FY 2009 USMMA Budget

Colleges and Universities A-Z Merchant Marine Academy - Kings Point
1

<p>Here is a quick update regarding Congressional actions on the Kings Point Budget. I encourage you to contact your Senators and Representatives and let them know you are paying attention.</p>

<p>Currently, the House Armed Services Committee has reported HR 5658 which includes the Kings Point authorization for FY 2009. The bill authorizes $61 million for USMMA. In the Senate, S 2997 the Maritime Administration Act for Fiscal year 2009, authorizes $79.8 million for USMMA and directs $26 million for capital improvements.</p>

<p>I encourage each of you to write your Representatives and Senators and let them know this is important. Additionally, encourage them to let the members of the Armed Services Committee in the House and the Transportation Committee that you support the higher authorization for the Academy in the Senate bill.</p>

2

<p>RE LFWB's post. If you want wording for the letter send me an email and I'll be glad to give you the wording. :)</p>

3

<p>Regarding budget letter, wording and more information may be found at the Mid-Atlantic Parent's site:
<a href="http://www.usmmamidatlanticparents.org%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.usmmamidatlanticparents.org&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Thanks for your support! If we all write letters we can help get the budget for KP passed :D</p>

4

<p>I wrote to my Representatives and Senators. I also sent request to family and friends and encouraged them to request the same from their elected officials. Online it is very easy.</p>

5

<p>Did likewise, Barack Obama is one of our Senators, don't think he's home much these days.</p>

6

<p>Sent to my Representative and Senator. Didn't bother sending to Hillary since I'm sure she isn't interested in USMMA right now and also is one who was looking to close it down. My Representative right now is resigning due to scandal so I don't know how effective sending him a letter would be, but I tried.</p>

7

<p>I have a "devils advocate" kind of question. What is the justification for having USMMA anymore? It came into being just before WW2 in a different era. The US is no longer a maritime nation- at least from the standpoint of the Merchant Marine. The US Flag ocean-going Merchant fleet is smaller than it has ever been with no expectation that it will grow at all. In fact outside of MSC, NOAA and a few lines that keep a couple of vessels flagged because of cabotage laws- there is no ocean going american flag fleet. The state Maritime Academies (Maine, Massachusetts, NY, California and Texas) all offer highly trained professional Deck Officers and Marine Engineers at a much lower cost to the Federal of State Governments than USMMA with at least comparable (or even greater) long term employment at sea in the limited spots available. I don't question that USMMA is a great deal for the Midshipmen and that it produces well trained leaders- but it requires relatively little public service in exchange for that education- this is a highly compensated industry so sailing on a license with an inactive reserve commission is not much of sacrifice). With so many options to fulfill their commitments, a graduating USMMA Mid has less active duty time required than for a full Navy or Army ROTC scholarship for example - both of which currently require 4 years of active duty plus reserve time. And yet- I believe that it costs the Fed Government significantly more to educate a USMMA mid than it does an ROTC scholarship. With no direct service to feed active duty officers into like USMA, USNA, USAFA, USCGA and with a skeleton industry on life support, perhaps instead of pushing for increased funding of USMMA- the Federal Government ought to be questioning supporting USMMA at all anymore? USMMA is a great and relatively unknown opportunity for those kids lucky enough to attend, but based on their web site and publications which certainly don't highlight a compelling mission- gotta wonder why it is still in business at least in its current form. As far as I can tell - there really isn't a good mission statement that lays out a current need for USMMA- certainly not what they quote on the web site ("The stark lessons of twentieth century conflict prove that a strong merchant marine is an essential part of American seapower") which is clearly a statement OBE (Overcome by Events) in light of the virtual nonexistence of the US flag or even the US controlled merchant marine. I would suggest that if USMMA is going to actually increase their budget for the long haul they need to come up with a valid current reason for being. I'm not trying to insult the mids at KP as they are a fine bunch of kids, but I would love to see a rationale for USMMA in the 21st century that rings true.</p>

8

<p>Actually, the fact that the blue water American Merchant Marine is dwindling is all the more reason why we need this school.</p>

<p>As in the times before WWII, there was little of an American Merchant Fleet, which caused a great growth that could not be entirely supported. The fact that KPers are trained in both Maritime and Military fields, have reserve commitments to sail in case of war, along with the rise of asymmetric warfare on the part of our enemies that heavily influences the maritime field. Ask any intelligence or Homeland Security official how safe our ports and ships are.</p>

