I support the Jones Act.
I want jobs kept in America. We have too much outsourcing already.
Jeopardizing America’s ports, indeed.
It also costs in moving oil from Texas coast to other states getting oil from the Middle East or other overseas locations.
Does Mr. Meyer work for the Chinese Communist government?
PS, Mr. Meyer is free to move to the Third World Corruptocracy of his liking. He’ll find things quite cheap there. Perhaps he can write anti-American screeds from there, ship them over the internet to one of the high value countries. Since his noise will be meaningless and valueless in Nowhereistan, it’s the only way to keep himself from having to work for starvation wages where he is.
No one is holding him back from leaving.
I had to go and refresh my memory on this...
WIKI SEZ:
“...The Merchant Marine Act of 1920, also known as “The Jones Act”,
is a United States federal statute that provides for
the promotion and maintenance of the American merchant marine.
Among other purposes, the law regulates maritime commerce
in U.S. waters and between U.S. ports.
Section 27 of the Jones Act, deals with “cabotage” (domestic port-to-port coastal shipping)
and requires that all goods transported by water between U.S. ports
be carried on U.S.-flag ships, constructed in the United States,
owned by U.S. citizens, and crewed by U.S. citizens and U.S. permanent residents.
The Act was introduced by Senator Wesley Jones (R-WA).
Laws similar to the Jones Act date to the early days of the nation.
In the First Congress, on September 1, 1789, Congress enacted Chapter XI,
“An Act for Registering and Clearing Vessels, Regulating the Coasting Trade,
and for other purposes,” which limited domestic trades to American ships
meeting certain requirements...”
Why don’t we just have China carry all our commerce? They’d probably do it for less than half the cost. Gee, what a cool idea? BTW, are you a shill for the Pacific Maritime Association?
Remember, regardless of Congress’s impressive track record for making constitutionally complaint laws (sarc), all federal laws need to be checked against Congress’s constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers.
Regarding U.S. ports for example, are these federal ports purchased under the Constitution’s Clause 17 of Section 8 of Article I?
Also, if U.S. ships (and what is a U.S. ship defined as?) transport goods between two ports in the same state, I don’t see how the Constitution’s Commerce Clause (1.8.3) would apply.
On the other hand, if the ports are in different states then all bets are off.
Otherwise, what am I overlooking?
Apples and oranges. The slowdown in the ports are due to the longshoremen and then obsolence of the port facilities. The Jones Act doesn’t have anything to do with either of those.
The NLRA is the problem, not the Jones Act. Thank FDR for that.
I read the Wiki article. Your piece leaves out tons of needed information like:
The American shipbuilding industry is booming right now. Wonder why that was left out?
The GAO says that any potential damages are unmeasurable and can’t be proven.
The Jones Act was updated as recently as 2006.
Ships can apply for and get waivers.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920
That's simply not true. Foreign ships may, in fact, take cargo directly to Hawaii. Most large container ships do not do that, though, and instead bring it to the West Coast, where it is then shipped back to Hawaii by U.S. shippers. But that's not required by the Jones Act - it is simply because it makes more economic sense for the foreign shipper to unload all of its cargo in a West Coast port, rather than stopping in Hawaii on the way to drop off a small portion of its cargo.
Why would Asian ships bringing goods to Hawaii have to drop it in San Francisco? Asia to Hawaii isn’t between two U.S. ports. And prohibiting foreign vessels from helping us out with the gulf coast oil spill was just bonehead stupid, Obama sucking up to the Commies, er, unions. Where were his executive orders when all that was happening?
Want energy independence? Waive the Jones Act
http://www.aei.org/publication/want-energy-independence-waive-the-jones-act/
Because there isn’t enough pipeline or rail capacity to handle the enormous quantities of unconventional oil being produced in North America — much of it oil-sands crude from Alberta and “tight oil” from the Bakken shale formation in North Dakota – the oil must be transported by a fleet of tankers and barges to mid-Atlantic refineries that can process it. But there aren’t enough vessels to ship the oil due to the Jones Act – which requires that all cargoes transported between U.S. ports be carried on U.S.-owned ships, built and registered in the U.S., and manned by U.S. crews.
Thanks to this protectionist statute, there is now a glut of sweet crude at Gulf ports, which has caused a backup that could start to slow oil production in North Dakota and at the Eagle Ford shale in south Texas.
I believe this act is the reason cruise ships have to stop in Canada on their way to Anchorage from Seattle. How it helps American business is anyone’s guess.
Do we REALLY want NAFTA of the Sea?
The “We Love Big Government Protectionism Club” at Free Republic is quite popular.
The West Coast longshoreman slow down has nothing what so ever to do with the Jones Act.
The article reads like a Hands Up Don’t Shoot sponsor.
These all sound like pretty good ideas to me.
China will hall build a huge port facility in Mexico and use Mexican trucks to ship to the US and Canada. LA, Long Beach and Seattle will lose 75% of their business.