MarEx Mailbag:
This week’s Mailbag is heavy. All letters reference our lead editorial from last week, which addressed another OPED piece from the Sunday May 31, 2009 Washington Post.
In his opinion piece, Richard K. Bank compares the woes of automaker GM to that of the U.S. Merchant Marine. His article, entitled, “GM is sunk: Just Ask the Merchant Marine,” was an eye-opener. It would have been even more powerful if any of it had been even remotely accurate. We took issue with Bank’s essay and so did our readers.
You can read our 4 June editorial, entitled “Apples to Oranges: a poor analogy” by clicking HERE. And, you can read Richard Bank’s OPED by clicking HERE.
Our first letter today is from former U.S. Maritime Administrator William G. Schubert (2001-2005). Schubert is another person who speaks from a better position of knowledge than Mr. Bank. Here’s what he had to say:
Mr. Bank’s Opinion Article “GM Is Sunk. Just Ask the Merchant Marine” would have some merit if it were written near the end of the 1980’s. Unfortunately his history lesson of the “demise” of US Merchant Marine has excluded the success story of how the Clinton and Bush Administrations, maritime labor, vessel operators, and Congress have worked together to reconstitute a modern and competitive US-flag merchant marine.
The bipartisan effort to revitalize the US-flag merchant marine became a priority after the first Gulf War. During Desert Shield/Desert Storm the commercial US-flag merchant marine performed admirably. However, it was evident that our ability to provide sealift support for a prolonged “two front” conflict could not be sustained. The need to take action became clear when foreign flag vessels chartered to support our military refused to enter the war-zone when the shooting started.
Progress was made to rebuild a modern fleet of US-flag vessels when the Maritime Security Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-239) was signed into law by President Clinton. The Act authorized the creation of the Maritime Security Program (MSP) which was designed to service both the commercial and national security needs of America. The MSP replaced the costly Operational Differential Subsidy Program referred to in Mr. Blank’s article. The MSP essentially pays a retainer to the US-flag vessel operator to be available to the military in times of national emergencies. President Bush subsequently signed into law the Maritime Security Act of 2003 which expanded the MSP to include a more diverse fleet of commercially viable and military useful vessels.
Mr. Banks makes the outrageous claim that “U.S. taxpayers enjoy little or no benefit from” the current US-flag fleet, and that “the US-owned and operated merchant marine liner fleet no longer exist”. First, the MSP saved the US taxpayers approximately $9 billion in appropriations which would have been required to replicate the capabilities of the US-flag carriers. With regards to the non existent US-flag vessels referred to by Mr. Bank’s, the US-flag merchant marine provided one of the most successful sealift operations in American history supporting Operations Iraqi Freedom/Enduring Freedom (OIF/OEF). By October 2004, the combined US-flag commercial/US Government assets manned by civilian merchant mariners had shipped approximately 88% of all the military surge cargo [34 million square feet of cargo], and 100% of the sustainment cargo. In addition, more than 6,200 merchant mariners, including 83 Midshipmen from the United States Merchant Marine Academy had served our country with honor supporting sealift operations for OIF/OEF.
Mr. Banks got one fact correct in his article - you really should “Just Ask the Merchant Marine” for a good example how to salvage the U.S. auto industry. The manufacturing base represented by the auto industry is critical to our national security interest and economy. The Administration, Congress, labor & management should work together to save our domestic auto industry with the least impact on the American taxpayer.
Captain William G. Schubert
Former US Maritime Administrator, 2001-2005
President, International Trade & Transportation, Inc.
MarEx Editor’s Remarks: Schubert’s letter gets down to the nitty-gritty in response, whereas Bank can only manage to speak in generalities. In truth, Bank’s OPED made for good “sound bite” material, while taking advantage of a tough situation in Detroit, while preaching to a Washington Post audience that largely wouldn’t know the pointy end from the round end. And now, they probably even know less. Read on for another letter:
Mr. Keefe,
You wrote a very fine article in rebuttal of Mr. Bank’s article. I just hope that you sent your rebuttal to the Washington Post’s Editor so the truth can be told to all who read Mr. Bank’s rubbish. You, sir, carry our torch well and I wish you calm seas and fair winds.
Just a fellow seaman,
Rick McCann, Capt.
Cape May Lewes Ferry
MarEx Editor’s Remarks: Thanks for your kind words, Rick. We’ll keep on doing what we’re doing. Here’s another letter:
Aloha Joseph.
Very good article and very true. I read Mr. Bank’s article and wondered what his salary is? First off I am a retired senior Staff Chief Engineer and your labor comments are very true. When you speak of the Jones Act and what it stands for it is a shame that so many out there feel it is no good and should be tossed out. If we are going to talk about pay let’s talk about pay but as you said many are overseas companies owned by American interests that pay no taxes here yet benefit from the huge money going into their pockets.
If you want to talk story, then all the salaries from the top down should be on a chart. I loved your salary comparison and as a young man I remember earning $1000.00 a month in Alaska. I was doing what they show on the Deadliest Catch and they talk about the deck crews making $20 to 39K a season as big money. Problem is that is not everybody and it is not the same money as it was in the 60’s.
Again today’s American and foreign shipping companies don’t show the whole story they just like to blame the Unions. When are the managers going to learn that they make what they make because of what the unions have negotiated long and hard for the members, they would get squat. Your buying power is very to the point and the other points about the laws and rules are so true that ships and lives are lost every day around the world. I have been on many of these ships and some are so bad that the USCG has tied them up and prevented them from coming into US ports.
Keep up the good articles and you are right, this one is way out of line, but you must remember the past administration did not want rules passed that may take dollars out of their friend’s pockets as it may cut into the dollars given to their reelection coffers.
Buying ships and equipment overseas and selling our military vehicles to China, (Hummer) is not an option that we should be doing. We need work here to make jobs here, so we can buy the things we make here.
Clark Dodge, President
CED Consulting LLC
MarEx Editor’s Note: Bank got a few things right in his OPED, as I noted. But, most of that only went to prove his entire theory as wrong. One more letter:
Mr. Keefe,
Great job on the reply to Mr. Bank!
Regards,
Bill Van Loo
MEBA Secretary Treasurer
MarEx Editor’s Remarks: Some kind words from someone who clearly has some skin in the game. Thanks, Bill. And thanks for reading.