<p>In addition, the Maritime Industry is seeing a huge boom right now in the brown water industry. Engineers, Officers and Logisticians are all needed, and Kings Point provides the best officers for that.</p>

<p>Maritime/Military Professionals are also needed in the Army, look at what happened to ports during Katrina. The Army National Guard, which commissions many officers straight from Kings Point, has set up a new position for professionals to deal with any natural or man-made threats/disasters that happen to ports, and Kings Pointers are the most qualified to fit those positions.</p>

<p>On the point of cost, it costs significantly less to train a Kings Pointer than any other Service Academy, and depending on the cost of civilian schools, it can compete with many ROTC scholarships.</p>

<p>All of the state maritime schools do not require graduates to even get a USCG license when graduating, so Kings Point which does both that and gives commissions is a great deal for our taxpayers. And active duty members, who can go any service they choose, out of KP requires the same commitment as the other Service Academies, 5 years and another 3 reserve.</p>

9

<p>k314 - so, you want to spend more money where it is not needed? This is like giving more money to the "hood" school districts and watching them do worse, then giving them more as a reward. </p>

<p>This is the current problem with America, we give too many handouts. I know a bunch of old people who get free medical check-ups and medicine courtesy or the government. They don't even take the pills and their reason is "it's free, it doesn't matter." It isn't free, it's tax money being wasted. I also know people on welfare that brag to me about having so much money for food they can't even spend all the food stamps. Then they use their money to buy cigarettes and liqour. </p>

<p>We live in a falling state of econmics because we keep handing out with this mentality. Prove you need it, show where it's going, provide proof of where it went, then fine, have it. </p>

<p>I have no problem paying taxes when it goes to something good but I watch my hard earned money get blasted on people who will take until its all gone. Leeches on the system.</p>

<p>Do me a favor, show me why KP NEEDS the original $61m for the year. What are these teachers getting paid, $500k each? And before you tell me it pays for keeping of the grounds, internet, etc....stuff like that is covered in the Activity Fee paid by the students or their parents.</p>

10

<p>not to let my above post be taken out of context...I'm again just curious to seeing where all the money goes. A DETAILED breakdown is what I want to see.</p>

<p>I'm glad the new mids have AC and all that cool stuff...but a lot of classes went there without it and survived. I bet that Geo-thermal stuff is expensive to install...especially at government contracted rates.</p>

<p>where I work...The government does a few deals through us...they normally pay 4x what the average client pays to move oil. I wonder if they pay four times in all their other endeavors?</p>

11

<p>I'm not arguing the money is spent well, in all honesty, it isn't We got an email about how funds WERE being misappropriated earlier this year. Some of the teachers at the school do not deserve to be there and, like ANY government program, there is an excess of frivolous funds.</p>

<p>However, I am arguing for why the school needs to be kept around, and I may not have worded my argument the best, but the idea is that Kings Point provides an important asset to the country at a relatively cheap cost.</p>

<p>I also dislike handouts, I consider myself something of an objectivist, any sort of government welfare, healthcare, medicare, medicade, social security and regulations I am against. (Yes that includes the Jones Act).</p>

<p>However, I do not see KP as a place for handouts, but an investment by the United States Government in a future source of maritime and economic stability, as well as in competent officers in any service. Yet, like every other investment in the world, not all pay off and some pay off with flying colors.</p>

12

<p>The ability to access U.S.-Flag Merchant Marine ships and seafarers is essential and benefits U.S. national defense and economic security interests. Ninety-five percent of the equipment and supplies required to deploy the U.S. armed forces overseas are delivered by ship. U.S.-flagged commercial and government-owned vessels, manned by more than 8,000 U.S. citizen mariners, continue to play a significant and indispensable role in strategic sealift support for Afghanistan and Iraq operations. With increased requirements to support and sustain special operations forces, maritime coalition forces and expeditionary groups, the military will need substantial logistics force and commercial sealift capability. In-theater afloat, prepositioned war fighting capabilities for immediate employment will require a variety of Navy and commercial vessels, in-stream cargo handling systems and high-speed connector vessels to support Sea Bases, Global Fleet Stations and expeditionary or humanitarian operations.</p>

