Maritime Transportation Security Act Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Maritime Transportation Security Act - Essay Example While the attacks focused attention on our aviation system's vulnerability, it became obvious that our maritime domain needed greater attention. Besides being gateways through which dangerous materials could enter, ports are attractive targets because they are often large and sprawling, accessible by water and land, close to crowded centers, and interwoven with highways, roads, factories, and businesses (Flynn, 2004). Security is made difficult by the number of stakeholders involved in port operations, which include local, state, and federal agencies; multiple law enforcement jurisdictions; transportation and trade companies; factories and other businesses. The MTSA imposed an ambitious schedule of requirements on federal agencies and called for a comprehensive framework that included planning, personnel security, and careful monitoring of vessels, facilities, and cargo. Table 1 contains the MTSA's key security-related activities. However, "Haste makes waste", and the urgent nature of the legislative and implementation efforts of the MTSA 2002 proved this to be true (Bouchard, 2005; Ervin, 2006; Haveman et al., 2007). The MTSA 2002, through the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), gave the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) lead responsibility for most of its requirements. Timetables for implementing the provisions were tight, and adding difficulty was the need to implement MTSA after the most extensive federal reorganization after the Second World War. Most of the 22 agencies with MTSA responsibilities were reorganized into the DHS in March 2003, less than 5 months after enactment. Some departments such as the Transportation Security Agency (TSA) were new, while others such as the USCG, Customs Service, and the Immigration and Naturalization Service were transferred from various executive departments. This recombination of organizational cultures and the need to coordinate with other agencies such as the State, Transportation, and Justice Departments introduced complex chains of command and reporting responsibilities (MTSA,2002; DHS, 2005; USCG, 2007). The deadline for implementing MTSA of July 1, 2004 was tight. Unlike other areas of critical infrastructure security where the government was unwilling to set clear mandates for the private sector and push for meaningful change, the MTSA was a catalyst for action. Unfortunately, in the face of unrealistic deadlines and disjointed implementation milestones, good intentions were not necessarily translated into greater security at the pier. And to add insult to injury, the USCG not only proved incapable of managing the projects designed to improve its capability but became open to graft and corruption and overspending (Economist 2007, p. 36). The priorities