Comments on: 100 % Cargo Scanning: A Misguided Mandate That Hurts http://www.freightpublicpolicy.org/2009/11/100-cargo-screening-a-misguided-mandate-that-hurts-not-helps-homeland-security/ Freight Transportation & Logistics Thu, 16 Jun 2011 18:08:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: jgold http://www.freightpublicpolicy.org/2009/11/100-cargo-screening-a-misguided-mandate-that-hurts-not-helps-homeland-security/comment-page-1/#comment-8 jgold Fri, 04 Dec 2009 21:30:59 +0000 http://www.freightpublicpolicy.org/?p=170#comment-8 I was pleased to see the statements from Secretary Napolitano and Chairman Rockefeller earlier this week about the difficulties of achieving 100% scanning by 2012 as required by the 9/11 Act. As Secretary Napolitano stated, "100% scanning does not equal 100% security." We fully support the current DHS risk-based multi-layered strategy on supply chain security. Congress should recognize the difficulties with 100% scanning, repeal the mandate and focus on strengthening and improving the current multi-layered risk-based approach utilized by DHS. I was pleased to see the statements from Secretary Napolitano and Chairman Rockefeller earlier this week about the difficulties of achieving 100% scanning by 2012 as required by the 9/11 Act. As Secretary Napolitano stated, "100% scanning does not equal 100% security." We fully support the current DHS risk-based multi-layered strategy on supply chain security. Congress should recognize the difficulties with 100% scanning, repeal the mandate and focus on strengthening and improving the current multi-layered risk-based approach utilized by DHS.

]]> By: asalerno http://www.freightpublicpolicy.org/2009/11/100-cargo-screening-a-misguided-mandate-that-hurts-not-helps-homeland-security/comment-page-1/#comment-4 asalerno Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:18:12 +0000 http://www.freightpublicpolicy.org/?p=170#comment-4 There appears to be a disconnect with what is possible, and what is being mandated. The fact remains that 100% Scanning cannot be acheived because of a number of reasons, many of which have to do with the basic workings of and need for global trade and the dramatic impact that this mandate would have. Another would be the problems created by international community opposition. The US does not have jurisdiction in those foreign ports, so to ensure the mandate occurs, we would essentially have to use the threat of enforcement. With that said, they would then use the threat of retaliation. The point is that both the international community and the US government are in opposition to the mandate. However, the mandate still remains law. Congress needs to back away from this mandate to ensure that we actually do acheive a secure supply chain. The threat of 100% scanning only hurts security. Let's propose something that is workable, and that is looked at positively with our trading partners. Then, we'll get results. As for right now, we are simply in a holding pattern. There appears to be a disconnect with what is possible, and what is being mandated. The fact remains that 100% Scanning cannot be acheived because of a number of reasons, many of which have to do with the basic workings of and need for global trade and the dramatic impact that this mandate would have. Another would be the problems created by international community opposition. The US does not have jurisdiction in those foreign ports, so to ensure the mandate occurs, we would essentially have to use the threat of enforcement. With that said, they would then use the threat of retaliation.

The point is that both the international community and the US government are in opposition to the mandate. However, the mandate still remains law. Congress needs to back away from this mandate to ensure that we actually do acheive a secure supply chain. The threat of 100% scanning only hurts security.

Let's propose something that is workable, and that is looked at positively with our trading partners. Then, we'll get results. As for right now, we are simply in a holding pattern.

]]>