PDA

View Full Version : Sorry Patteeu: GOP House appropriations committee votes 62-2 against UAE port deal


banyon
03-08-2006, 06:17 PM
GOP House Panel Votes to Block Ports Deal By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer

39 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - In an election-year repudiation of President Bush, a House panel dominated by Republicans voted overwhelmingly Wednesday to block a Dubai-owned firm from taking control of some U.S port operations.


By 62-2, the Appropriations Committee voted to bar DP World, run by the government of Dubai in the United Arab Emirates, from holding leases or contracts at U.S. ports.

Bush has promised to veto any such measure passed by Congress, but there is widespread public opposition to the deal and the GOP fears losing its advantage on the issue of national security in this fall's elections.

"This is a national security issue," said Rep. Jerry Lewis (news, bio, voting record), the chairman of the panel. The California Republican said the legislation would "keep America's ports in American hands."

As the committee acted, Democrats on the other side of the Capitol were clamoring for a vote on the same issue in the GOP-led Senate.

"We believe an overwhelming majority will vote to end the deal," said Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer (news, bio, voting record) of New York, whose attempt to force the issue to the floor brought the Senate to a late-afternoon standstill.

By its vote, the House committee attached the ports language to a must-pass $91 billion measure financing hurricane recovery and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The full House could consider that measure as early as next week.

While GOP Senate leaders hope to delay a quick showdown with Bush on the issue, the House panel, including members of Bush's own party, showed a willingness to defy him.

"One of the most vulnerable situations facing America is our ports of entry," said Rep. Bill Young, R-Fla., chairman of the House defense appropriations subcommittee. "Whoever's responsible for those ports of entry should be American."

Rep. Marcy Kaptur (news, bio, voting record), D-Ohio., said allowing the DP World takeover to proceed — and ignoring the public outcry over it — would be irresponsible. "The American people elected us to do something when an issue like this comes up," she said.

Only Reps. Jim Kolbe, R-Ariz., and Jim Moran, D-Va., voted against the measure.

"It is premature, we don't have enough information and ... it may turn out to be unnecessary," Moran said. Added Kolbe: "I just don't think this is the right thing to do."

The House and Senate developments underscored the extent to which the politically charged issue has come to dominate the agenda in recent days, with Republicans and Democrats competing to demonstrate the strongest anti-terrorism credentials in the run-up to midterm elections.

banyon
03-08-2006, 06:18 PM
common f****** sense finally prevails.

Adept Havelock
03-08-2006, 06:31 PM
Good news. A company owned by a foreign government has no business running a US port.

A private company might be a different case.

Boozer
03-08-2006, 09:23 PM
Well, it's good to know our ports are secure.



ROFL...Wait, that's not funny at all. That comedy is too black even for me.

Adept Havelock
03-08-2006, 09:40 PM
Well, it's good to know our ports are secure.



ROFL...Wait, that's not funny at all. That comedy is too black even for me.

Isn't that the sad and sorry truth. :banghead:

Eye Patch
03-09-2006, 11:52 AM
Well, it's good to know our ports are secure.


I'm more worried about our borders than I am with the ports.

Now only if we had political grandstanding to fix this problem

go bowe
03-09-2006, 12:02 PM
i think rejecting this deal has nothing to do with security and everything to do with politics, grandstanding, as you say...

Eye Patch
03-09-2006, 12:06 PM
How easy would it be for a terrorist group to come through Tijuana and go after the many military installations in San Diego?

Imagine the political/ideological impact for both the U.S and the jihads of having the ability to attack the military instead of civilians.

Taco John
03-09-2006, 05:07 PM
That's hilarious.

What if ants took over the Whitehouse lawn! Where would George and Laura picnic then!?

journeyscarab
03-09-2006, 05:12 PM
I am glad this failed. And we should now look at all companies running our ports and terminals and take this further.

Then we need to take the borders serious. We need to put our words to action - Homeland Security means Security not 30 pieces of silver to the highest bidder for the sake of "capitalism".

I am conservative for the record.

banyon
03-09-2006, 05:17 PM
I am glad this failed. And we should now look at all companies running our ports and terminals and take this further.

Then we need to take the borders serious. We need to put our words to action - Homeland Security means Security not 30 pieces of silver to the highest bidder for the sake of "capitalism".

I am conservative for the record.

I think this is the first time I've agreed with an entire post of yours.

journeyscarab
03-09-2006, 05:39 PM
I think this is the first time I've agreed with an entire post of yours.

:thumb:

Radar Chief
03-10-2006, 08:59 AM
i think rejecting this deal has nothing to do with security and everything to do with politics, grandstanding, as you say...

:clap: Yup.