As the presidential race heats up before the Nov. 3 election, Jones Act observers are keeping an eye on what candidates are saying about the 100-year old shipping law and how they would deal with it during their administrations.
Normally the Jones Act has been an untouchable and relatively quiet cabotage law that protects the U.S. shipping industry from foreign intrusion, garnering strong bipartisan support in Washington, while drawing scant public attention — unless efforts are made to dismantle it, which sends the shipping lobby into counterattack mode.
Presidents of both parties have generally supported the Act, which since 1920 reserves domestic shipping routes to vessels that are built (or rebuilt) in the U.S., manned by U.S. citizens and registered in the U.S. Buoyed by a well-financed shipping lobby that counts many well-placed lawmakers as supporters, presidents have resisted efforts to repeal or rewrite the law, often overruling dissenting voices within their own administrations that call the Jones Act an antiquated law that discourages competition, raises prices and is counter to open and free markets.
Shipping interests and maritime unions have a lot riding on this status quo, and are making financial contributions to supportive lawmakers, and reminding their members to vote for pro-Jones Act candidates. Opposition remains relatively weak by comparison and includes groups like the Cato Institute and a few federal and state lawmakers who favor free markets and limited government, energy industries such as oil and gas that want to move their products, and some foreign governments that want to enter U.S. coastwise shipping. They argue that restrictions in the law drive up shipping costs and restrict competition…
