[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 195 (Friday, December 8, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2325]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     MARITIME SECURITY ACT OF 1995

                                 ______


                               speech of

                       HON. WALTER B. JONES, JR.

                           of north carolina

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, December 6, 1995

       The House in Committee of the While House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill H.R. 1350, to 
     amend the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 to revitalize the United 
     States-flag merchant marine, and for other purposes;

  Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, last fall the electorate called for the role 
of the Government to change and the size of the Government to be 
reduced. With downsizing and budget cutting, we in Government will need 
to do more for less. We must look for cost-effective entrepreneurial 
approaches to providing services to our country.
  Reinventing Government includes programs related to national 
security. Not all national security programs need to be Government 
owned and staffed. Some activities essential to national security can 
be provided by provided by the private sector, functioning in a 
commercial environment, but readily available to the Government when 
needed for national security.
  There is no debate whether ships and seafarers are needed to carry 
U.S. military cargo and supplies to the areas of conflict. The issue is 
whether some of the sealift can be provided by the private sector at a 
substantially reduced cost to the Government, compared to the 
alternative of a full-time Government fleet fully paid for by the 
Government.
  Both the Bush administration and the Clinton administration 
recognized the need for abundant sealift capacity, especially with the 
reduction of forces overseas and the experiences of the Persian Gulf 
war. Both administrations proposed the use of U.S.-owned and U.S.-
crewed commercial vessels to provide supplemental sustainment lift of 
military cargo and supplies. Dedicated Government-owned ships would 
continue to be used for immediate surge lift. The continuous carriage 
of cargo, called sustainment lift, would be transported on commercial 
vessels.
  At the same time, both administrations recognized the need to 
reinvent the existing maritime program, reduce its costs, and 
deregulate its operations. They would replace the old subsidy program 
based on a cost differential between foreign and Government and the 
private industry to provide modern and efficient ships with U.S.-
citizen crews when needed for war and national emergencies. Flat-fee 
contracts would be approximately one-half the cost of the old programs.
  The new maritime program would cost the Government $100 million per 
year for 52 ships. The private sector would be providing to the 
Government 52 ships worth $5 billion paid for by the private sector. In 
addition to buying the vessel with private funds, the U.S. shipowner 
saves the Government the related inermodal transportation assets that 
would cost billions to duplicate. Also, rather than hiring a full-time 
Government crew, the Government would have use of well-trained and 
loyal merchant mariners when needed.
  Some critics propose eliminating all support for our vital maritime 
industry. They fail to see how shortsighted it would be to kill a 
program primarily financed by the private sector which would eventually 
be replaced by a much more costly Government program.
  Legislation reported out of the National Security Committee (H.R. 
1350) and the Senate Commerce Committee (S. 1189) provides for a core 
fleet of approximately 50 vessels for $100 million per year. Since 
1936, the old program has cost between $200 to $400 million a year.
  When the Government reinvents the way it does business, it looks at 
the need for the program, the cost of the program, and the efficiency 
of the program. There is no question that there is a need for sealift. 
As far as the costs are concerned, the new program costs are cut in 
half, and, by using the private sector for sustainment sealift, the 
Government saves billions of dollars which otherwise would be needed to 
buy and maintain a Government fleet.
  While I believe that there is much to be done to make our domestic 
commercial fleet more competitive with its foreign rivals, it is 
important that we recognize the role of that domestic fleet as part of 
our national defense capability.
  I am one who supports initiatives to reduce the size and cost of 
Government. We must be aware of false economies, however, it would be 
foolish to try to save $100 million this year, only to spend billions 
when the Government must step in to assure its national security.

                          ____________________