Posted:
July 27, 2010
While opponents of the Jones Act - the cabotage law reserving all domestic waterborne cargoes for vessels owned, built, registered and crewed in the U.S. - continue to make false claims that the law is hindering cleanup of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, Congressional Representatives Gene Taylor (D-MS) and Linda Sanchez (D-CA) have spoken to correct the record about the cornerstone of U.S. maritime policy.
"I am writing to you today to set the record straight about the Jones Act," Rep. Taylor said July 20 in a letter to his colleagues in the House. Despite many accusations, primarily from "people who are only vaguely familiar with U.S. maritime law," the Jones Act has in no way hampered cleanup efforts in the Gulf, he said.
Jones Act critics have claimed there are not enough domestic vessels for the cleanup operation and the Jones Act is somehow preventing useful foreign vessels from working in the Gulf. But, under current interpretation of the law, the Jones Act applies only within three miles of the Gulf coastline. The Deepwater Horizon spill site and most of the oil in the Gulf is outside this zone. "From day one of the oil spill, foreign vessels were allowed by law to be engaged by BP to clean up the spill offshore, where the spill originates," wrote Taylor. "No waiver of the Jones Act was needed for this work because the Jones Act does not apply to it."
Adm. Thad Allen, the national incident commander for the spill, agrees and recently stated: "at no time in the course of this response have [we] been inhibited by anything having to do with what we call [the] Jones Act or Jones Act waivers."
Despite the facts of the situation, Jones Act opponents have seized this media opportunity to attack the law, drawing on "incorrect statements and false accusations," Rep. Taylor said.
The Jones Act and other U.S. cabotage laws "help sustain more than 500,000 American jobs É many of which are in the Gulf, and $1 billion in economic activity annually," he said. "The Jones Act is not the problem; the oil spill is the problem. Let's focus on fixing that."
Other Congressional representatives have also come to the defense of the Jones Act. Speaking before the House, Rep. Linda Sanchez said: "the Jones Act ensures a ready merchant marine fleet in time of war. And it prevents our economy from being dominated by foreign interests who don't pay American taxes, hire American workers, or even follow American health, safety and environmental laws."
Rep. Sanchez has condemned recent legislation from Sen. John McCain seeking repeal of the Jones Act. She pointed out: "We are in a recession. It's time to work together to expand American manufacturing and create jobs, not play partisan games. I urge my colleagues to stop posturing and start supporting American families by supporting the Jones Act."
Congressional representatives set the record straight on the Jones Act
While opponents of the Jones Act - the cabotage law reserving all domestic waterborne cargoes for vessels owned, built, registered and crewed in the U.S. - continue to make false claims that the law is hindering cleanup of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, Congressional Representatives Gene Taylor (D-MS) and Linda Sanchez (D-CA) have spoken to correct the record about the cornerstone of U.S. maritime policy.
"I am writing to you today to set the record straight about the Jones Act," Rep. Taylor said July 20 in a letter to his colleagues in the House. Despite many accusations, primarily from "people who are only vaguely familiar with U.S. maritime law," the Jones Act has in no way hampered cleanup efforts in the Gulf, he said.
Jones Act critics have claimed there are not enough domestic vessels for the cleanup operation and the Jones Act is somehow preventing useful foreign vessels from working in the Gulf. But, under current interpretation of the law, the Jones Act applies only within three miles of the Gulf coastline. The Deepwater Horizon spill site and most of the oil in the Gulf is outside this zone. "From day one of the oil spill, foreign vessels were allowed by law to be engaged by BP to clean up the spill offshore, where the spill originates," wrote Taylor. "No waiver of the Jones Act was needed for this work because the Jones Act does not apply to it."
Adm. Thad Allen, the national incident commander for the spill, agrees and recently stated: "at no time in the course of this response have [we] been inhibited by anything having to do with what we call [the] Jones Act or Jones Act waivers."
Despite the facts of the situation, Jones Act opponents have seized this media opportunity to attack the law, drawing on "incorrect statements and false accusations," Rep. Taylor said.
The Jones Act and other U.S. cabotage laws "help sustain more than 500,000 American jobs É many of which are in the Gulf, and $1 billion in economic activity annually," he said. "The Jones Act is not the problem; the oil spill is the problem. Let's focus on fixing that."
Other Congressional representatives have also come to the defense of the Jones Act. Speaking before the House, Rep. Linda Sanchez said: "the Jones Act ensures a ready merchant marine fleet in time of war. And it prevents our economy from being dominated by foreign interests who don't pay American taxes, hire American workers, or even follow American health, safety and environmental laws."
Rep. Sanchez has condemned recent legislation from Sen. John McCain seeking repeal of the Jones Act. She pointed out: "We are in a recession. It's time to work together to expand American manufacturing and create jobs, not play partisan games. I urge my colleagues to stop posturing and start supporting American families by supporting the Jones Act."