Colin Grabow Profile picture
Dec 29 27 tweets 13 min read
President Biden is currently vacationing in the U.S. Virgin Islands, which is exempt from the Jones Act. Seems like a good time to dig into the USVI's history with this protectionist maritime law.
Originally a Danish territory, the United States had made attempts to acquire the Virgin Islands since 1867. But during World War I these efforts took on a new urgency due to fears Germany could conquer Denmark and use the islands as a naval base. 2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/w…
A treaty to transfer the islands was reached between the U.S. and Denmark on August 4, 1916, ratifications exchanged on January 17, 1917, and formal transfer made on March 31, 1917. In exchange for ceding the islands, the U.S. paid Denmark $25 million. doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/…
Section 21 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920 exempted the USVI from U.S. coastwise laws (the Jones Act) but gave the president the ability to impose them. huelladigital.univisionnoticias.com/cruceros-vacac…
Every year the president would issue a proclamation on whether adequate shipping service to the islands had been established and, if it hadn't, would extend the Jones Act exemption for another year. Here is an example of one such proclamation: presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/proc…
So while the U.S. Virgin Islands had been granted a Jones Act exemption, the prospect of its application was constantly hanging over their heads. Several contemporaneous studies of the U.S. Virgin Islands warned against applying U.S. coastwise laws to the territory.
A 1924 report from a federal commission tasked with studying the USVI's economy highlighted the downsides of applying these laws and recommended that the USVI's Jones Act exemption be made permanent: drive.google.com/file/d/1MX471O…
A 1925 report emphasized the harm the Jones Act would cause to the USVI's bunkering business selling coal imported from Virginia. With the JA in place the coal would become more expensive, harming the USVI's ability to compete with neighboring islands. drive.google.com/file/d/1RmfzXi…
A 1930 report flatly stated that "Perhaps one of the most helpful things that could be done to promote the shipping activities of St. Thomas" would be to make the USVI's Jones Act exemption permanent. drive.google.com/file/d/1o68aW1…
Also from the report—doesn't get much more direct than this: "We are convinced that the application of the United States coastwise regulations would have a most destructive effect on the trade of the Islands."
Again highlighting the Jones Act's likely impact on the USVI's coaling business, the report noted this would also be harmful to the U.S. mainland as it would compel the USVI to purchase its coal from non-U.S. sources where the JA does not apply.
The U.S. Virgin Islands continued to agitate for a permanent Jones Act exemption. In 1932 the USVI's governor testified before Congress noting the lack of investment resulting from the possibility that the JA might be imposed: drive.google.com/file/d/1HVsF2N…
In 1934 the governor once again appeared before Congress to testify in favor of a permanent exemption, noting the lack of competition that would result if the Jones Act was to be imposed. drive.google.com/file/d/1LvtQsO…
In 1936 yet another hearing was held on the matter, with the new governor of the USVI again emphasizing the deleterious consequences of applying the Jones Act to the islands: drive.google.com/file/d/1--1mW9…
Also supportive of an exemption for the USVI at the hearing was Ernest Gruening, director of the Department of Interior's Division of Territories and Island Possessions.
Gruening would later become governor of Alaska and a critic of the Jones Act's impact on the state: alaska.edu/creatingalaska…
In June 1936 the Organic Act of the Virgin Islands was signed into law. The president retained the power to apply the Jones Act to the USVI but the legislation did away with the annual proclamation: govinfo.gov/content/pkg/US…
The territory had succeeded in obtaining at least a semi-permanent exemption from the Jones Act. But in 1976 Sen. J. Bennett Johnston of Louisiana—a traditional bastion of JA support—led a Senate effort to impose the law on the USVI for the transportation of energy products.
The U.S. Virgin Islands delegate in Congress was strongly opposed, calling the proposed bill "potentially devastating" to the islands' refining industry. drive.google.com/file/d/1J1dC-u…
The Ford White House performed its own analysis of the legislation, noting the harmful impact the Jones Act's extension would have on East Coast consumers that receive petroleum products from the USVI. Total costs were placed at up to $1 billion: drive.google.com/file/d/1QF-Ucc…
At a 1979 hearing a U.S. Virgin Islands representative again made clear the negative impact the Jones Act's imposition on energy shipments would have on the territory: drive.google.com/file/d/1rKJuaX…
Today the U.S. Virgin Islands remains free of the Jones Act, which is widely seen as beneficial to the territory's economy.
The exemption also benefits the rest of the country. After Hurricane Fiona the exemption allowed the USVI to provide Puerto Rico with fuel supplies using less expensive and more numerous internationally-flagged vessels:
All of this raises an obvious question: what benefits would neighboring Puerto Rico enjoy today if it had been exempted from the Jones Act? Or for that matter, the rest of the country? Imagine all of the opportunities that are being missed.

