Posted:
May 27, 2016
Voting May 18 on a proposed amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, the House of Representatives again showed strong support for the Maritime Security Program and the military necessity of the fleet of 60 U.S.-flagged commercial cargo ships it supports in international trade.
The House voted 41-383, rejecting the amendment offered by Rep. Mark Sanford (R-SC), which would have required a Government Accountability Office study of the Maritime Security Program. Among other things, the study would have sought to determine the comparative cost of contracting for U.S.-flagged vessels and foreign-flagged vessels on a temporary basis as an alternative to the MSP.
Congressional leaders - including Chairman of the Armed Services Committee Mac Thornberry (R-TX), the principal sponsor of the National Defense Authorization Act - emphasized the importance of the MSP and the U.S.-flagged vessels it supports to U.S. defense sealift operations.
"Military testimony has indicated that 'there is no guarantee whatsoever that a foreign-flag fleet will sail into harm's way.' Ninety percent of all U.S. military cargo moved from Iraq and Afghanistan has been by U.S.-flagged, U.S.-crewed commercial vessels enrolled in the program," Rep. Thornberry noted.
During the floor debate on the amendment, Rep. John Garamendi (D-CA) pointed out government studies of the Maritime Security Program have already been conducted, and a foreign-flagged ship loaded with military cargo turned around and refused to enter the war zone during Operation Desert Storm.
"We cannot allow that to happen ever again," Rep. Garamendi said.
In a letter to colleagues prior to the vote, Congressmen J. Randy Forbes (R-VA), chairman of the Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee, and Joe Courtney (D-CT), ranking member on the subcommittee, wrote: "This is a question about what sealift capacity and capabilities our military contingency plans require, and the extent to which we can rely upon foreign shipping companies and foreign mariners in times of both peace and war. This strategic question is best answered by the professionals at U.S. Transportation Command, Military Sealift Command, and the Maritime Administration.
"The Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces heard testimony from the leaders of these organizations earlier this year.
"Lieutenant General Stephen Lyons, the Deputy Commanding General of U.S. Transportation Command, testified that 'the case for a US-Flag fleet is compelling' and that several mobility capability studies done by Transportation Command have repeatedly reaffirmed the need for a 60-ship Maritime Security Fleet.
"Chip Jaenichen, the Maritime Administrator, testified that the Maritime Security Fleet's '60-ship capability is extremely important' and that foreign-flagged ships, which might be cheaper, cannot be relied upon for critical national security missions."
The congressmen concluded: "The Maritime Security Fleet is a wartime capability that must be there when we need it. It's about military readiness and national security, not just dollars and cents. The study called for by this amendment cannot and will not adequately address the military reasons for sustaining the Maritime Security Fleet, and for that reason we urge our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to oppose this amendment."
House vote demonstrates strong support for MSP
Voting May 18 on a proposed amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, the House of Representatives again showed strong support for the Maritime Security Program and the military necessity of the fleet of 60 U.S.-flagged commercial cargo ships it supports in international trade.
The House voted 41-383, rejecting the amendment offered by Rep. Mark Sanford (R-SC), which would have required a Government Accountability Office study of the Maritime Security Program. Among other things, the study would have sought to determine the comparative cost of contracting for U.S.-flagged vessels and foreign-flagged vessels on a temporary basis as an alternative to the MSP.
Congressional leaders - including Chairman of the Armed Services Committee Mac Thornberry (R-TX), the principal sponsor of the National Defense Authorization Act - emphasized the importance of the MSP and the U.S.-flagged vessels it supports to U.S. defense sealift operations.
"Military testimony has indicated that 'there is no guarantee whatsoever that a foreign-flag fleet will sail into harm's way.' Ninety percent of all U.S. military cargo moved from Iraq and Afghanistan has been by U.S.-flagged, U.S.-crewed commercial vessels enrolled in the program," Rep. Thornberry noted.
During the floor debate on the amendment, Rep. John Garamendi (D-CA) pointed out government studies of the Maritime Security Program have already been conducted, and a foreign-flagged ship loaded with military cargo turned around and refused to enter the war zone during Operation Desert Storm.
"We cannot allow that to happen ever again," Rep. Garamendi said.
In a letter to colleagues prior to the vote, Congressmen J. Randy Forbes (R-VA), chairman of the Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee, and Joe Courtney (D-CT), ranking member on the subcommittee, wrote: "This is a question about what sealift capacity and capabilities our military contingency plans require, and the extent to which we can rely upon foreign shipping companies and foreign mariners in times of both peace and war. This strategic question is best answered by the professionals at U.S. Transportation Command, Military Sealift Command, and the Maritime Administration.
"The Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces heard testimony from the leaders of these organizations earlier this year.
"Lieutenant General Stephen Lyons, the Deputy Commanding General of U.S. Transportation Command, testified that 'the case for a US-Flag fleet is compelling' and that several mobility capability studies done by Transportation Command have repeatedly reaffirmed the need for a 60-ship Maritime Security Fleet.
"Chip Jaenichen, the Maritime Administrator, testified that the Maritime Security Fleet's '60-ship capability is extremely important' and that foreign-flagged ships, which might be cheaper, cannot be relied upon for critical national security missions."
The congressmen concluded: "The Maritime Security Fleet is a wartime capability that must be there when we need it. It's about military readiness and national security, not just dollars and cents. The study called for by this amendment cannot and will not adequately address the military reasons for sustaining the Maritime Security Fleet, and for that reason we urge our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to oppose this amendment."