Under the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, more commonly called the Jones Act, cargo shipped between two U.S. ports must be carried by ships that were built in America and are primarily owned and staffed by Americans.
As a result, oil pumped in Alaska can only be transported to the U.S. mainland by a small subset of available vessels, making it much more difficult—and expensive—to do so. Americans pay more for certain energy products like natural gas, even when it’s produced here.*
“The logic behind the law was that restrictions on foreign competition would, among other things, encourage the development of a strong U.S. shipbuilding sector,” Colin Grabow of the Cato Institute wrote in 2019. But "rather than prospering, U.S. shipyards have been in a decline for decades, and there are only a mere handful that build oceangoing commercial ships. That may seem a headscratcher to some given the Jones Act’s U.S.-build requirement, but it makes more sense when one considers that these ships cost up to five times more than equivalent vessels built in foreign
5 Likes
Jones. Act also recognizes the need for ocean shipping during a national emergency. Certainly liberty ships were a major asset in WWII.
Jones Act gives us experienced domestic merchant marine and officers academy in Kings Point NY. This core can easily be expanded in time of need. Then we have experienced officers and crews to lead. An asset worth supporting.
We have just been through this during co-vid when face masks and other protective equipment were needed in China and not available when we depended on them.
Perhaps terms should be adjusted but generally Jones Act is good policy.
3 Likes
I don’t agree. Granted, my experience with the Jones Act is in the forcing of cruise ships to make stops at meaningless ports so they can satisfy the “visiting a foreign port” requirement. You want to cruise to Hawaii? It’s going to stop in Ensenada for no other reason that satisfying the Jones Act. The only exception I’m aware of is the NCL Pride of America, because it is US flagged. It spends most of its time going between islands.
It’s really pointless if it’s so easy to avoid it. Stop in Victoria, and you can cruise to Alaska. Stop in Ensenada, you can cruise to Hawaii. Etc. It’s just dumb. It didn’t accomplish the objective of getting more US flagged vessels. The workaround is cheaper for ship owners than flagging their vessels in the US.
7 Likes
You are entitled to your opinion. Maintaining skilled crews is worth the inconvenience of an extra stop. Jones act means foreign cruise ships are factory ships w most food prepared fresh on ship. US river cruises are much more costly often w food prepared on shore and frozen.
Jones act is cited in various situation where equipment is not available made in USA. Wind farms at sea were delayed. Heating oil shipped from the Gulf to New England is more expensive. Can be cheaper to ship from the Mideast. Hurricane recovery in Puerto Rico was delayed by the Jones Act requirement.
Some adjustments in the rules or emergency suspension of rules may be in order. But elimination of the rule is a bad idea. How else will we support the experienced crews?