Article/Column

On February 26, 2008, the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation held a hearing to examine the fiscal year 2009 budget request from the United States Coast Guard.

 

President Bush has requested $8.8 billion to fund the Coast Guard in fiscal year 2009 – an increase of approximately $459 million over the fiscal year 2008 enacted budget. 

 

Included in that overall budget request is a request of $1.2 billion for the Coast Guard’s capital account – of which just over $990 million is requested to continue the Deepwater acquisitions program. 

 

Last year was another remarkable year for the Coast Guard. In August, the service celebrated the saving of a million lives through actions taken both by it and by the precursor agencies that were folded into it.

 

In 2007, the Coast Guard also celebrated the removal of 355,755 pounds of cocaine with an estimated street value of more than $4.7 billion from circulation. As a Representative – and resident – of the City of Baltimore, a city that knows too well the terrible impact of illegal drugs, I know what a critical accomplishment these record seizures represent.

 

However, even as we celebrate these successes, the Coast Guard must always be striving forward and preparing to meet the emerging challenges that confront our nation. 

 

As is well-known, the service has assumed significant new homeland security responsibilities – particularly for port security. Unfortunately, as it has assumed these responsibilities, it has not yet found balance between security and its traditional missions. As a result, in at least one traditional mission – marine safety – the Coast Guard appears to have suffered a decline in expertise and resources.

 

The problems in the marine safety program are thoroughly catalogued in a report recently completed by retired Vice Admiral James C. Card, the former Vice Commandant of the Coast Guard (www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/cg54/docs/VADM%20Card%20Report.pdf). 

 

Admiral Card’s report raises many of the criticisms of the program that have been of deep concern to the Subcommittee and particularly to the Chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Congressman James Oberstar.  

 

Specifically, Admiral Card’s report details a loss of professional competence among marine inspectors and investigators. The report also indicates that frequent transfers prevent marine safety personnel from developing technical or geographic expertise. Further, Admiral Card also confirms that many in the maritime industry believe the Coast Guard has lost the desire to work in partnership with them to achieve safety and what should be complementary security goals.

 

Most troubling, however, was Admiral Card’s statement that the “biggest concern” among all those whom he interviewed while compiling his report was that “the Coast Guard no longer considered Marine Safety an important mission for the Coast Guard and therefore let performance and service slide.” Safety is the ultimate complement of security – and as one is increased, the other is increased.

 

As a first step in what needs to be a deliberate and thorough effort to shore up the marine safety program and ensure it is the equal of all the Coast Guard’s missions, the service has requested $20 million in operating funding to fund 276 new billets in the marine safety program.

 

The service’s fiscal year 2009 budget also requests $2.6 million to pay for support to be obtained on a contractual basis to help the Coast Guard complete nearly 100 pending rulemakings. Obviously, completing the regulatory backlog is also a top priority for the Subcommittee.

 

Unfortunately, the problems we have witnessed in the marine safety program were precisely the types of issues which so concerned the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure when the Coast Guard was moved to the Department of Homeland Security – and they became perhaps inevitable as the Coast Guard expanded its missions without significantly expanding its personnel.

 

This brings me to a critical point. I firmly believe that as the Coast Guard cannot find its new point of balance if it does not grow in size from an active-duty force of just under 42,000 individuals – an end strength that has been roughly unchanged for decades.

 

 In the post-9/11 world, the Coast Guard can no longer be like the fire department that responds only when called. Instead, the Coast Guard must be prepared to be like the police – always present on patrol.

 

Unfortunately, during our hearing, the Coast Guard was unable to indicate specifically how many new personnel it needed to align its resources with its missions despite vigorous questioning from Chairman Oberstar. 

 

A thorough review of the Coast Guard’s current personnel resources is long overdue. It is imperative that the service identify the specific gaps it faces and the resources required to fill these gaps – and the Subcommittee looks forward to receiving a frank assessment.

 

Such an assessment will help to ensure not only that the Coast Guard’s marine safety program is adequate to effectively regulate the increasingly complex maritime industry – but that the Coast Guard is able to perform each of its missions to the standard of excellence that the American people expect of the service and that I know it expects of itself.