Section Front Front Page |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| By MICHAEL R. McKAY | |
|
Renewal of the Maritime Security Program and defense of the Jones Act
against new challenges are among our union's legislative priorities in the
108th Congress. The MSP was authorized in 1996, and it is working as intended. Under the program, 47 privately owned and operated U.S.-flagged and manned ships are working in commercial foreign trade markets, seven of them under American Maritime Officers contract. More importantly, the Department of Defense has immediate access to the ships, their crews and an extensive network of intermodal and logistics support systems during national security emergencies, all at no cost to DOD. The Maritime Security Program is a budget bargain as well. Funded through the Maritime Administration, the program now costs under $100 million a year, a fraction of what it would cost DOD to duplicate the sealift capacity and support systems the MSP represents. The U.S.-flag shipping companies that have MSP contracts with the agency pay taxes on what they earn, and so do the companies' office personnel and the U.S. citizen officers and crews working aboard the 47 ships. There is only one drawback to the Maritime Security Program: a built-in time limit. Under the authorizing legislation, the MSP will expire at midnight on Sept. 30, 2005. If the MSP is not renewed in advance of that date, the ships now participating could be flagged out to foreign registries. Under that circumstance, the U.S. citizens aboard the vessels would lose their jobs to foreign nationals, and DOD would lose a suitable and dependable cargo fleet that can supplement government-owned and chartered sealift ships anywhere in the world. If the issue is taken up in Congress this year as expected, it will be framed by two very important considerations: current events and budget reality. With the U.S. poised for war in Iraq and confronting the very real possibility of a long boots-on-the-ground battle, and with possible contingencies arising from the ongoing war on terrorism and the North Korea crisis, DOD could need the MSP fleet to help keep U.S. armed forces fed and fighting. But there will be increasing pressure for spending caps if budget deficits continue to spike and the economy remains weak. A lot of interests will be pleading on Capitol Hill for a lot of causes, and AMO will do its level best to be heard above the clamor. While we and many in Congress believe the Maritime Security Program makes its own case as a sound investment, the program does have its critics. Included among them are Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain, chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee--which would have immediate jurisdiction over MSP renewal legislation. Lawmakers eager to file such legislation will wait until Maritime Administrator William Schubert weighs in on the issue in formal Congressional testimony sometime this year. Schubert has said many times that the Maritime Security Program is worth keeping, and he has asked for an industry consensus on how to make the program even more effective. Such agreement was reached last year. In August, AMO, the Seafarers International Union, the International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots, the Marine Engineers Beneficial Association and major U.S.-flag ship operators went before the House Armed Services Committee's Oversight Panel on the Merchant marine and proposed that the Maritime Security Program be extended for 20 years, that the number of eligible ships be increased from 47 to 60, and that MSP stipends be increased from $2.1 million per ship per year to $3.5 million per ship per year (at a total cost remaining well below what DOD would have to spend to build and acquire the MSP's ships and shoreside support systems). The unions and the vessel operators also proposed that U.S.-flag companies now enrolled in the Maritime Security Program be given the first opportunities to bring in additional ships, that U.S.-flag companies owned overseas be allowed to fill any remaining MSP slots, andthat, in all cases, ships covered by MSP contracts be U.S.-flagged and manned. DOD's Transportation Command (TRANSCOM) later endorsed the core intent of the package--more ships, more citizen seafarers. But that does not guarantee MSP renewal legislation an easy ride. There are some concerns about shipowner citizenship, and several lawmakers want troubled U.S. shipyards to benefit from the Maritime Security Program in some way. There will be difficult negotiation. Our interest in the MSP does not end with seven ships. We in AMO do not want to see the U.S. flag come down from any merchant vessel in any trade, regardless of what union or unions are affected. We do not want to see any licensed or unlicensed civilian American seafarer out of work. And we do not want the U.S. military hindered by inadequate U.S.-flag sealift. To us, it is a matter of principle: the U.S. needs a large and diverse merchant fleet under its own flag for trade and defense, and the Maritime Security Program helps provide that. Equally important is the Jones Act, the 1920 cabotage law that reserves domestic shipping markets for merchant vessels owned, built, flagged and crewed in the U.S. The law has had the support of every President since its enactment, and strong bipartisan majorities in both the House and the Senate are on record in favor of the law as an economic and national security asset. Still, it has been under relentless attack by powerful political and business interests in the U.S. and abroad. This year, the Jones Act could be tested again by farm interests who want foreign-flag vessels to carry feed grains from the Midwest to North Carolina via the Mississippi River or the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway, and Rob Quartel is getting back into the political picture, beginning with Jones Act criticisms in the context of still-emerging "short sea" shipping development proposals. AMO members are asked to contact their representatives in the House and their Senators and express continued support for both the Jones Act and the Maritime Security Program. We would appreciate continued strong support of the AMO Voluntary Political Action Fund as well. |
|
|
|
Front Page
|
|