DPW to Divest US Operations
FOXNews.com and other sources report that DPW will divest itself of US port operations it picked up in the P&O deal. (Hat tip to Michelle Malkin) Sen. John Warner (R-Va.) read a statement from DPW executives on the Senate floor.
While details are still being hammered out, it looks as if the firestorm of the deal may finally start to go away. However in the deal's wake there are a lot of questions which need to be answered.
We need a clear examination of port security and a plan of how to fix the problems. The ports were considered a weak link prior to the DPW-P&O deal, and the divestiture does not change the facts. As the Bush Administration said time and again, the Coast Guard is in charge of port security. But are we doing what is needed to equip the guard to protect us? The DPW deal only served to distract us from the real problem.
The Bush Administration should ask questions about the internal workings of their chain of command, and their ability to anticipate public response to their policies. I still do not understand how the administration did not anticipate the backlash over the deal long before they gave approval. And not telling the president until after the fact was not the best decision.
With this deal moving along, let us not forget the other UAW company which is buying a supplier of parts used in engines for military aircraft. While I did not believe the ports deal was much of a threat, I do have a lot of questions on this second deal. I am not ready to say we should block the deal, but I hope this one gets a very thorough review.
DPW divestiture may solve a problem for the administration and the GOP, but it still leaves the country with problems we must solve.
Update 3/10/06: Danny Carlton makes an interesting contrast between the DPW deal and the Harriet Myers nomination in a post on jacklewis.net.
See also prior posts:
Port Security Sale
Flip-Flopping on the Port Deal
The President's Legacy
While details are still being hammered out, it looks as if the firestorm of the deal may finally start to go away. However in the deal's wake there are a lot of questions which need to be answered.
We need a clear examination of port security and a plan of how to fix the problems. The ports were considered a weak link prior to the DPW-P&O deal, and the divestiture does not change the facts. As the Bush Administration said time and again, the Coast Guard is in charge of port security. But are we doing what is needed to equip the guard to protect us? The DPW deal only served to distract us from the real problem.
The Bush Administration should ask questions about the internal workings of their chain of command, and their ability to anticipate public response to their policies. I still do not understand how the administration did not anticipate the backlash over the deal long before they gave approval. And not telling the president until after the fact was not the best decision.
With this deal moving along, let us not forget the other UAW company which is buying a supplier of parts used in engines for military aircraft. While I did not believe the ports deal was much of a threat, I do have a lot of questions on this second deal. I am not ready to say we should block the deal, but I hope this one gets a very thorough review.
DPW divestiture may solve a problem for the administration and the GOP, but it still leaves the country with problems we must solve.
Update 3/10/06: Danny Carlton makes an interesting contrast between the DPW deal and the Harriet Myers nomination in a post on jacklewis.net.
See also prior posts:
Port Security Sale
Flip-Flopping on the Port Deal
The President's Legacy
posted by Dennis | 2:56 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home