[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 2]
[House]
[Pages 1954-1955]
[From the U.S. 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

[[Page 1955]]

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 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.

                          ____________________