4 Comments
User's avatar
Todd Wohling's avatar

Right idea for wrong reasons. Decimating maritime unions should be looked at as collateral damage of ending The Jones Act, not as its goal. The goal of removing The Jones Act should be de-globalizing supply chains to choke (garrote?) China while revitalizing American manufacturing and the unions that come with it.

J. Butler's avatar

Jones Act also requires US food aid to be shipped on US-flagged vessels, adding to the cost per shipment.

Bewildered's avatar

I remember learning about blue laws and several strange ordinances - many still in effect (but ignored) - when I was a kid. Like, dancing on Sundays, etc. Nevermind countless sodomy laws, you also can’t dress like a clergy member in Alabama (unless you are actually a clergy member).

Kids (not just nerdy law students) need to learn about things like the Jones Act expressly because they are dumbfounding but also still entirely in effect.

Any kid can not just appreciate the problem here, but more so, they can learn how a string of seemingly innocent, sequential laws and other ingredients can make for a very bad soup that we all have to eat.

Romell Cummings's avatar

We have to protect our ports, also remember that one function of the government is to create jobs. I struggled with that until I reached back in history and refreshed my memory on President Roosevelt's New Deal and how he used the government to create jobs.

Puerto Rico is a different story, but it's also the cost of doing but that is likely absorbed by tourists.