Former Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta offered his audience at the North American Port and Intermodal Finance and Investment Summit recommendations “we can act on immediately” to address the inadequate “role of maritime issues in our national transportation policy.” Here are Pt. 1 and Pt.2. Pt.3 follows…
It struck some people as a bit odd. Here Norman Mineta was talking about changes that are needed to strengthen U.S. maritime policy but he waited until he was out of office to raise them. Perhaps these were ideas that coalesced in his mind only once relieved of the day-to-day tasks of office. Maybe not. Ultimately it didn’t matter. At least he was raising them now.
“What is the path to victory? I have ten recommendations we can act on immediately. Some are major and some seem to be minor, but are critical to success.
“First, the Federal government must reorganize the Maritime Administration – MARAD. I would rename it for what it should become – the Federal Maritime Administration, and I would combine virtually all of the Federal maritime responsibilities there. It should reinvigorate the uniformed Federal Maritime Service and transfer the aids to navigation responsibilities from the Coast Guard to it.
“The portion of the Army Corps of Engineers whose responsibilities and capabilities for our domestic ports and waterways should be relocated to the Federal Maritime Administration. The Army performing as domestic civil Federal engineers is not a role for the military and the country would save money and get a better product if these services were transferred to a single maritime agency.
“Secondly, the new agency must shift its focus to the condition of the nation’s ports and waterways and the role of this infrastructure in the totality of the U.S. transportation system. The current agency has too many of its resources and its structure focused on the issue of ships and crews.
“Thirdly, the Merchant Marine Academy in Long Island should be renamed the National Maritime Academy. It should be a Federal service academy where every graduate must perform his or her service in the Federal Maritime Service or as a commissioned officer in one of the other services as they do now including the Department of Homeland Security. This Academy is one of the major assets of the Federal government and we need to give it our time and attention.
“Fourthly, the Federal government must develop a legislative reauthorization process that puts maritime issues on the same priority and level of importance that surface and aviation assets currently have. If ports and waterways funding is always being relegated to parts of the surface transportation bill, or the defense bill, they will remain second-class subjects where the hope is to get your particular project an earmarked status.
“Fifth, the U.S. must revitalize its role in international maritime organizations and its maritime relations with other countries. Whether its treaties or issues involving security and trade, the U.S. needs to give more time and attention to these areas.
“Earlier I said to achieve this refocus on maritime importance, state and local governments, port authorities, and other government entities reliant upon maritime trade must work with industry stakeholders to educate American citizens and their decision makers regarding U.S. reliance on a strong national maritime system.
“Therefore, I believe the next set of actions should begin with port and waterway interests and industry stakeholders – including financial players who want to enter this sector – creating a national association whose charter is to accomplish the following action items:
“Educate the Congress and the presidential candidates on the role of the national maritime system and get hard commitments to take action. Educate American decision makers and others on the role maritime assets play in how freight and goods are delivered to them. Then enroll them in the effort to get maritime’s fair share of infrastructure resources.
“My final recommended action is that you accomplish all of the above by overcoming the inevitable opposition – not only from without but from within. Within the maritime industry there are many agreements of mutual mediocrity. People are familiar with this system and will not want to see it changed. The ground is shifting under their feet and they imperil needed financial investment and the innovation and the efficiencies it brings.
“Also, there are issues that need to be addressed within the industry – labor agreements, the role that technology will play in the labor force, and how security issues will be addressed. These are important issues that need to be vigorously debated and resolved – but they are not reasons to oppose raising the importance of maritime issues on the national agenda. Take a side in these issues, fight for them, but do not let it dominate the larger objective.
“Finally, for those of you who are looking for quick investments in ports and maritime infrastructure, I’m not sure I’ve given you a lot of useful information. And for you I’m afraid there is more bad news. There are no quick rates of return to be made here. Private investment into ports and infrastructure will have to be a true and long-term partnership.
“The up side as we say is that this is an industry that has the potential for tremendous growth and to have a real impact on our national transportation system.”
So there you have it. A message that is important not so much for the specific recommendations made–although there are some good ones there–but for the fact that he was putting the spotlight on a problem that few public officials and industry people bother to talk about or even acknowledge. See the next post for some additional thoughts. Pbea