MARAD's Condition

By Kyle Kajihiro
Sept 2, 2007

To the Editor

While there is plenty of blame to go around for the Superferry fiasco, the real source of the problem may lie in the mysterious condition of the Title XI loan guarantee set by the Maritime Administration (MARAD) that there be no environmental impact statement. Why would the federal government use such coercion of the purse to prevent the state from following its own laws, especially under a program that the Bush administration does not believe in?

Sean Connaughton, Administrator of MARAD testified before Congress (March 15, 2007) that the agency had not requested Title XI loan guarantees since 2001 because it viewed the program as a corporate subsidy. However through Congressional appropriations (i.e. earmarks) MARAD funded a number of loan guarantees, the most recent of which was the Superferry.

So let's follow the money. How were the funds for the Superferry loan guarantee appropriated? And what strings were attached to the money in that legislation? What promises or assurances were made to ease its passage?

Could Connaughton's surprisingly alarmist declaration last week in the Maui court that "the military readiness of the Nation could be diminished if the ALAKAI is precluded from sustaining normal commercial operations" be a clue to the deals made to clinch the Superferry?

Last update: September 4, 2007