California state Sen. Joe Simitian (D, Palo Alto) introduced a bill that would place ocean rangers on cruise ships operating from California ports in order to protect passengers from crime and monitor the ships' environmental law compliance. The bill goes to a hearing of the state Senate's Environmental Quality Committee on April 14. Senior editor Johanna Jainchill talked with Simitian about the necessity of these rangers.
Q: What led you to believe this was necessary?
A: I came to this issue by way of the environmental concern. An obvious concern is that we have good laws on the book but no one onboard to enforce them. We currently rely on self-monitoring and self-reporting, which isn't a terribly reliable way to ensure environmental compliance. The notion of having someone onboard seemed logical. As we looked at this issue, we realized there was concern about the level of crime on cruise ships.
Q: Are there statistics that back up those concerns?
A: We have press reports, industry statistics, FBI statistics, and it suggests there is reason for serious concern. Frankly, it is hard to get your hand on reliable statistics, because there is no one onboard monitoring and collecting that information. And there is some indication that the industry has been less than forthcoming about providing complete and accurate information.
What I am proposing is not "Columbo" meets "The Love Boat." We're talking about having someone onboard who is a bona fide peace officer ... to provide oversight and ensure that things are done in a proper and professional way. Whether it's the collection and reporting of evidence, securing a crime scene ...
Q: What about the cruise lines' own onboard security?
A: Onboard security works for the cruise line, not for the passengers and not for the public. Once you step onboard, you are living and traveling in a lawless society ... you have a ship under a foreign flag, more often than not in international waters. We have air marshals on planes with a couple hundred passengers, but no one on cruise ships with 10 times that number.
Q: But those air marshals are primarily to defend against terrorism.
A: There is homeland security value in having folks onboard, as well. ... You've got no homeland security presence onboard, no bona fide peace officer presence onboard and a situation where the number of passengers is typically about 2,000 and about 800 or 900 crew members, half of whom are not U.S. nationals, which makes accountability and jurisdictional issues even more difficult.
Q: What kind of jurisdiction would that person have ininternational waters?
A: We are not asserting jurisdiction in international waters. We do have the ability, and we checked this with our counsel, to regulate access to California ports. So accepting an ocean ranger onboard and complying with the provisions of the bill would be a precondition to accessing California's ports.
Q: How would one person help protect thousands of passengers?
A: I don't say it's a cure-all, but the information we have suggests that the response is not what it should be. ... The cruise industry is a boon to California's economy, and I want to be supportive of it. Enlightened self-interest should lead the industry to welcome this additional incremental safety for their passengers.
To the extent that the industry is tied to the public's belief that it is a safe and enjoyable way to vacation, this ought to be a way to provide that additional increment. If there's not a problem, what have they got to hide?
To contact reporter Johanna Jainchill, send e-mail to [email protected].