Thread by @CatoTrade

Given the recent public attention @CatoInstitute's criticism of the Jones Act has received, it's worth quickly reviewing why we believe such criticism is warranted, @cpgrabow writes: cato.org/blog/why-cato-…

#EndTheJonesAct (🧵THREAD)

1) The Jones Act has failed to produce a healthy U.S. maritime industry. Over the last four decades, the number of JA‐​compliant oceangoing cargo ships has more than halved.

2) It has undermined shipbuilding competitiveness.

#EndTheJonesAct (2/x)

3) It has failed to meet U.S. national security needs.

4) It impedes domestic commerce, especially for energy, by making ocean shipping a last, high-cost resort for moving goods over long distances (and sometimes, even flatly impossible).

#EndTheJonesAct (3/x)

5) It impedes disaster response, making it more costly and difficult to move aid to where it is needed.

6) It harms the environment by increasing demand for dirtier transportation methods, like trucking.

7) It funds lobbyists, not innovation.

#EndTheJonesAct (4/x)

8) It's archaic: The US and the maritime world have changed significantly since the enactment of the Jones Act in 1920, yet the law remains.

9) It's unfair: The burden of the Jones Act is borne disproportionately by Alaska, Guam, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico.

#EndTheJonesAct (5/x)

@CatoInstitute scholars who critique the Jones Act have no objection to ensuring that the country’s national security needs—the ultimate public good—are effectively met.

But the Jones Act fails to do so, all while undermining the country’s prosperity.

#EndTheJonesAct (6/x)

Read the full blog post here: cato.org/blog/why-cato-…

Learn more about our Project on Jones Act reform here: cato.org/project-jones-…

#EndTheJonesAct (END)