The Cost of Ports Security

A reader writes:

I work in international shipping and I would love to see examinations of all containers. However I wonder where this $20 per container fee comes from. Presently the customs vacis exam (x-ray) costs between $300 – $400 per container, depending on which terminal is involved. If the container is then tagged for a full physical exam, the charge is an additional $750 -$900.

This plan also doesn’t seem to include associated port storage costs. Once a container arrives at the port it has 5 days to be picked up before heavy demurrage charges are incurred. Presently custom exams can cause 10-15 day delays. Demurrage usually runs at about $100 per day. The cost to the consumer will far exceed $20 per day. The direct cost would be huge, not to mention the expense of severely constricting the supply chain.

The real issue is man power. Customs and Border Protection can’t keep up with exams at the current level. In order to complete a 100 percent exam rate, the number of workers for CBP will need to be increased drastically.

I work in international house hold goods moving and I have seen first hand the incompetence of CBP. Just last week, we imported a house hold goods shipment from South Korea that contained two hand guns. The guns were undeclared and unmanifested. The customer was an ex-military man who was returning and he told us about the guns only after the shipment was placed on a customs hold. Even after the full physical exam, the guns were not found! Scary, especially when you consider that house hold goods are considered a high risk commodity by the newly formed Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism. It is not a question of if, it is a question of when.

Port security needs to be drastically improved but we need to be honest about the costs and the negative effect it will have on commerce and industry.

I think Americans are more than ready for an honest debate about the true costs of real border protection. And the true costs of staying as we are.

From Israel, With Hope

Know_hope

Michael Totten is blogging his way through the Middle East. When he gets to Israel, he gets culture shock.

Arab countries have a certain feel. They’re masculine, relaxed, worn around the edges, and slightly shady in a Sicilian mobster sort of way. Arabs are wonderfully and disarmingly charming. Israel felt brisk, modern, shiny, and confident. It looked rich, powerful, and explicitly Jewish. I knew I had been away from home a long time when being around Arabs and Muslims felt comfortably normal and Jews seemed exotic.
First impression are just that, though. They tend to be crazily out of whack and subject to almost instant revision …

As often, it’s an interesting, complex analysis from Michael. And, as his photo above suggests, a not entirely bleak one.

Pro-Life Pro-Choicers

A member of the "party of death" writes:

My wife and I are personally pro-life but we take a pro-choice position when it comes to public policy (and yes, we vote Democrat). I believe that women should have the complete right to an abortion during the first trimester and after that I favor restrictions. I have yet to come across a Democrat who promotes abortion. If anything, we Democrats stand for neutrality on this issue and want the government to keep out of it. Isn’t this after all a true conservative position?

Er, yes it is. The trouble is: the word ‘conservative’ has been hijacked by religious extremists. I find the attempt of the government to police a woman’s body in the first stages of pregnancy to be a deeply unconservative idea. I find the absolutist stance of those who say a zygote is as morally significant as an infant lacking in the moderation and common sense that has long been the hallmark of conservatism. I abhor abortion as a moral matter and can never condone it. But in the balancing of goods, I’d keep it legal in the first trimester, strongly restrict later abortions, while doing all I can to facilitate care, adoption options and support for pregnant mothers. I’d also aggressively encourage contraception, the morning-after pill, and the institution of marriage as bulwarks against unwanted pregnancy. And all of this makes me part of a "party of death" because I don’t agree with banning all abortion by law?

Ponnuru has his fig-leaf on the partisan point. When he says "party", he can say he doesn’t mean political party. Sure. But somehow only the Democrats appear in the subtitle. And Ponnuru is integral to the GOP machine. Limbaugh and Coulter do the rest. Hey, it sells.