Beltway Blunder(s) - and what to do about them...

•    No Ports: No Commerce

As President Obama asks Congress to approve his $556 billion, six-year surface transportation spending plan, he argues that transportation spending will create jobs and thereby strengthen the economy. A key facet of the proposal calls for $8 billion to be spent in the coming year for Obama's intercity passenger rail program and a total of $53 billion over six years. Monday’s U.S. Department of Transportation press release also fleshes out the massive initiative, calling it “targeted investments in safe, efficient transportation that will spur growth. Nowhere in the statement is there any reference to the ports that carry and handle virtually 99 percent of the supply chain’s output.

U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, in a prepared statement, said President Obama’s $129 billion budget for the U.S. Department of Transportation, the first year of a comprehensive six-year transportation plan, will lay a new foundation for economic growth and competitiveness by rebuilding the nation’s transportation systems, enabling innovative solutions to transportation challenges and ensuring the highest level of safety for all Americans. The press release also mentions “moving people, goods, and information more quickly and reliably than ever before.”  He then goes on to talks about rebuilding our crumbling roadways and runways, modernizing railways and bus systems, the “high-speed rail lines of America’s future,” repairing bridges and more than 55 separate highway programs. Conspicuously absent from any of that dialogue is any mention of the waterfront.

Not everyone was completely happy with the proposed budget. But, don’t take my word for it. The American Association of Port Authorities, through a prepared release, expressed a measure of disappointment as well. AAPA President and CEO Kurt Nagle said, "AAPA applauds the Administration's desire with the DOT budget to prioritize transportation infrastructure investments.  However, we're concerned that the expanded variety of modes in the I-Bank compared to TIGER could cause funding for seaport-related infrastructure to be overshadowed by high-profile initiatives such as transit and intercity rail." He added, "There needs to be a heightened federal focus on freight transportation."

Nagle wasn’t done. He complained, “While we're optimistic that certain seaport-related infrastructure could be funded through the I-Bank, the Administration's proposed budget cuts for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Civil Works program misses the mark by failing to adequately fund the waterside infrastructure that is critically needed to restore the economic security of the nation, increase exports and create the jobs necessary for full economic recovery. Although we're mindful of the need to make necessary sacrifices to reduce the deficit, we believe the priority for programs and projects that enhance America's ability to move cargo and compete in world markets should be raised rather than lowered."

LaHood correctly notes that “Nationwide, our transportation systems are already congested and overburdened.” And, he says that the budget will put high-speed rail on equal footing with other transportation programs. No doubt the ports would like to have even a fraction of the whopping $53 billion he’s planning to spend this year on high-speed rail, never mind achieving “equal footing” with the other transportation modes under the purview of DOT. 

The Administration’s six-year, $336 billion proposal represents an almost 50 percent increase over the previous authorization, and the Department of Transportation's budget would increase 66 percent to $128 billion, as compared to just under $80 million in 2010. Somewhere in the summary of the proposed DOT budget, I suppose, will be some money to dredge U.S. ports to the depths necessary to accept the mega-containerships and other vessels that will soon begin to pour through the improved and enlarged Panama Canal, starting as early as 2014. Or, just maybe, DOT will find money to catch up on inland waterway lock maintenance. If so, the President and Secretary LaHood aren’t very excited about it. The emasculation of the U.S. Maritime Administration will apparently continue unabated for the foreseeable future. * sigh *

•    Port Security: Are Criminals Patriotic?

Almost ten years after the tragic events of 9/11, the argument that U.S. ports are now safer took a big hit when the FBI announced one of the largest Mafia takedowns in history. The recent arrests that snared more than 120 defendants – some reported to be dockworkers and longshoremen union officials – raises the questions of whether crime is significantly affecting port security. Perhaps a better question to ask is, “Are criminals Patriotic?”
 
As the indictments point to pockets of port-based organized crime, the situation at least partly minimizes the apparent impact of hundreds of millions of dollars spent on port security over the past decade. Because the nation’s ports were identified early in the war against terrorism as sensitive homeland security targets in the turbulent wake of the 9/11 attacks, the presence of organized crime on the docks is, at best, disconcerting. In a worst case scenario, the indictments could indicate a direct threat to port security. On the other hand, if these are loyal, American criminals, they would likely draw the line at letting someone bent on terrorism onto the docks. Right?

The arrests, in the absence of all other variables, should indicate a positive step forward for the domestic waterfront. Left unanswered is how many mobsters the FBI missed in their sweep of the docks and what they (the criminals) are up to at this very second. I don’t know about you, but I feel better already.

•    Maritime Activism: American Style

Either or both of the two preceding bullets might make you uncomfortable or perhaps even nervous about the future of our collective, domestic waterfront. If so, there is something you can do about it. At least two industry events, both scheduled within the next two months in the greater Washington area, could be the perfect vehicle(s) to spur awareness on the part of our elected officials on the importance of the nation’s ports and commercial, ocean shipping sectors. A choice of opportunities is waiting for you:

Maritime Congressional “Sail-In”

Continuing on last year’s first of what is hoped will be just one of many more “Sail-In Outreach to Congress” journeys, the U.S. Maritime Coalition has announced that this year’s Congressional “Sail-In” will take place on Capitol Hill on May 4, 2011. The Sail-In will look to build on the success of last year’s inaugural event which was widely supported by the American maritime industry including international and domestic ocean carriers, terminal operators and labor unions. We highlighted the upcoming event in a recent online MarPro column, and we’re happy to do it again here.

WCI Washington Meeting

Elsewhere, the Waterways Council, Inc. (WCI) will address the news media about the President’s FY 2012 budget and outlook for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Civil Works program, the state and importance of lock and dam infrastructure to the nation, and the prospects for the Inland Waterways Capital Development Plan in the 112th Congress. The event is open only to the media, but also highlight’s WCI’s continued outreach on behalf of their constituents.

WHEN: Thursday, March 10, 2011, 12:00 noon (lunch will be served)
WHERE: National Press Club, 529 14th Street, NW, Washington, D.C., Lisagor Room
RSVP: Debra Colbert, WCI, 703/373-2278 or dcolbert@vesselalliance.com

Waterways Council, Inc. is the national public policy organization advocating a modern and well-maintained national system of ports and inland waterways.  The group is supported by waterways carriers, shippers, port authorities, shipping associations and waterways advocacy groups from all regions of the country.  Visit www.waterwayscouncil.org.

•    Irony: A Subsidized Waterfront?

It is times like this that the word “irony” derives its definition. For example, grain shippers from the Midwest or the trucking lobby – as it blocks repeal of the harbor maintenance tax for the shortsea leg – would both have you believe that the collective domestic waterfront and the American merchant fleet itself exist only as a function of giant federal subsidies that inflate shipping prices and somehow “wrong” American consumers. In the face of a $556 billion proposal – you read that right – for transportation infrastructure that largely ignores ocean commerce, I find it hard to swallow the party line from those who would like to abolish the Jones Act. Even more laughable is the premise that the President’s proposed budget will solve the Highway Trust Fund crisis or promote a robust (as Marad would have you believe) shortsea shipping program. Yeah, it is time to book your ticket for the maritime “Sail-In.” See you there. – MP.

* * *

Joseph Keefe is the lead commentator of MaritimeProfessional.com. Additionally, he is Managing Editor of the new Maritime Professional print magazine. You can also read his work in MarineNews and Maritime Reporter magazines. He can be reached at jkeefe@maritimeprofessional.com or at Keefe@marinelink.com. MaritimeProfessional.com is the largest business networking site devoted to the marine industry. Each day thousands of industry professionals around the world log on to network, connect, and communicate.