[Page S12419]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


            PRIVATE DREDGES--A BETTER DEAL FOR THE TAXPAYER

<bullet> Mr. FAIRCLOTH. Mr. President, before coming to the Senate, I 
spent 45 years in the private sector meeting a payroll a businessman 
and a farmer. I understand free enterprise and the ability of the 
private sector to meet the needs of the citizens of this country. 
Others, Mr. President, do not. They place their faith in government.
  This wrongheaded reliance on government is clearly exhibited by the 
continued use and maintenance of Government-owned hopper dredges. 
Hopper dredges are the large seagoing vessels used to maintain ocean 
entrance channels to the Nation's ports and waterways. They are also 
used to maintain rapidly shoaling rivers.
  This problem is that government-owned and operated dredges charge the 
taxpayer 41 percent more to do their work than is charged by the 
privately owned dredges. That's according to a 1991 study done by the 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the very same folks who operate and 
maintain these dredges.
  Hopper dredges have historically been owned and operated by the 
Government. But in 1977 the Congress did the right thing by directing 
the Corps to phase out Government-owned dredges and privatize the 
business of maintaining our Nation's ports and waterways. What a 
terrific policy that has been for the taxpayer. In 1977 there was a 
single private hopper dredge--today there are 15. Each one of them 
doing more work, more cheaply, more efficiently and with more expertise 
than was previously expected from Government-owned and operated 
dredges.
  The job, however, is not yet done. The private sector has not yet 
been allowed to fully work its magic. Four Government-owned hopper 
dredges remain. These inefficient, costly, and antiquated old work 
horses are perhaps best characterized by the McFarland, a tired old 
lady whose day has passed. Berthed at Philadelphia Naval Ship Yard, the 
McFarland needs more than $20 million in repairs to even begin to meet 
the standards we have come to expect from private dredges. I don't 
think the taxpayer needs to subsidize the work these by-gone beasts of 
old. And surely we do not need to spend money to repair ships so that 
they can then go out perform work more expensively than would be the 
case with privately owned and operated vessels.
  The private dredge industry would welcome the work now being 
conducted by the Government and Government vessels. Right now, one of 
the large private dredges is relegated to work overseas. That's 
unfortunate. Because the Government continues to devote 21 percent of 
available work to old Government dredges, work that accounts for fully 
52 percent of available maintenance dredge funds, the private sector 
must go overseas to find jobs.
  The supporters of Government-controlled dredging cite two reasons for 
their objection to privatization: national security and emergency 
response. These objections do not hold up under scrutiny. The private 
sector has proven its ability to respond when called on in an 
emergency, and its record can only improve with further privatization. 
As for national defense, a recent corps study concluded that the 
private dredges are fulfilling their role as reserve vessels for the 
corps, and will certainly perform as required in the case of an 
emergency.
  As a member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, I filed an 
amendment several weeks back to the Water Resource Department Act that 
would establish a system by which these dredges would be phased out. 
The amendment was not offered because I agreed with the chairman, 
Senator Chafee, that perhaps it was a bit premature. The committee was 
not prepared to address the issue at that point. That's fine, Mr. 
President, but when the bill comes to the floor, it is my intention to 
offer the amendment or one very much like it. It is time we allowed the 
private sector to work its magic.


                          ____________________