[Mb-civic] GOP Leaders Draw Back From Bid to Block Port Deal - Washington Post

[William Swiggard]

GOP Leaders Draw Back From Bid to Block Port Deal
But Bipartisan Critics on Hill Vow to Force Security Review

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, February 25, 2006; A03

A Dubai company's offer to delay taking control of terminal operations 
at six U.S. ports, combined with aggressive White House lobbying, has 
tempered a rush by congressional GOP leaders for quick action next week 
to block the $6.8 billion transaction, which has triggered a political 
furor.

Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) will meet with House GOP leaders 
Tuesday to discuss the chamber's next move, while aides to Senate 
Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) said he will wait to be briefed by 
the company before taking a stand. Both Hastert and Frist had issued 
strong statements earlier raising concerns about national security in 
the wake of Dubai Ports World's acquisition of the London-based 
Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. and its terminal operations 
at six major U.S. ports, including those in New York and Baltimore.

But a bipartisan group of senators, who dismissed the Arab maritime 
company's offer late Thursday as meaningless, said yesterday that they 
will try to force a vote early next week on legislation that would 
require a 45-day national security investigation of the deal.

Senators from across the political spectrum -- including Charles E. 
Schumer (D-N.Y.), Norm Coleman (R-Minn.), Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), 
Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine), Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), Tom Coburn 
(R-Okla.), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.) -- said they 
will push for a fast vote on legislation that would block the takeover 
of port operations while the administration conducts a national security 
review of the transaction's implications.

The secretaries of homeland security and the Treasury would have to 
brief members of Congress on their findings, and Congress would have the 
authority to reject the deal.

"A brief period for the company to continue lobbying without the full 
45-day investigation that should have been done from the beginning is 
simply not enough," Schumer said. "If the president were to voluntarily 
institute the investigation and delay the contract, that would be a good 
step. But a simple cooling-off period will not allay our very serious 
concerns about this dubious deal."

GOP leadership aides said they are not certain lawmakers can avert a 
showdown between Congress and the White House.

"It would have been a lot easier to frame this deal correctly before 
this public relations fiasco," said one House leadership aide. "We're 
going to give the White House a chance to explain the deal, but it's 
going to be very hard to put the genie back in the bottle."

Although the transaction has been in the works for months and was 
approved by a federal interagency committee Jan. 17, the White House was 
caught by surprise early this week when a bipartisan group of lawmakers 
lashed out at the deal and suggested that the administration was 
compromising national security by allowing a state-owned company from 
the United Arab Emirates to take charge of operations at U.S. ports. 
President Bush fought back, threatening to veto any attempt by Congress 
to scuttle the deal and portraying the reaction as anti-Arab. Since 
then, the White House has expressed regret that it did not keep 
congressional leaders informed of the deal.

Facing a political uproar, Dubai Ports World announced Thursday night 
that it will not exercise control over or influence the management of 
terminal operations at the ports in New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia, 
Baltimore, Miami and New Orleans "while it engages in further 
consultations with the Bush Administration and as appropriate 
Congressional leadership and relevant port authorities address concerns 
over future security arrangements."

But the company said it will proceed with the multibillion-dollar 
acquisition of those port operations, set to be completed Thursday.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the Bush administration 
welcomes "a slight delay" to allow more time to brief Congress. But he 
said Bush's threat to veto legislation blocking the takeover still stands.

Through spokesman Ron Bonjean, Hastert called the offer "a good move," 
but rank-and-file lawmakers from both parties were unimpressed.

Menendez called the company's offer "a smoke screen that changes nothing."

House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter T. King (R-N.Y.) said 
he still needs a firm commitment from Bush that his administration will 
fully investigate the company and the country and share its findings 
with Congress. Without that, he said, he and 48 House co-sponsors will 
introduce legislation on Tuesday that would force a 45-day review.

For the Dubai company, the obstacles kept mounting yesterday. The Port 
Authority of New York and New Jersey filed suit in New Jersey Superior 
Court in Newark to stop the deal, charging that any transfer of control 
of port facilities requires the authority's consent.

A U.S. company at the Port of Miami, Eller & Co., petitioned Britain to 
block the sale, alleging that the deal will force the firm to become an 
"involuntary partner" with Dubai's government. The company said it might 
seek millions of dollars in damages.

And Thomas H. Kean (R), a former New Jersey governor who chaired the 
commission that examined the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, came out against 
the port deal, telling the Associated Press "it should never have happened."

"We're in a no-win situation," Kean said, referring to the United Arab 
Emirates. "There's no question that two of the 9/11 hijackers came from 
there and money was laundered through there."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/24/AR2006022400765.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20060225/7f65803b/attachment-0001.htm