I’d like to expand the Jones act so more ships can do US trade.

If you visit most any European port city, you’ll see a lot more shipping than in the Midwestern US. In Detroit, where I am, your’ll see an occasional ore boat from Wisconsin, and an occasional tourist cruise, but nothing to compare to German, Belgian, or Turkish ports. The reason for the difference is “The Jones act.”

The port of Istanbul with many ships

The Jones act , also known as “The Merchant Marine Act of 1920”, requires that all ships depositing cargo or people between US ports must be US owned, US built, US captained, US flagged, and at least 70% US manned. This raises costs and reduces options. The result is that few ships can move people or cargo between US cities, and these ships are older and less efficient than you’ll see elsewhere. World wide water traffic costs about 1/8 that of rail traffic per ton-mile, but in the US, the prices are more comparable. The original justification was to make sure the US would always have a merchant marine. The Jones act does that, sort of, but mostly, it just makes goods more expensive and travel more restrictive.

The port of Detroit — we rarely see more than one ship at a time.

Because it does some good, I don’t want to get rid of the Jones act entirely, but I’d like to see US shipping options expanded. Almost any expansion would do, e.g. allowing 50% US manned ships delivering along US rivers, or expanding to allow Canadian built ships or flagged, and ships that are more than 50% US owned, or expanding to any NAFTA vessel that meets safety standards. Any expansion of the number of ships available and would help.

The jones act increase the price of oil transport by a factor of five, about.

Currently, the only exceptions to the Jones act are for emergencies (Trump voided the act during several storms) and for ships that visit a foreign port along the route. This exception is how every cruise ship between California and Hawaii works. They’re all foreign, but they stop in Mexico along the way. Similarly, cruises between Florida and Puerto Rico will stop in Bermuda typically, because the ships are foreign owned. Generally, passengers are not allowed to get off in Puerto Rico, but must sleep on board. This is another aspect of the Maritime act that I’d like to see go away.

Because of the Jones act, there is some US freight-ship building, and a supply of sailors and captains. A new, US ore-ship for the Great Lakes was launched last year, so far it’s been used to carry salt. There is also a US built and operated cruise ship in Hawaii, the “Pride of America,” that makes no stop in Mexico. I’d like to see these numbers expanded, and the suggestions above seem like they’d do more good than harm, lowering prices, and allowing modern container ships plus roll-on-roll-off car transports. Our rivers and lakes are super highways; I’d like to see them used more.

The port of Antwerp – far busier than Detroit.

Another way to expand the Jones act while perhaps increasing the number of US-built and operated ship would be through a deal with Canada so that ships from either country could ply trade on either countries rivers. As things stand, Canada has its own version of the Jones act, called the Coastal Trade Act where Canadian vessels must be used for domestic transport (cabotage) unless no such vessel is available. Maybe we can strike a deal with Canada so that the crew can be Canadian or US, and where built ships in either country are chosen on routes in either country, providing they meet the safety and environmental requirements of both.

Robert Buxbaum, June 14, 2023.

2 thoughts on “I’d like to expand the Jones act so more ships can do US trade.

  1. Michael Conze

    It’s 2-sided issue (or n-sided, if you wish). Considering the number of foreign built cars and foreign components in American built cars, the Jones act has indeed fallen out of time. Permitting less strict US material usage would seem a remedy, hence.
    When it comes to crew nationality, it must be admitted that crew qualification is a major contribution to marine safety. Living close to a European coastline, I notice a constant uneasiness about shipwrecking and unqualified staff is an issue.
    KR MiC

    Reply
    1. R.E. Buxbaum Post author

      I agree that the Jones act still has a value. I’d like to expand it. One was is with a bilateral agreement with Canada. An easier thought for expansion, currently ships plying US trade must be American owned, American built, American captained AND American majority crewed. What if we allowed shipping with any 3 of the above 4 restrictions, or 2 of the above 4 restrictions. Our ships will be worth more, and our sailors will make more. It helps our shipping if we can move more cargo, and our cargo will be worth more if it can move easier. In terms of tourism, it would be nice to have more ships between Detroit, Chicago, and Pittsburgh, or between the US and Alaska.

      Reply

Leave a Reply