Thanks for the corrections regarding the ChiComs. In any event, the main original argument in '76 (which carried Reagan to the conventin, saving his bacon in Texas and beyond) was largely a matter of justice, not whether the Panamianians could run the operation well.
I don't particularly want the ChiComs being part owners of the management company running the ports either. The secondary argument had to do with the United States being able to move in and act to protect the Canal as needed without interference. That's a slam dunk when you already own it.
You are welcome.
BTW: All the Pentagon people I speak with say it is still is a slam dunk to protect the Canal. Treaty wise and militarily.