<p>But, even as the United States’ need for reliable and efficient marine transportation continues to grow in domestic and international trade, the base of skilled U.S. citizen mariners is shrinking in proportion to the declining numbers of U.S.-flagged commercial ships. The diminishing pool of mariners presents a crisis that threatens the nation’s ability to project timely military power.</p>

<p>The Maritime Administration’s (MARAD’S) Ready Reserve Force (RRF) of 52 vessels and the Maritime Security Program’s (MSP) 60 vessels have been major contributors in providing critical strategic sealift capability. Additionally, the Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement, (VISA) jointly sponsored by MARAD and DOD, has provided 58 vessels, intermodal equipment and management services. Until, the future sealift vessels for Sea Basing and Global Fleet Stations are in hand in sufficient numbers, maintenance of the RRF (with its mix of special mission ships not available in sufficient numbers in the U.S. commercial fleet or in the Military Sealift Command fleet) is a viable, cost-effective option to retain the required deployment capability.</p>

<p>The USMMA Alumni supports:</p>

<p>Budgetary, and legislative measures --- including capital and operations-related changes in U.S. tax and maritime regulations --- needed to maintain a viable U.S.-flag Merchant Marine.</p>

<p>Full funding for the 60-ship Maritime Security Program. To replicate the lift capacity of this fleet would cost DOD $8 billion in capital outlay.</p>

<p>The Jones Act and Passenger Vessel Act that governs domestic trades and urges opposition to any legislative initiatives or trade agreements that would weaken these vital industry support mechanisms.</p>

<p>Funding for the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy and the federal programs at the state maritime colleges and the maritime union/industry training facilities to ensure that sufficient numbers of licensed and unlicensed mariners are available to serve the nation’s needs.</p>

<p>Funding and a Title XI Construction Loan Guarantee Program for shipbuilding for U.S. commercial industry, for both economic and national security reasons.</p>

<p>Maintenance of the RRF until sufficient replacement capacity ans capability are available.</p>

<p>Efforts by the U.S. Coast Guard to expedite the licensing and documentation of Merchant Mariners while striking a balance between national security and maritime commercial interests.</p>

<p>A strong Merchant Marine Reserve component in the U.S. Navy Reserve. The Merchant Marine Reserve program must be a high priority from the Navy Reserve community to preserve critical maritime skills and experience.</p>

<p>Legislation for the Department of Veterans Affairs to treat Merchant Marine veterans of action in World War II as they do all other veterans, to include monthly monetary benefits.</p>

<p>MARINE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM</p>

<p>The U.S. Marine Transportation System (MTS) consists of waterways, ports and their intermodal connections, vessels and vehicles that are crucial to the U.S. economy. As the world’s trade leader, the United States requires a technologically advanced, secure, efficient and environmentally sound MTS. MTS moves annually through 300 public and private ports and 25,000 miles of navigable waterways more than 2.3 billion tons of domestic and international cargo worth $2 trillion; imports 3,3 billion barrels of oil to meet our energy demands and transports 180 million passengers by ferry vessels and more than 7 million cruise ship passengers. 13 million people are employed in this industry, including 60,000 water transportation workers and 36,000 mariners, 8,000 of whom are qualified to crew dod sealift ships</p>

<p>Roughly, one quarter of the world’s trade flows through U.S. ports. Our economic prosperity is dependent on international trade, of which 95 percent by volume moves by sea. Any disruption in this global supply chain would have a serious and immediate impact on the U.S. economy and, consequently, our national security. International and domestic trade is expected to double in volume by 2020, creating greater congestion on overburdened land, port, water passenger and freight delivery systems. Only a truly seamless, integrated, multimodal transportation system with an expanded Marine Highway System (short sea shipping) and freight movement will meet the nation’s growing needs. The system should now include the Artic area.</p>

<p>The USMMA Alumni supports:</p>

<p>Efforts to ensure that the MTS is, and remains, adequate and safe to conduct maritime commerce and u.s. military deployments.</p>

<p>The Department of Transportation’s initiatives, including the new National Port Strategy and Global Maritime Awareness interagency organizational framework, to provide the policy and resources needed to maintain and improve the MTS, complementing similar initiatives in aviation and highway transportation.</p>

<p>America’s Marine Highway initiatives such as an exemption of waterborne cargo trans-shipped between U.S. ports from the Harbor Maintenance Tax. This double tax is a major disincentive for increased waterborne transport.</p>

