Reply
Fri 18 Jun, 2004 04:30 pm
Quote:Jun 18, 5:37 PM EDT
House Rejects Plane Cargo Inspections By ALAN FRAM
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The House refused on Friday to require inspections of all cargo shipped on passenger airline flights, heeding arguments that technology is not available, and losing the freight would drive carriers into bankruptcy.
With its 211-191 vote, the House ignored election-year cries that the government must do what it takes to enhance security in an era of unabated terror threats. Currently, only a small percentage of cargo aboard passenger flights is inspected, and uninspected cargo is supposed to come only from shippers known to the government.
"If six planes are blown out of the sky a week from now or two weeks from now, are all of us going to go back to our districts and say, `We can't afford to do it?'" said Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn. "I can't do that."
Rep. Harold Rogers, R-Ky., cited estimates by the Transportation Security Administration that it would take $700 million and the hiring of 9,000 additional inspectors to examine cargo thoroughly on passenger flights at the nation's largest airports. He said forbidding airlines to carry uninspected freight would have financially catastrophic effects on an industry that already has several struggling companies.
"You shut off air cargo, you close down the airlines," Rogers said.
The vote was on an amendment by Shays and Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., to a measure providing $32 billion for next year for the Homeland Security Department.
The overall bill was approved by 400-5. It would provide more money than President Bush proposed to help state and local emergency responders, though less than he wanted for cities considered the likeliest terrorist targets.
Last year, the House easily approved a similar provision requiring inspections of cargo aboard passenger flights, but it was never approved by the Senate.
I wonder if the government will find the funds should an airliner be blown out of the sky. If it should happen I can see a commission charged with determining who is responsible and fingers pointing in all directions. In addition I suppose a number of I told you so books will appear in the bookstores.
Naw, they'll just blame the president. They're blaming him for everything else.
They really are between a rock and a hard place, however. Any cargo coming into the U.S. via ship, plane, and truck or anything transported across country could be lethal and only a tiny percentage of any of it is inspected. Where do you begin?
Seems to me there should be some kind of certification seal from known shippers. Transport companies accepting cargo from a new carrier would have to do a background check and 'certify' it before accepting sealed cargo. That would still be expensive but it would cost everybody far less than trying to open and look at everything shipped.
The Homeland Securities Dept could do the background checks and issue the official seals.
Even now, I mail a lot of 'heavy' envelopes and anything over 16 ounces I have to carry to the post office and hand it in person to a postal worker who has the authority to require ID from me and open the package for inspection if needed. (They never do but they could.) If I drop the 'heavy' mail into the outside mail drop box, I get it back in two or three days. They will not send it on.
Foxfyre,
The idea was to inspect cargo aboard passenger planes.
To inspect all cargo is an even dumber idea than the passenger plane one.
Your seal idea is already partially implemented (all containers have a seal).
I asked ehBeth about this, regarding Canadian truck shipments. Yes, they are sealed, and yes, they are still inspected at the border - not 100%, possibly, but the seal doesn't confir immunity.