Dubai Port Deal In Terms of Privatization

The machinations going on in Republican circles over the Dubai ports deal is interesting in a number of ways. We have knee-jerk partisans putting aside their typical xenophobia towards the Arab world, and supporting their man Bush. We also have a prime example, with Social Security Privatization a close second, of Republican representatives and talking heads breaking rank with the administration in an attempt to keep the self-crowned "party of national security" label intact.

Now, the question of whether this particular company would be a security risk to U.S. ports is debatable, and there are enough people on all sides of the political spectrum voicing in.

But a question I haven't heard asked, and one I believe Democratic party is missing the beat on, is this: Is it in the interest of national security to turn over the operation of our ports to any private company?

I don't know the full history of who has operated our ports throughout history. But we have certainly had a supreme addiction to privatization in recent years, and the justifications are often times flawed. Any apparent financial savings are often the direct result of lack of unionization of the workforce; hence lower labor costs. The process of turning over critical operations of our government to private sector companies can lead to corruption and cronyism in the worse case, or the appearance of cronyism at best.

But, putting that aside...

Our nation's ports are fundamentally important. In the aftermath of Katrina, our economy experienced first hand the effects of a non-functioning port. Does it make sense for us to outsource such a fundamental function to anyone?