<p>Dredging and marking river and harbor channels that connect U.S. ports to the world.</p>

<p>Improve marine terminal capacity and access to rail and roads.</p>

<p>Efforts by the Coast Guard to develop a national capacity for the MTS to recover from major disruptions to the system to ensure the continuity of commercial and critical maritime activities.</p>

<p>The maintenance of a robust U.S. salvage vessel capability to ensure the expeditious clearing of vital channels and harbors.</p>

<p>Modernization of locks and dams to regulate water flow and facilitate commerce.</p>

<p>Maritime research and development at levels consistent with those provided for other modes of transportation.</p>

<p>Revitalization of the Title XI section of the Merchant Marine Act of 1936 to support replacement of existing Jones Act liner tonnage, supports the investment required for short sea shipping, including infrastructure in both large and small ports and support for the needs of the shipyards that will efficiently build replacement Jones Act vessels and those to be used to accommodate short sea shipping.</p>

<p>[url=<a href="http://www.tellamericatv.com/overview.cfm%5DTell_America_Save_Our_Ships%5B/url"&gt;http://www.tellamericatv.com/overview.cfm]Tell_America_Save_Our_Ships[/url&lt;/a&gt;]&lt;/p>

13

<p>I got to tell you guys...since i sailed on ships, my fiance works in a US shipyard, and we know the industry. It's just cheaper to build and repair a ship elsewhere. Even when current bunker prices in usg are around $600 per mt and it's still cheaper to sail a ship around the globe to get work done in singapore. Our unions to protect american workers with fair rates have made it entirely too expensive. I can tell you all about the massive quanity of tankers to be built in the far east shipyards in the next five years and you'd simple be amazed. Then I'd tell you about the few contracts they have in the philly shiyard and when you compare, it's a wow factor and a half. </p>

<p>American shipping power is already gone. It's not coming back. They can ammend the Jones act, the Mercant Marine Act, etc..it is too late. We can control the inter-coastal barge system and that's about it. Honestly, it's only a matter of time before budgets are completely cut-off for KP. With the state schools that produce plenty of sailors, they need for the government to continue paying really isn't there anymore. Maine, Mass, Suny, CMA, Texas A&M provide more than enough sailors. </p>

<p>The facts of life. Nothing last forever.</p>

14

<p>
[quote]
It's just cheaper to build and repair a ship elsewhere

[/quote]

Yep.. back in 2003 the ship I was assigned to went through 90+ days of repairs, drydocking and conversion work in a Chinese shipyard. The total cost was just a little over 5 million USD for the whole thing. I asked the project senior port engineer how much it would have cost if the company had a US yard do the work and he said it would have cost probably 5 times that amount. Not only that, but more critically it would have taken twice as long. No American company drydocks in the states unless absolutely necessary. </p>

<p>The Kevernar (I think it’s called Aker now) Shipyard in Philadelphia is currently building 12 double hull tankers for the Jones Act trade. And as Disgruntled said that is a drop in the bucket compared to what is being built in foreign yards.</p>

<p>
[quote]
bunker prices in usg are around $600 per mt

[/quote]

WOW!!! :eek: When I got off my ship in Long Beach in December I think we were paying around $360 per metric ton.
A classmate of mine who is captain on a C-11, said this April they were paying $500 per metric ton in LA. We take about 2600 metric tons every 35 days. That equates to an annual fuel bill of 13 million dollars. And that’s just for one ship and doesn’t include the cost of lubes and MGO.</p>

15

<p>Diesel is running about $1225!!!</p>

16

<p>Well, to broaden the subject, why are any of the service academies necessary? ROTC programs and OCS produce enough qualified officers for the branches of the military, why do we still have them?</p>

<p>Just because something isn't the most logical thing doesn't mean it will be done...</p>

17

<p>


</p>

<p>For the Navy at least, numerous studies have been conducted which show that USNA is the most cost effective source for officers, both in quality and longevity of service. You get what you pay for.</p>

18

<p>I was thinking the same thing today K31. There are numerous ROTC programs that supply quality officers.....so why any service Academies? It would save us tax payers a ton of money if we all think along those lines. Also USNA, you are correct....you get what you pay for, and that's the same argument for USMMA.</p>

19

<p>once again...
does it matter?
it seems like this debate just goes in circles. the academies aren't going anywhere...</p>

20

<p>Is2day...no they are not, and these arguments aren't either :D</p>