The Reality of Ports...

What an impressive firestorm rages now over the possibility that a company based in the United Arab Emirates may assume "control" over a number of U.S. ports. It is providing endless opportunities for our elected panderers -- on both sides of the aisle -- to indulge themselves in more than usual grandstanding. But have we learned anything useful from any of these overloud folks?

First, it would be best to bear in mind that the "control" the company will exert is subject to override from other sources, such as the Department of Homeland Security, and the lonshoremen's union. Homeland Security is in a position to assert requirements for employment screening, and the longshoremen will continue their long tradition of rejecting anyone who they deem unsuited to membership -- and the company will have no more success controlling that than has any other company in the past.

Second, the "control" of these ports by a foreign-owned company is hardly news, as the ports are currently under the "control" of a British company.

Third, if the goal were to do harm to American ports, there is simply no need to spend such large sums, as our pathetically low level of inspections of imported goods -- variously reported as 2-4%, or at most, 5% -- means that it would be almost trivially simple to ship bombs to us, and we'd be unlikely to discover them prior to the damage being done.

The hard reality is this. If we find foreign "control" of our ports unacceptable, then is it unacceptable regardless of the country involved. Further, we would be better served were our noisy politicians to spend some time honestly considering whether a higher level of incoming inspection might be in order.

If the politicians really want to do something useful, they might begin by eliminating all earmarks, and finding opportunities to reduce their outrageous spending, rather than pushing us ever closer to economic collapse.