  
| 
| ||||||||||||||||||
GOP's 'Declaration of Independence'Congressmen split from White House over ports in the Play of the Week
 New York Representative Peter King is one of several Republicans to take a stand against the deal. RELATED
YOUR E-MAIL ALERTSWASHINGTON (CNN) -- Republicans in Congress have had their differences with President Bush before. After all, the controversy over Bush's nomination of White House counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court wasn't too long ago. But the split over U.S. port operations is different. It's about the most serious issue of all -- national security. For evidence of some GOP concerns, just listen to Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine: "I'm troubled by the national security implications." Similar sentiments, likewise voiced by Republicans traditionally loyal to the White House, surfaced in the House of Representatives. "I am very worried about this proposed sale, because of the security implications," said Rep. Illeana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Florida, echoing several of her fellow lawmakers. Reassurance falls flatOn Thursday, the president did attempt to reassure the Congress and the general public -- comments that some found a bit patronizing. "People don't need to worry about security," Bush said after a Cabinet meeting. "This deal won't go forward if we were concerned about the security of the United States of America." In other words, "Trust me." A few Republicans -- most prominently, independent Sen. John McCain of Arizona -- said they do. But, somewhat astonishingly, many do not -- at least not on this issue. Among them are the party's leaders, including House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois, who asked the president to put a moratorium on the decision. DP World, the United Arab Emirates-based company whose plans to take over six U.S. ports triggered harsh bipartisan criticism, took the initiative -- saving the White House a difficult decision, at least for now. The company announced it would delay the planned takeover until "the concerns" were addressed "to the benefit of all parties." (Full story) But that merely postpones the decision. It does not abate Congressmen's worries and, in some cases, anger over the proposed plan or how the Bush administration has handled the decision. "Surrendering any control of any of our ports to any foreign national strikes me as not only a bad idea, but a national security risk," said Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, who has lost his position as House majority leader but remains very much a presence on Capitol Hill. Accusation of arroganceSome members of Congress are particularly upset by the president's apparent disdain for Congress. "It almost smacks of an arrogance, like it doesn't matter what Congress says," said Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pennsylvania. Voter outrage is also a factor. The Bush administration's decision to allow an Arab-owned company to operate U.S. ports seems to defy common sense, to some. Rep. Peter King, a Republican whose jurisdiction includes Long Island communities not far from New York City, has been inundated with calls from concerned constituents. "I've never had a situation like this, where so many calls come in and everyone, everyone cannot understand what's happened," King said. This week, congressional Republicans issued a Declaration of Independence -- and won the political play of the week. 
|
| ||||||||||||||||||
| © 2007 Cable News Network. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Read our privacy guidelines. Contact us. Site Map. |
 |
|
Pay service with live and archived video. 
