[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 2] [Extensions of Remarks] [Page 2274] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT ON JOINT RESOLUTION ______ HON. JANE HARMAN of california in the house of representatives Tuesday, February 28, 2006 Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Speaker, last week I stood at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, the largest container port complex in the nation, with my good friend Senator Susan Collins, the chair of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. We both have championed the fight to strengthen security at our ports. As of last week, neither of us had been briefed on the review conducted by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, CFIUS, into the sale of stevedoring and terminal operations of many major eastern seaboard and Gulf Coast ports to a state-owned firm from Dubai. This sale would not only affect the six major US port terminal facility leases that have been reported, but additional operations in 15 other locations, including ports shipping military materiel. Last week, we stated our concerns about the announced sale and our plan to issue a Joint Resolution of Disapproval. Today, I am introducing in the House the Joint Resolution which Senator Collins introduced yesterday, S.J. Res. 32. This resolution would do three things. First, it officially disapproves of CFIUS's initial review of the Dubai Ports World deal. Second, it requires CFIUS to rescind its previous decision and conduct a formal 45-day investigation. Third, it requires that CFIUS brief the Congress before allowing the deal to proceed, if in fact that is the decision after a full, complete and proper evaluation of the national security risks posed by this arrangement. Since Senator Collins and I announced our intentions last week, there has been some progress. Dubai Ports World has agreed to a secondary review, the Administration has agreed to a 45-day assessment of the sale, and, beginning this week, some committees of Congress will now be briefed. But the bad news is that this process got as far as it did, and that it took deep bipartisan concern to have Congress brought into the loop. When our country considers these important deals, Congress should be on the front lines, not the back bench. And as we heard yesterday from a Senate briefing, the U.S. Coast Guard cited their concerns over the deal at the time. The U.S. Coast Guard plays a critical role in ensuring the security of our ports, and their reservations make me question why this deal was approved as quickly as it was. This issue has also served to highlight the fact that our Nation's ports remain inadequately protected. As a member of both the House Intelligence and Homeland Security Committees, I have consistently worked to improve our national security, and believe much remains to be done. When we focus 9 out of 10 transportation security dollars on aviation security, we fall into the trap of fighting the last war instead of the next one. Fighting terror requires that we look forward, and what keeps me up at night is the possibility of a radiological bomb or human terrorist entering our ports in an uninspected container. When it comes to port security, we should have solid answers, not lingering questions. In this Era of Terror, there remains a constant threat to our homeland. We don't have the luxury of waiting to harden the obvious vulnerable targets. I have visited the Los Angeles/Long Beach port complex many times. I have authored and co-authored bipartisan port security legislation. Representative Dan Lungren and I will introduce a comprehensive bill soon to ensure a coordinated approach to maritime and cargo security through the authorization of key security programs and initiatives, as well as a dedicated funding grant program to shore up security gaps that exist at our Nation's ports. Senators Collins, Lieberman, and Coleman have introduced similar legislation in the Senate, and both bills will be the subject of hearings in this Congress. This resolution on CFIUS is prudent; so are our efforts to legislate enhanced port security. I urge its support. ____________________