Time: Thu Oct 02 09:21:50 1997
by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA28068;
Thu, 2 Oct 1997 09:20:29 -0700 (MST)
by usr03.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA22969;
Thu, 2 Oct 1997 09:08:06 -0700 (MST)
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 09:07:34 -0700
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: Sen. Inhofe Changes Tack, Supports Ban of COSCO (fwd)
<snip>
>
>The Washington Times
>October 1, 1997
>
>Inhofe changes tack, supports ban of Cosco
>
>By Rowan Scarborough
>
>Sen. James M. Inhofe, responding to critics on yesterday's conservative
>talk-radio shows, said he is proposing legislation that would
>specifically bar China's giant ocean shipper from leasing the old Navy
>base at Long Beach, Calif.
>. . . . Mr. Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican and chairman of the Senate Armed
>Services Committee's subcommittee on readiness, was criticized for
>opposing a House-passed measure that would ban any state-owned shipper,
>such as the China Ocean Shipping Co. (Cosco), from leasing or owning
>closed military bases.
>. . . . Inhofe aides were quoted in yesterday's editions of The
>Washington Times as saying that the legislation was too broad, and that
>the senator would oppose its inclusion in the 1998 defense authorization
>bill.
>. . . . The staffers also said the senator did not want to interfere in
>the prerogative of local communities to find new uses for installations
>closed by a base-closure commission, as Long Beach was in 1994.
>. . . . The comments in The Times drew a torrent of conservative
>lambasting, and yesterday Mr. Inhofe said he would propose an amendment
>that specifically names Cosco.
>. . . . "This was a bomb that exploded in my face on this thing," the
>conservative senator said of The Times' story.
>. . . . Mr. Inhofe said he broached the more restrictive language three
>weeks ago in a closed-door, Senate-House conference on the 1998 defense
>authorization bill.
>. . . . But in a letter to Mr. Inhofe five days ago, Rep. Duncan Hunter,
>California Republican and author of the anti-Cosco measure, portrayed
>the senator as an opponent.
>. . . . "Please advise me if you still insist on turning the former Long
>Beach naval base over to the Chinese government through its wholly owned
>and operated entity: Cosco," the letter said.
>. . . . The port of Long Beach had signed a lease with Cosco to operate
>the 144-acre site, once the base's buildings were leveled and a new
>container terminal built. But the lease was killed after
>environmentalists forced the port and the Navy to conduct a new impact
>study due for completion next spring.
>. . . . Mr. Inhofe's subcommittee has jurisdiction over the Cosco
>matter. The panel's ranking Democrat, Charles S. Robb of Virginia,
>opposes legislation that would bar Cosco, saying, through an aide, that
>the Pentagon has deemed the company not a security threat.
>. . . . Mr. Inhofe said he does oppose legislation that intrudes in
>local government decisions to convert closed military bases.
>. . . . "I don't want to interfere in that, but I do in the case of
>Cosco," he said. "Cosco has demonstrated they don't have our national
>security interests at heart."
>. . . . Mr. Hunter is spearheading a drive to defeat Cosco based on its
>checkered history. In 1996, a Cosco ship, the Empress Phoenix, was
>discovered carrying 2,000 automatic rifles destined for illegal sale in
>Los Angeles.
>. . . . The congressman, who heads the House National Security
>Committee's subcommittee on procurement, also says Cosco is the
>communist regime's vehicle for delivering nuclear-weapons components to
>Pakistan and Iran.
>. . . . Oliver North was among talk-show hosts criticizing the senators
>yesterday.
>. . . . "I am greatly surprised that Jim Inhofe, who is usually a
>stalwart defender of U.S. security, has agreed to support this
>ill-advised venture," he said. "I urge both senators [Inhofe and Robb]
>to take another close look at the dangers inherent in allowing the
>communist Chinese government to control a significant portion of a major
>U.S. port, and I call on them to join their colleagues in the House to
>block this foolhardy venture."
>. . . . Mr. Inhofe issued a statement yesterday, saying: "I am
>absolutely opposed to the Cosco deal in Long Beach. This is a national
>security issue of major importance. But I want the legislative language
>dealing with this to be tightly drawn to target Cosco specifically by
>name."
>. . . . California's two Democratic senators, Barbara Boxer and Dianne
>Feinstein, oppose any effort to block Cosco. The White House also
>endorsed the Cosco lease arrangement.
>. . . . Both Mr. Inhofe and Mr. Hunter explained their stands on
>talk-radio shows.
>. . . . "My message is, I talked to Jim, and Chairman Inhofe is on board
>on this thing, and everybody needs to call up [Virginia Democratic Sen.
>Charles S.] Robb's office and let him know where they stand," Mr. Hunter
>said in an interview.
>. . . . "It ought to strike a chord with liberals," he said. "This was a
>company caught red-handed smuggling 2,000 guns for street gangs in
>California. That ought to make liberals in American outraged."
>. . . . Cosco, a fast-growing shipper looking for new terminals across
>the globe, remains interested in signing a new Long Beach lease, a port
>spokeswoman said.
>. . . . But the Inhofe amendment would preclude that possibility. It
>reads, in part, "The secretary of defense shall impose as a condition on
>each conveyance of real property located at such an installation the
>requirement that the property may not be subsequently conveyed (by sale,
>lease, or other method) to China Ocean Shipping Co."
>. . . . Mr. Inhofe said he hopes to insert his amendment into the
>defense authorization bill at the next House-Senate conference meeting
>on the measure. The meeting has not been scheduled.
>
>Copyright ) 1997 News World Communications, Inc.
>
<snip>
===========================================================================
Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris : Counselor at Law, federal witness 01
B.A.: Political Science, UCLA; M.S.: Public Administration, U.C.Irvine 02
tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night 03
email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU 04
website: http://supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now 05
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best 06
Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone 07
Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this 08
_____________________________________: Law is authority in written words 09
As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall 10
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal. 11
======================================================================== 12
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.] 13
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail