Relevant to the Great Lakes economy, and national security, the Jones Act requires that vessels transporting cargo between US ports must be US-flagged, and merchant mariners sailing on them must be US citizens or legal residents. The Jones Act also protects the Great Lakes shipbuilding industry that still exists, and those in other parts of the nation, by requiring companies operating within the domestic US trade to do business only with US shipbuilders when buying new vessels. McCain argues that the Jones Act is antiquated protectionism, and says eliminating it will save consumers money. The latter point is probably true...it would save money on consumer goods FOR CONSUMERS WHO STILL HAVE JOBS. Granted, the skilled tradesmen who work for shipbuilders will likely find other jobs quickly, since we have a shortage of skilled workers (possibly another reason McCain would like to eliminate the Jones Act, rather than shift education policy to encourage training in the skilled trades). However, there is a real risk that it would lead to the collapse of the shipbuilding industry entirely, as US worker and environmental protections limit the ability to fiscally compete with nations such as China, that do not have such costs to contend with. Those who are concerned with climate change should be especially wary of this, not only as overseas shipbuilders pollute their own lands and pump air pollution and CO2 into our shared atmosphere, but also because the US will have little effective jurisdiction over the environmental standards of foreign-flagged ships that transport cargo between US domestic ports. Enforcing environmental standards currently requires mandatory US Coast Guard inspections of all vessels operating within US waters, including foreign-flagged vessels transporting cargo between domestic and foreign ports. US ships currently undergo periodic US Coast Guard inspections as well as regular annual inspections (on the Great Lakes, this is during the off season). In addition, US vessels have mandatory 5 year dry dock inspections. (Canada has identical requirements, and our agencies work closely together for the health of our shared waters). If the number of foreign-flagged vessels increases, then funding for inspections will have to be increased because there is no way the US can enforce regular annual and 5 year dry dock inspections on foreign ships. Its unlikely that Congress will adequately fund such inspections. Those who are concerned with national security should be aware that US merchant mariners have a history of serving in time of war, and practice readiness by voluntarily serving when called up on military sealift operations. US sailors must have security clearance, and are also trained to work with local, state and federal agencies in homeland security measures. International sailors cannot perform this function. Not only that, but border security guards currently work at every US port, assigned to foreign-flagged vessels to ensure that sailors dont enter the US without clearance. International sailors with criminal records are not allowed shore leave in US ports, and shipping companies are billed for the cost of guarding the ship. An increase in the number of foreign-flagged vessels in US ports would require increased security. Whether the cost is covered in full by the shipping companies, or subsidized by taxpayers, there will be a higher cost passed on to consumers. Finally, if the US shipbuilding industry collapses, the military will be hindered in its ability to meet national defense needs, possibly putting us in the position of having to outsource military shipbuilding to overseas shipyards. All of these points show that costs to Americans will go up, not down, if the Jones Act is eliminated.
Posted on: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 05:49:41 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015