A test of Democracy in the US

[Bozo Erectus]

Congress sets up fight with Bush

A powerful committee of the US House of Representatives has voted to block a deal that would give a Dubai-based company control over six US ports.

The vote is a direct challenge to President George W Bush by members of his own Republican party in Congress.

Lawmakers say they are concerned about the security implications of the deal - which is unpopular with the public.

Dubai Ports World is taking over P&O, which runs six major US ports from New York to New Orleans.

The House Appropriations Committee voted 62-2 for an amendment to block the deal.

The full House is expected to confirm the committee's decision next week and the measure is also expected to be approved in the Senate.

The deal is currently in limbo while the US conducts a review.

Americans opposed

Mr Bush has strongly backed the $6.85bn (£3.94bn) deal, saying repeatedly that he would veto any law designed to block it.

Map of ports at issue in the DP World row
But Jerry Lewis, who heads the appropriations committee has made his legislation part of an emergency spending bill that provides extra funds for hurricane disaster relief and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - which the president would be hard pressed to reject.

"We want to make sure that the security of our ports is in America's hands," Rep Lewis, a California Republican, said before the vote.

Opinion polls have shown an overwhelming majority of Americans think the White House is wrong to back the deal.

With an election due in November and the popularity of both the president and Congress low, some Republicans apparently fear that Democrats could use the deal against them.


HAVE YOUR SAY
It is ludicrous to spend billions of dollars on Homeland Security and wilfully trade six doorways to the very thing we are attempting to secure
Melvin Moore, Baltimore, USA

Send us your comments
"We're not going to let the Democrats get to the right of us on national security," Rep Peter King, who chairs the homeland security committee, said recently.

The head of DP World said the deal would not give the company control of security at the ports.

Security "is in the hands of the American government. This includes the border security guards, customs officers and the US ports Authority. Our role is only loading and offloading goods," Sultan Bin Salim told the BBC Arabic service.

DP World is a state-owned company based in the United Arab Emirates, a US ally.

It is moving to take control of UK-based P&O, which holds contracts to run six ports in the US: New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Miami and New Orleans.

Veto threat

President Bush has never vetoed a law in more than five years in office.

Congressional leaders reportedly believe they would have enough votes to override a presidential veto.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4784842.stm

The country is finally united on an issue. We dont want the port deal with Dubai to go through. Republicans and Democrats are united, along with an overwhelming majority of Americans of every political stripe. Yet Bush says that he knows best, and threatens to use his veto for the first time ever --- to further the interests of the government of Dubai, not the United States. If he goes ahead and vetos, Congress says it will vote to override, but I dont have that much faith in the integrity of Republican legislators. When push comes to shove, I think they'll knuckle under to pressure from the Whitehouse, and help the President thwart the will of the American people and the Congress. I hope Im wrong. Hopefully their dismal chances of getting reelected if they cave in to the President will stiffen their backbones.

 

[JohnRM]

Bush will veto and Congress will find a reason not to overturn the decision.

 

[Xen]

Bush will veto and Congress will find a reason not to overturn the decision.

 

[bhsup]

This isn't really a test of democracy at all. It is how our system of government works. It's not as if the port deal going through means we're some fascist state.

 

[Cuivienen]

Bush will veto and Congress will override the veto. They won't pass up an opportunity to be on the good side of ~70% of the country (and Congress might have a higher approval rating than the President for the first time since Nixon).

 

[CartesianFart]

United States ports have been bought by foreigners for about 30 or more years now. I see nothing wrong with free trade.I find this a little xenophobic(unless the senators are using this as a bait for other purposes) and a insult to our allies in the Middle East.


Edited:i deleted the quote saying China somewhat joint-venture ownership in some of San Diego ports companies.I really need to do research on this or i will be a fool. I swear that i've read somewhere that China have some ownership in some ports in US,but not really sure where at.

 

[Little Raven]

They say people get the government they deserve, and with this, I'm beginning to think America really does deserve Bush.

Of all the stupid issues to 'unite' the American public. Good lord.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

United States ports have been bought by foreigners for about 30 or more years now. I see nothing wrong with free trade.I find this a little xenophobic(unless the senators are using this as a bait for other purposes) and a insult to our allies in the Middle East.

Its that clash of civilizations Western elites like to deny is taking place. People at the grass roots level understand whats going on though. As far as insulting them goes, Middle Eastern leaders insult the US and the West daily. Its one of the few ways they have of drumming up support among their own people.

Of all the stupid issues to 'unite' the American public. Good lord.

I hardly think the safety of our ports is a stupid issue.

 

[Little Raven]

I hardly think the safety of our ports is a stupid issue.

It isn't. But if you want to address the safety of our ports, do that. Don't pretend that locking Dubai out of port management role accomplishes anything towards that goal.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

This isn't really a test of democracy at all. It is how our system of government works. It's not as if the port deal going through means we're some fascist state.

Yeah thats true. But the fact remains that if the Republicans cant bring about an override, the will of the American people will have been thwarted.

Bush will veto and Congress will find a reason not to overturn the decision.

Omigod, if Bush vetos, and then the Republicans fail to override, the GOP can kiss the House and Senate goodbye. The collapse of the Republican party will have been complete.

Bush will veto and Congress will override the veto. They won't pass up an opportunity to be on the good side of ~70% of the country (and Congress might have a higher approval rating than the President for the first time since Nixon).

Even if they do manage to override, the Republicans are hardly out of the woods. Thats how toxic Bush has become. He gets more radioactive every day, thanks to this port fiasco. By election time, Republican candidates will be trying to be photographed next to Clinton.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

It isn't. But if you want to address the safety of our ports, do that. Don't pretend that locking Dubai out of port management role accomplishes anything towards that goal.

