 |
||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||
|
| March 03, 2004 | |||
 |
|||
|
SENS. COLLINS, AKAKA CALL FOR INCREASED PORT SECURITY FUNDS
America’s Ports Remain Vulnerable to Attack |
|||
|
WASHINGTON, D.C.—Senate Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Susan Collins (R-ME) and Senator Daniel Akaka (D-HI), Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Financial Management, the Budget, and International Security, today urged the Budget Committee to include $300 million in the Fiscal Year 2005 budget to secure America’s ports, which remain vulnerable to terrorist attack.
In a letter sent to Senate Budget Committee Chairman Don Nickles (R-OK) and Ranking Member Kent Conrad (D-ND), the Senators wrote, “With 95 percent of all U.S. cargo passing through the Nation’s 361 ports, a terrorist attack on a seaport could devastate our economy. … As the nation continues to fight the war on terrorism, both at home and overseas, we strongly believe that it is critical that the funding decisions of Congress reflect the vital need to protect our nation’s ports against terrorism.” Under the Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA), maritime industry stakeholders are required to complete security assessments, develop security plans, and make infrastructure enhancements. The Coast Guard estimates that the MTSA port security requirements will cost more than $1.5 billion in the first year of implementation, which will begin in July 2004, and will cost $7.3 billion over the next 10 years. “An investment now of $300 million—20 percent of the Coast Guard’s first-year cost estimate for MTSA implementation—is vital to our efforts to prevent future terrorist attacks,” the Senators wrote. The Administration’s budget proposal allocates $46 million for port security, an amount that the Senators said “falls short of the amount needed to secure our ports in the near term.” Senators Collins and Akaka pointed out that problems at one port could have economic repercussions nationwide. “That was made clear during the West Coast longshoreman’s labor dispute of 2002, which was estimated to have cost more than a billion dollars a day. This event totally shut down operations in 29 west coast ports despite the fact that the dispute was anticipated. With more than 300 commercial ports of entry in the United States and approximately six million cargo containers arriving each year, terrorists have countless opportunities to stage an attack that could lock down our ports without warning for an indefinite period.” The text of the letter appears below. March 2, 2004 The Honorable Don Nickles Chairman Committee on the Budget United States Senate Washington, D.C. The Honorable Kent Conrad Ranking Member Committee on the Budget United States Senate Washington, D.C. Dear Chairman Nickles and Senator Conrad: As you prepare the budget resolution for the 2005 Fiscal Year, we urge you to provide $300 million to secure our ports, which remain vulnerable to a terrorist attack. With 95 percent of all U.S. cargo passing through the Nation’s 361 ports, a terrorist attack on a seaport could devastate our economy. The Coast Guard estimates that the Maritime Transportation Security Act port security requirements will cost more than $1.5 billion in the first year of implementation, which will begin in July of 2004, and $7.3 billion over the next 10 years. We greatly appreciate that the President included funding for port security grants in his fiscal year 2005 budget; however, his proposal to provide only $46 million falls short of the amount needed to secure our ports in the near term. The cost of an attack on our maritime transportation system would be devastating to our economy. That was made clear during the West Coast longshoreman’s labor dispute of 2002, which was estimated to have cost more than a billion dollars a day. This event totally shut down operations in 29 west coast ports despite the fact that the dispute was anticipated. With more than 300 commercial ports of entry in the United States and approximately six million cargo containers arriving each year, terrorists have countless opportunities to stage an attack that could lock down our ports without warning for an indefinite period. We believe that an investment now of $300 million – 20 percent of the Coast Guard’s first-year cost estimate for MTSA implementation – is vital to our efforts to prevent future terrorist attacks. We understand your funding constraints, and suggest that an amount for port security could be provided in a budget neutral manner. For example, you might consider allocating a substantial amount of the $200 million for infrastructure protection to the port security grant program. You might also consider designating a portion of the funding identified for high threat areas to better secure our maritime transportation system. Regardless of how the grants are funded, all commercial ports should be eligible to compete for funds as none are impervious to the threat of a terrorist attack. As the nation continues to fight the war on terrorism, both at home and overseas, we strongly believe that it is critical that the funding decisions of Congress reflect the vital need to protect our nation’s ports against terrorism. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on issues of interest within the purview of the Committee on Governmental Affairs. Sincerely, Susan M. Collins, Chairman Daniel K. Akaka Ranking Member, Committee on Financial Management, the Budget, and International Security |
|||
| ### | |||
| Printable Version | |||
|
|||
| 1998 - 1999 - 2000 - 2001 - 2002 - 2003 - 2004 - 2005 - 2006 - 2007 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
340 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510