UPDATE: House Votes To Expedite Airport Screening For Troops
By Adrianna McGinley
The House is scheduled to vote Tuesday on legislation that would expedite airport security screening for members of the Armed Forces.
H.R. 1801 would give the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) six months to implement a risk-based system for screening members of the military and their families traveling on official orders.
The legislation, introduced by Rep. Chip Cravaack (R-Minn.), was sparked in 2007 when 200 soldiers traveling home from Iraq to Hawaii were detained during a layover at Oakland International Airport and denied entry to the passenger terminal.
“Our soldiers who are putting their lives on the line in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and elsewhere should be afforded extra respect when returning home to their loved ones and shouldn’t be viewed as potential terrorists in our airports,” Cravaack said.
The House Committee on Homeland Security unanimously agreed in September to bring the legislation to the floor for consideration.
Staff
As expected, the Risk-Based Screening for Members of the Armed Services Act passed the House unanimously Tuesday evening. The vote tally was 404-0.
The Right to Defend Oneself
“We all have an inherent right to self defense in international waters,” according to Senator Jim Webb (D-VA). This remark came out of a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing that saw testimony from Richard Phillips, Captain of the Maersk Alabama. Phillips received international media attention several weeks ago while being held hostage by pirates off of the coast of Somalia.
Both the Senators and the witnesses acknowledged that Piracy off of the coast of Somalia has been on the rise recently. Committee Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.) said that America’s “ability to project naval power and to help ensure the free passage of goods and humanitarian aid is as important as ever.”
Phillips acknowledged that more needs to be done to secure vessels of the merchant marine, specifically arming the crew.
“In my opinion, arming the crew cannot and should not be viewed as the best or ultimate solution to the problem. At most, arming the crew should only be one component of a comprehensive plan and approach to combat piracy,” he said.
The comprehensive approach the committee discussed could include increased U.S. Navy presence in the most dangerous areas, the creation of a protected corridor that civilian ships can travel within, the rooting out of pirates in their land based sanctuaries and the “hardening” of ships, to make the ships structurally more resistant to pirates. “Hardening” measures include razor wire on railings, fire hoses to repel the pirates, and unbolting ladders that lead onto the boat. Phillips does not believe this will stop the pirates, but rather, that they will find a way to adapt.
Maersk Chaiman John Clancey, also present at the hearing, does not believe that arming the crews is a good idea.
“Our belief is that arming merchant sailors may result in the acquisition of even more lethal weapons and tactics by the pirates, a race that merchant sailors cannot win. In addition, most ports of call will not permit the introduction of forearms into their national waters,” Clancey said.
Clancey also posed that greater liability may be assumed by the companies if sailors are traveling with weapons. Neither Chairman Kerry nor Phillips felt that this argument was strong, because of the intense amount of training that mariners go through already. Kerry, a former member of the U.S. Navy, feels that the benefits outweigh the risks, and that multinational agreements can be reached to work out the issue of bringing weapons into port.
Richard Phillips is scheduled to testify next week before the Senate Armed Services Committee.