Hollings blasts Bush trip, port safety

U.S. Sen. Fritz Hollings is calling President Bush’s trip to the Port of Charleston today a “photo opportunity” that obscures Bush’s poor record on protecting the nation’s ports from terrorists.

Democrat Hollings has long called the nation’s 361 ports — including the one in his hometown of Charleston — the United States’ most vulnerable assets.

He blames Bush for failing to ask Congress for enough money for port security, which will be a major topic in the Republican president’s address today.

“The president didn’t request anything in 2001 and he didn’t request anything in 2002,” said Hollings, referring to Bush’s budget proposals.

“We know Osama bin Laden is looking to blow up a port,” Hollings continued, noting the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole and bin Laden’s control of at least 20 boats and ships. “A disaster at the Port of Charleston would shut down the East Coast.”

“The president is committed to port security,” said White House spokesman Taylor Gross. “His budget is reflective of that.”

Hollings also blames the Republican-dominated U.S. House. Last year, backed by the White House, it defeated an amendment to a budget resolution that called for $2 billion for port security. The amendment had passed the Senate.

Without more funds for port security, Hollings says, the United States won’t be able to significantly increase its inspection rate of arriving shipping containers — now about 3 percent.

U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., commends Hollings’ efforts to protect the nation’s ports, and the Port of Charleston in particular.

But he said his colleague goes too far when he impugns Bush.

“The president has tried to budget for our port security needs in a very aggressive fashion with a 10 percent increase in the Department of Homeland Security budget this year,” Graham said.

Noting there hasn’t been a terrorist attack in the U.S. since Sept. 11, 2001, Graham credited Bush.

“The president doesn’t deserve this criticism. With his visit to the port and this budget, he has stepped up to the plate. The criticism that he doesn’t care about ports is off base.”

In his budget request for fiscal 2005, which begins Oct. 1, 2004, Bush calls for a 9.7 percent increase for homeland security efforts. Included in that figure is $1.9 billion for port security.

That sounds close to the $2 billion Hollings tried but failed to push through Congress for ports, but he says it’s not.

His reason: $1.7 billion of the $1.9 billion is set aside for the U.S. Coast Guard for “port, waterway, and coastal security activities.”

According to Hollings, that money could be spent on Coast Guard activities — such as interdicting drug runners at sea and search-and-rescue missions — that are not directly related to fighting terrorism.

“They give you the runaround if there ever was one,” Hollings said of the Bush administration’s approach to port security. He said the Coast Guard needs money for its traditional activities, but also more specific allocations for counterterrorism projects, such as cargo scanning equipment and bomb-sniffing dogs.

Hollings, though, agrees with most experts on port security that the nation’s ports have grown safer since 9/11. They also agree that the Port of Charleston, the fourth busiest in the nation, is better protected than most.

One of the reasons is Project Seahawk, which Hollings has helped fund to the tune of $22 million for fiscal 2004.

The project, started last year under the umbrella of the U.S. Department of Justice, coordinates the work of federal, state and local agencies to improve the port’s ability to detect and deal with threats.

“We are doing the best we can with what we have,” said Project Seahawk director Sean Kittrell, an assistant U.S. attorney.

Reach Markoe at (202) 383-6023 or lmarkoe@krwashington.com