Why is it inconceivable that terrorists based in the Middle East might be able to infiltrate a Middle East based shipping firm that controls terminals in major US ports, and arrange for weapons or operatives to be smuggled there in containers?

 

[Little Raven]

Why is it inconceivable that terrorists based in the Middle East might be able to infiltrate a Middle East based shipping firm that controls terminals in major US ports, and arrange for weapons or operatives to be smuggled there in containers?

It isn't. But given that Dubai is notoriously pro-western nation, and Dubai Ports World a perfectly respected international business, they aren't any more likely to be infiltrated than anyone else.

Moreover, Dubai Ports World (or whoever else manages the ports) has absolutely no control over security. That is handled by the relevant Port Authorities. And do you know what those Port Authorities are saying, and have been saying since 9/11?

That they're desperately under funded, and that in excess of 90% of containers shipped into this country undergo absolutely no screening whatsoever.

That's a real security risk, and one that should be addressed. But instead, we're worrying about Arabs owning the trucks that are used to load and unload ships. Talk about skewed priorities.

Moreover, I don't know if you've noticed, but America is currently surviving on foreign capital. Blocking this deal on account of Dubai geographical location smacks of protectionism and xenophobia, which are two things international investors just hate. Do we really want to risk dampening foreign appetite for US investments over such nonsense?

Believe me, it pains me to be on the same side of an issue as President Bush. But even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and this happens to be the magic minute.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

It isn't. But given that Dubai is notoriously pro-western nation,

Lets not get carried away. Its pro Western only in comparison to its neighbors. Being truly pro Western isnt a viable option for a Middle Eatern ruler. Even Jordans Abdullah can only go so far.

and Dubai Ports World a perfectly respected international business, they aren't any more likely to be infiltrated than anyone else.

I disagree. If I was in Al Qaeda, infiltrating this respectable company with access to US ports, would be a top priority.

Moreover, Dubai Ports World (or whoever else manages the ports) has absolutely no control over security. That is handled by the relevant Port Authorities. And do you know what those Port Authorities are saying, and have been saying since 9/11?

That they're desperately under funded, and that in excess of 90% of containers shipped into this country undergo absolutely no screening whatsoever.

That's a real security risk, and one that should be addressed. But instead, we're worrying about Arabs owning the trucks that are used to load and unload ships. Talk about skewed priorities.

Thats a very serious security threat, I agree wholeheartedly. Its true, over 90% of containers entering the country undergo no screening. All the more reason to block the Dubai deal.

Moreover, I don't know if you've noticed, but America is currently surviving on foreign capital. Blocking this deal on account of Dubai geographical location smacks of protectionism and xenophobia, which are two things international investors just hate. Do we really want to risk dampening foreign appetite for US investments over such nonsense?

If we start sacrificing security for financial reasons, we almost deserve to be attacked.

Believe me, it pains me to be on the same side of an issue as President Bush.

Thats what I was thinking, this must be tough for alot of people on the Left, being on the same side as Bush.

But even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and this happens to be the magic minute.

Theres one thing you can count on in every issue. He's always wrong.

 

[Little Raven]

I disagree. If I was in Al Qaeda, infiltrating this respectable company with access to US ports, would be a top priority.

But you wouldn't be at all interested in infiltrating P&O Navigation Company?

All the more reason to block the Dubai deal.

Why? Blocking Dubai won't change the situation of the Port Authority at all. The only thing it will do is give people a false sense of security that the government is actually doing something about port security.

If we start sacrificing security for financial reasons, we almost deserve to be attacked.

Financial stability is every bit as important as security when it comes to protecting the American way of life. Why do you think Bin Laden targeted the financial capital of the US?

Thats what I was thinking, this must be tough for alot of people on the Left, being on the same side as Bush.

I have a lot of backing on this from the Left?

News to me. So far, the only people in my corner seem to be CATO. Are they considered Leftist these days? Newspeak gets so confusing…

 

[Kayak]

It isn't. But if you want to address the safety of our ports, do that. Don't pretend that locking Dubai out of port management role accomplishes anything towards that goal.

Interestingly, this is my view as well. The Dems are seizing on this to get at the Rebs strong point, National Security, not to make our ports any safer. The Rebs are jumping on board to protect themselves politicaly. Neither side is leading. Bush actually has the right veiw. Not that he has done anything to stengthen port security otherwise.

 

[Secular]

I just don't even see the point other than the capital hill wanting to show that they're "pro-active". Security does not change in the least, the UAE is an ALLY, and it's a positive economic move.

This is a form of accepted racism thats becoming more and more prevailent in the U.S. and i find more than a little disturbing.

 

[Stormbringer]

We are forgetting that the legislation to block the deal is actually an amendment to a special apropriations bill that apropriates money for Iraq and Katrina relief. Bush cannot veto that bill, because the money has to go through, and so I think he will just let it go.

 

[betazed]

@Bozo: In this case, I have to say that you are wrong and getting swayed by typical political scare-mongering.

The Dubai company is just a financial company. Think of it as a bank. If you consider having Dubai holding the finance of US ports as a security risk then I have news for you. Citibank, one of the top banks in US is primarily owned by Sheiks in ME. Go figure! Then by your logic that should also be a security risk!

Just like LR, it pains me to agree with Bush, but in this one case he is right.

Another pointer that the hill has got it wrong is that the Dems and Reps are united on this issue. Which means that it is a popular issue. Which means that it must be wrong, since the general populace in US nowadays usually gets everything wrong!

 

[Irish Caesar]

^ I can't really add anything to what betazed said, but I'd like to go on the record as agreeing with it.

 

[Stile]

Breaking news says Dubai to give up management stake in US ports. I guess that defuses everything. They will sell it to another company (probably based out of Iran).