It appears that the House is following Congressman Ford's strong lead in securing America by not allowing our nation's security to be outsourced to foreign countries.On Wednesday the House Appropriations Committee took a first step first when they voted overwhelmingly 62-2 to block the port deal.
The Washington Post has the whole story on the unfolding situation:
The shot of the gritty Baltimore waterfront pulls back to reveal a youthful, serious Senate candidate intoning: "President Bush wants to sell this port -- and five others -- to the United Arab Emirates, a country that had diplomatic ties with the Taliban, the home of two 9/11 hijackers, whose banks wired money to the terrorists."
"I'm running for the Senate," Rep. Harold E. Ford Jr. (D-Tenn.) had been saying all week on televisions throughout his home state, "because we shouldn't outsource our national security to anyone."
The message may be simple, but it mirrors the views of the vast majority of Americans whose visceral sentiments on the port issue are driving Congress toward a confrontation with the White House. For Republicans -- even those reluctant to cross the president -- the only viable response to Ford's conclusion is "I agree," said Carl Forti, spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee.
"Every day, we get hundreds and hundreds of phone calls, e-mails, letters objecting to this," House Republican Conference Chairman Deborah Pryce (Ohio) said yesterday on CNBC. "And you just can't buck that when there's that much public [sentiment] and objection to it. Whether it's right or wrong, this is sort of a lose-lose now."
Lawmakers took their first formal steps yesterday toward killing Dubai Ports World's acquisition of management operations at six major U.S. ports when the House Appropriations Committee added a measure to a must-pass war-funding bill that would block the deal. The vote was 62 to 2, with only Reps. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) and James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.) opposing it. A full House vote on the bill is expected to pass overwhelmingly next week.
The Senate saw its first skirmish on the issue when Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) moved to amend a lobbying reform bill with a measure that would also scuttle the acquisition. That brought Senate progress on the lobbying bill to a halt, as Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) objected to what he described as a blatant violation of Senate rules on the Democrats' part. Frist vowed to use parliamentary tactics to block a vote on Schumer's proposal, but Democrats made it clear they would not let the matter go away.
The confrontation over Dubai Ports World's acquisition of management operations at six major ports, more than any other issue in recent years, has been driven by constituents anxious about terrorism, the war in Iraq, and illegal immigration and foreign encroachment, lawmakers say.
"The broader issue at work here is the public's continuing concerns over 9/11, Iraq and all things Middle Eastern as a result," said Rep. Michael N. Castle (R-Del.). "As this played out across the country, I don't think there was a whole lot of distinction going on between the UAE and any other country."
Add to that the president's rock-bottom approval ratings and there may have been little the White House could do to beat back the issue.
"I've literally had senior citizens, little old ladies, calling my office crying about their concern," Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) told administration officials recently.
White House officials did not back down in the face of a brewing revolt. Spokesman Scott McClellan stressed that conversations between the administration, Dubai Ports World and Congress continue. But he made clear that "the president's position is unchanged."
Republican lawmakers said yesterday that obstinacy has only fueled the rebellion. And GOP members of all ranks objected to the White House's handling of an issue that has proved to be a gift for Democrats.
"The administration made this plan and then popped it at all of us," Pryce said.
"This is probably the worst administration ever in getting Congress's opinion on anything," said Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.). "The difference [now] is, instead of a 60 percent favorability rating, he's got 40 percent favorability, and a 40 percent that's not getting any better."
For Democrats, the issue may prove to be a political windfall, even if Republicans side with them in a confrontation with the White House. About 70 percent of Americans oppose the port deal, and that opposition does not change if they are told port managers do not control security at the ports. Democracy Corps, a Democratic polling organization, released a memo yesterday saying the Dubai port issue has helped drive down Bush's approval ratings, particularly on national security matters and especially among Republican voters. And Bush's decline appears to be pulling the Republican Congress's approval ratings with it.
Brian Nick, spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, said yesterday that the port issue -- and its exploitation by Democrats such as Ford -- fit "into a national discussion about which party is better equipped to win the war on terrorism, and Republicans win that issue every time."
But political anxieties on the issue are clearly high.
"There's nothing more pitiful than a flock of politicians in full flight," joked Rep. David R. Obey (Wis.), the ranking Democrat on the Appropriations Committee.
Some Republicans put the blame squarely at the White House's feet. If the administration had conducted a 45-day national security investigation of the deal, and briefed Congress on the findings, lawmakers may not have been so quick to publicly oppose the deal when it became public, said Kolbe, who called port security concerns over Dubai Ports World's acquisition "bogus."
Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) said the president's dramatic veto threat -- delivered to reporters summoned to the front of Air Force One -- only inflamed sentiments, especially after he intimated that some opposition to the deal stemmed from prejudice toward Arabs. By elevating the issue to a confrontation between Congress and the president, Bush only ensured the issue would be front-page news until its resolution, Senate leadership aides said.
I am proud that Congressman Harold Ford Jr. is leading the fight to not allow the President to outsource our security to foreign countries.
From the very begining he has been against the deal and remains steadfast in seeing that it does not go through.
Put simply, his dedication to securing our nation is unsurpassed.
While some talk about securing our nation, Harold Ford Jr. takes action.
Watch Congressman Ford's ad on keeping our nation secure here!
Read Congressman Ford's letter on port security here!
64 Days
Days of Congressional Inaction on Ethics
Above is the number of days that have passed since Jack Abramoff pleaded guilty to bribing Congressman.
It is also the number of days in which Congress has failed to pass an ethics reform bill that would limit private travel, ski and golf junkets, and would call for a full disclosure of expenses by lobbyists on members of Congress.
It is time for Congress to step up and pass an ethics reform bill that would do all of the above. In addition, it is time to end the pork barrel spending system as we know it and establish an independent ethics commission that would review ethics complaints against members of Congress.
I am proud Congressman Harold Ford Jr. is fighting for that reform!
Read Congressman Ford's call for reform of the House rules here!