/Thread
@threadreaderapp please unroll

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Colin Grabow

Colin Grabow Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @cpgrabow

Dec 28
Today @algore is perhaps best known for his environmental activism. But in 1993 one of his top goals was improving public sector efficiency as head of an interagency task force called the National Performance Review. Among targets identified by the group: U.S. maritime policy.
From the task force's draft report: "What is left of the U.S. maritime industry stands as a stark reminder of how protectionist, economic regulatory policies by our government literally razed the economic underpinnings of our once mighty and proud merchant marine fleet."
Read 10 tweets
Nov 8
A lack of Jones Act-compliant tankers means 🇺🇸 LNG can be sent to China but not New England or Puerto Rico. Some may think the solution is building and subsidizing the operation of U.S. LNG tankers. But that’s a road the country has been down before, and it didn’t end well. 🧵
From 1977-1980 16 LNG tankers were built in three different U.S. shipyards, with 11 of the ships lavished with hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies. shipbuildinghistory.com/shipssincewwii…
drive.google.com/file/d/1y3-5Ji… ImageImage
Three of the tankers were built by the Avondale, LA shipyard (now closed). It was a disaster. To save money Avondale did not seek the assistance of foreign shipyards experienced in constructing this type of vessel. sanjuanco.com/DocumentCenter… Image
Read 24 tweets
Sep 28
👀 "A Jones Act medium range (MR) tanker newbuild currently costs around $200mn, compared with $45mn for an international-flagged MR, according to a broker." argusmedia.com/pages/NewsBody…
Seems a bit high. This recent document places the cost at $160-$175 million: americanshippingco.com/wp-content/upl…

This means a Jones Act tanker costs anywhere from 3.5x ($160 million) to 4.4x ($200 million) the world price.
That high cost of replacement explains why the @ArgusMedia story places Jones Act tanker lifespans at 30 years versus 20 years internationally. But 30 seems generous.
Read 4 tweets
Sep 28
At *best* this indicates the Jones Act waiver process is far too restrictive/bureaucratic and needs to be reformed. But I'm not convinced bureaucracy and rules are the problems here.
During the Colonial Pipeline outage last year Citgo requested a Jones Act waiver to move fuel (sound familiar?) from LA to NJ on May 12, 2021: maritime.dot.gov/sites/marad.do… Image
That waiver was granted by May 14: reuters.com/article/usa-pr…
Read 6 tweets
Sep 23
A short 🧵 with some thoughts on the letter sent by @NydiaVelazquez and 7 other members of Congress yesterday requesting that @DHSgov grant a one-year waiver of the Jones Act for Puerto Rico. ImageImage
First, I commend them for raising this issue and recognizing the Jones Act as an impediment to Puerto Rico's recovery from Hurricane Fiona. Granting the island access to expanded and more efficient shipping options from U.S. ports is the least the federal government can do.
That said, prospects for a one-year waiver being granted are very dim. Almost certainly non-existent. To understand why, take a look at this 2019 letter from DHS rejecting the Puerto Rico govt's request for a 10-year JA waiver for the transport of LNG: drive.google.com/file/d/1b0MCDM… Image
Read 11 tweets
Sep 20
Another example of a ship shipping ship shipping shipping ships.
Just to stay on brand, there are none of these heavy lift ships in the Jones Act fleet: sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R4572… Image
Due to the lack of these ships @SpaceX had to get a Jones Act waiver last year to move one of its droneships to the West Coast: spaceexplored.com/2021/06/25/spa…

Video:
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(