[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 20 (Thursday, February 16, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H358-H359]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
RAISING CONCERNS ABOUT UNITED ARAB EMIRATES' TAKING OVER U.S. PORTS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Foley) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring to the House's
attention a transaction that is being contemplated on five of our major
ports, five important ports of entry in the United States. New Orleans,
Miami, Newark, Philadelphia and New York are all being considered as an
asset to be transferred to the United Arab Emirates soon after review
of the transactional details.
I am concerned about this transaction for several reasons. First and
foremost, it has occurred under what is called Council for Foreign
Investments, as it is known, chaired by the Secretary of the Treasury,
Mr. Snow, and multiple agencies of the United States Government to
review transactions launched by foreign entities to purchase assets
here in the United States.
Why am I concerned about the United Arab Emirate's ownership and
potential management of our ports of entry, these five strategic ports?
For many reasons.
Just yesterday, it was reported that the United Arab Emirates was in
negotiations urging a more robust trade relationship with Iran. Just
yesterday, they were making a decision to move forward with a more
robust trading platform with Iran.
I am sure most of our colleagues realize that in recent days we have
gone to enormous lengths to convince our allies and our friends around
the world to put pressure on Iran in order to reduce the likelihood of
their using nuclear weapons or building nuclear capabilities. So at a
time when we are trying to get our international partners to put
pressure on Iran, the United Arab Emirates is doing the exact opposite
by encouraging and engaging in trade debate with Iran.
The United Arab Emirates has worked with us since 9/11 on helping us
fight the War on Terror, but it has always been well known and
documented that a number of the terrorist activity planning and
financing was taking place in these very countries that would now have
control of our ports.
In this country, if we were asked to turn over our airport security
to another foreign national, people would be rightfully outraged. But
in this particular transaction, we cannot seem to get any information
as to what are the requirements of security, what are the requirements
for people and personnel who would be employed there, what are the kind
of safeguards of inspection of cargo.
I have long stated my concern on port security. I feel we have failed
to adequately secure cargo coming into this country. Now I am told in
my inquiry to Secretary Snow that they couldn't really answer any of my
questions yesterday in the committee because it was a more secretive or
at least private transaction that could not be commented on.
As a Member of Congress, it bothers me that we have a transaction
being considered and contemplated where we have no information provided
to Members of Congress.
{time} 1245
Tomorrow, President Bush travels to my home State of Florida, and he
will visit the port of Tampa, not a port being considered for sale, but
a port nonetheless, a very important port of commerce in the State of
Florida.
I hope the President as he flies to Florida will contemplate the
utilization of the law known as Exxon-Florio, which allows the
President to intercede and stop a transfer of assets if it is reflected
to be of some national security concern.
We have recently seen, because of the outpouring of opposition to the
Chinese Government's acquisition of a United States domestic oil
producer, we have seen that deal unravel because of domestic pressure
on not allowing the Chinese Government to take ownership of a domestic
refinery operation.
Now, I hope the same outrage is expressed by our constituents in
trying to figure out what is involved in this transaction. How can we
bring to fruition, at least we hope, a termination of these
engagements, and continue the
[[Page H359]]
operation of the ports as they currently are conducted.
Again, they are the largest seaports in the United States on the
eastern seaboard, including New Orleans, so the potential threat to our
country is not imagined, but is real. We have heightened security, as I
mentioned, at the airports. We are trying to heighten security at the
seaports, but I believe we will be impeded if we do not look at this
transaction.
It is not a foreign entity; it is a foreign government that seeks to
have controlling interest in these six ports on the eastern seaboard.
We again inquired of Secretary Snow yesterday. We inquired yesterday of
Ambassador Portman. I hope some answers are forthcoming as to how they
strategically thought through this transaction
But it is my fervent hope that as we continue to debate and discuss
this issue that the President again will use the authority granted to
him by the Congress and intercede and not allow the transaction to take
place.
____________________