New legislation seeks to increase oversight of the House panel at the center of the Dubai Ports controversy amid concerns that the bill could scare off foreign investment.

Congressional Democrats, in power for the first time in twelve years, quickly passed homeland security measures long stymied by Republicans. Experts give mixed reviews to the proposals, and some Republicans complain about a lack of debate.

The U.S. Congress has signaled intentions to tighten scrutiny over foreign investments in the United States. Legislators point to national security concerns but critics warn of economic nationalism.

Dubai Ports World has agreed to divest itself of its U.S. ports holdings that were the focal point of a firestorm in Congress over the last two weeks. Though the move should calm immediate fears, the larger questions of port security and foreign control of U.S. infrastructure are likely to linger.

The issue of "protecting" vital infrastructure from foreign control—an issue that arose in 2005 during an unsuccessful bid by a Chinese company to purchase an American oil firm—is again in the news. This time, the infrastructure in question is six major U.S. shipping terminals that have been acquired, with U.S. approvel, by a UAE firm. The political backlash at state and city levels is quickly building.

One year after the Dubai Ports World controversy, Congress is pushing legislation to reform the committee that reviews foreign investments in American companies. But some business groups think proposals for increased oversight go too far.

The United States launched the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) in 2003 to help curb the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Since then, PSI membership has expanded sevenfold, and the program has contributed to significant seizures of WMD shipments.

A United Arab Emirates-owned company is set to take control of terminals in six major U.S. ports, raising questions about security.

The transport of liquefied natural gas to the United States is expected to surge in the next two decades. The explosive power of such gas makes transport ships attractive terrorist targets. Security experts say it is time to improve safeguards.

The central finding of this report is that federal government has had a naïve view of what the market is able to do when left largely on its own to protect critical infrastructure.

Pittsburgh Tribune-Review investigative reporter Carl Prine performs an audit of freight rail security and finds large stores of hazardous chemicals left completely unguarded in the heart of major cities.

In the aftermath of the Dubai ports deal, President Bush's approval rating has hit a new low and his image for honesty and effectiveness has been damaged. Yet the public uncharacteristically has good things to say about the role that Congress played in this high-profile Washington controversy.

Testimony of Dr. James Jay Carafano on port security and foreign-owned maritime infrastructure.

Administration officials have not done a good job explaining why Americans should worry about U.S. port security and what needs to be done to secure the maritime domain. Now that the Administration has Americans’ attention on this issue, it needs toaddress the heart of the matter.

Critics of the Dubai Ports World deal are focusing on the wrong ports. The place of maximum danger to the United States is at the port of embarkation, where cargo is loaded on its way to our shores, not where the cargo is offloaded. By then it will be too late.

This report analyzes the proposed acquisition of six major U.S. ports by Dubai Ports World and Unocal by the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC), which has sparked intense concerns among some Members of Congress and the public and has reignited the debate over what role foreign acquisitions play in U.S. national security.