The American Spectator

Observe that the WSJ editorial on the weekend — “Ports of Gall” — summarizes in cogent prose the facts of the matter of the port imbroglio. I mention that in the course of last week’s report, I learned that the jingoism, demagoguery, and base poor research by members of Congress are a sizable threat to rational political discourse.

The facts are that there are four major terminal operators on the planet. Number one is a private owned but China based firm from Hong Kong, Hutchinson, and will not do business in the U.S. because of the unions and the shoddy port political environment. Number two and three are a Singapore government-owned entity and a privately owned entity from Denmark. With the DP World purchase of P&O, it becomes number four in the world.

All four of these enterprises share terminals and or facilities at ports around the planet. P&O operates one terminal at New York/New Jersey. The Danish company operates another terminal.

Not one of the four firms, two Chinese dominated/owned, one Euro owned, one now proposed to be UAE owned, is responsible for or in the business of providing security, inspection, policing, management or intelligence gathering for any of the ports in the U.S. or elsewhere. These are vendors who must make money or wither. And making a profit in the U.S. ports — witness the backup on the West Coast last summer because of union shenanigans — is daunting and risk filled.

Questions to be asked about the port imbroglio is who among the pols who are misbehaving with bad facts or conscious distortions are also taking phone calls or meetings or cash from longshore or stevedore unions or patronage posts that do business with port authorities.

Quick version is to follow the money.