritime safety, security and environmental protection missions. As the commandant, I have an obligation to the public and our Coast Guard men and women to ensure the Coast Guard retains the necessary discretion and flexibility to meet our mission demands in an often-changing, dangerous operating environment. This bill, in its current form, does not do that. I am also disappointed that proposals to protect seafarers who participate in the investigation and adjudication of environmental crimes and enhance our ability to prosecute alien migrant smugglers at sea were not included in the bill. While the bill contains several provisions that would improve Coast Guard operations and mission support, I strongly oppose other provisions as written in the bill that would limit the commandant’s authority to direct Coast Guard operations and assign senior personnel to specific duties. I look forward to continuing to work with the Congress to address each of the provisions outlined in the Statement of Administration Policy.”
I think as commander-in-chief he doesn’t have to foolow the new law because it violates the US Constitution.
How so?
The President is CNC, and the House of Representatives is, uh, NOT? Perhaps?
Congress sets the regulations for the Military not the pres, he merely commands the forces and follows their guidelines.
Has the Coast Guard recovered from the Deepwater mess yet?
Excerpt:
After 9/11, few government entities were as poorly prepared to take on an expanded role as the U.S. Coast Guard. Already charged with sea rescues, drug interdictions and immigration enforcement, the Coast Guard became the primary maritime force for homeland security, tasked with protecting 95,000 miles of coastline and 361 ports with an old and antiquated fleet.
So five years ago the Coast Guard undertook a massive modernization program called "Deepwater" and ended up way over its head. As correspondent Steve Kroft reports, the $24 billion project has turned into a fiasco that has set new standards for incompetence, and triggered a Justice Department investigation.
(snip)
From the outset, the Coast Guard didn’t have the resources to run a $24 billion project. So it outsourced the entire program to the private sector—not just the construction—but the day-to-day management of the contract. It went to a company called Integrated Coast Guard Systems, a joint venture of Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman that had been formed specifically for this job. Not surprisingly, the joint venture picked Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman to do the lion's share of the work.
One of the first people to send up a warning flare about the contract was Captain Kevin Jarvis, who, until his retirement last fall, commanded of the Coast Guard’s Engineering and Logistics Center.
"People have told us, ‘Look, the people that were supposedly managing the contractors were, in many cases, the contractors themselves.’ The same companies. Correct?" Kroft asks.
"Correct. Correct. People say that this is like the fox watching the henhouse. And it's worse than that," Capt. Jarvis says. "It's where the government asked the fox to develop the security system for the henhouse. Then told 'em, ‘You're gonna do it. You know, by the way, we'll give you the security code to the system and we'll tell you when we're on vacation.'"
(snip)
From the outset, the Coast Guard didn’t have the resources to run a $24 billion project. So it outsourced the entire program to the private sector—not just the construction—but the day-to-day management of the contract. It went to a company called Integrated Coast Guard Systems, a joint venture of Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman that had been formed specifically for this job. Not surprisingly, the joint venture picked Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman to do the lion's share of the work.
One of the first people to send up a warning flare about the contract was Captain Kevin Jarvis, who, until his retirement last fall, commanded of the Coast Guard’s Engineering and Logistics Center.
"People have told us, ‘Look, the people that were supposedly managing the contractors were, in many cases, the contractors themselves.’ The same companies. Correct?" Kroft asks.
"Correct. Correct. People say that this is like the fox watching the henhouse. And it's worse than that," Capt. Jarvis says. "It's where the government asked the fox to develop the security system for the henhouse. Then told 'em, ‘You're gonna do it. You know, by the way, we'll give you the security code to the system and we'll tell you when we're on vacation.'"
(snip)
“We, don’t like the orders you’re giving the CG, so we’ll just remove the ability to give those orders.”
That about right? Sounds like Congress is issuing orders to the CG to me...
I’m not sure but as commander-and-chief the congress cannot dictate to him where troops are deployed only fund the troops or not.
I am also disappointed that proposals to protect seafarers who participate in the investigation and adjudication of environmental crimes and ENHANCE OUR ABILITY TO PROSECUTE ALIEN MIGRANT SMUGGLERS AT SEA WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE BILL.”
That one in particular bothers me.
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.