[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 25 (Thursday, March 2, 2006)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E259]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PORT SECURITY AND THE SALE OF FIRMS OPERATING TERMINALS AT U.S. PORTS

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS

                              of maryland

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, March 2, 2006

  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about port security 
and the sale of firms operating terminals at U.S. ports. The proposed 
sale of the P&O firm--which manages terminal operations at major East 
Coast ports, including the Port of Baltimore--to a company controlled 
by the government of Dubai has made many aware for the first time that 
major seaports in the U.S. are operated by firms controlled by foreign 
interests, including foreign governments.
  We have long known that we have not closed gaps in physical security 
at our ports. Only approximately 5 percent of the nearly 9 million 
containers coming into our nation are physically inspected.
  These gaps exist in part because we have simply not prioritized port 
security. Since 9/11, more than $20 billion in federal funding has been 
directed to aviation security while just over $630 million has been 
directed to port security.
  However, the proposed sale of P&O now makes us aware that not only 
have we overlooked physical security, we have failed to develop the 
systems necessary to manage the unique security issues that the 
increasingly global nature of port management raises.
  Most U.S. ports are owned by public or quasi-public authorities. 
These authorities frequently lease their terminal spaces to operating 
companies. P&O is one such operating company--and a quick review of 
U.S. port facilities reveals that like P&O, many terminal operating 
companies active in the United States are either foreign-owned or are 
subsidiaries of foreign entities.
  In some case, these firms not only manage ports around the world, 
they also run the shipping lines that travel between these ports.
  These kinds of relationships may be very good for business, but our 
government is not comprehensively assessing what threats these 
relationships could pose to our national security.
  The Coast Guard analyzed the P&O deal because this deal was subjected 
to the scrutiny of the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United 
States.
  Under normal circumstances, no federal entity comprehensively 
assesses terminal operating agreements for their security implications.
  Each U.S. port is responsible for developing a facility security 
plan, which the Coast Guard approves. Amazingly, the Coast Guard does 
not regularly review terminal operating agreements as part of its 
assessment of a port's security plan.
  I believe that Congress should, at the very least, examine whether 
the Coast Guard should be required to review terminal operating 
arrangements as part of their review of port facility security plans.
  In the absence of such assessments, we do not really know whether 
firms managing our ports have ownership or business relations that 
could create a security threat.
  Our transportation networks are truly global and all aspects of 
transportation businesses have significant foreign involvement. If our 
government has yet to take stock of these complex business arrangements 
and of the threats they pose to our transportation security, what other 
gaps exist and what incidents more threatening than a proposed sale 
will reveal them?
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, while we have been conducting a national 
dialogue over recent weeks about the extent of foreign involvement that 
should be allowed in the operation of our ports, ports are just one of 
the many pieces of sensitive infrastructure in this nation which have 
not been adequately secured.
  As we continue to examine our national security policies, we must 
examine whether our current laws on foreign ownership and operating 
arrangements pertaining to our nation's infrastructure are in the best 
interests of our national security. The American people well understand 
that the protection of our nation should not be subject to the 
seemingly relentless advancement of trade at all costs.


                          ____________________