Modifying the Jones Act Cruise Ships Exempt

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

https://gcaptain.com/senator-murkow...139820873&mc_cid=851f2a07f4&mc_eid=5b70bcca05

 

[SteveK]

A blind man could see this coming

 

[Sailor of Fortune]

I love the large cruise ship companies! They build and register offshore to avoid paying US and domestic shipyard rates... Along comes covid and they apply to US to "bail them out" (we didn't}. Now they want to be Jones act exempt....sheesh! Talk about wanting it all...except paying there fair share to the country of their target market...

 

[gholmesbm]

They also overrun their small destination ports, demand huge commissions from local vendors of tours and activities to get their guests' business, and largely monopolize the passenger spending for themselves.

They are a blight on sustainable travel imho.

Also a big factor in the initial spread of COVID...

 

[Gdavid]

They also overrun their small destination ports, demand huge commissions from local vendors of tours and activities to get their guests' business, and largely monopolize the passenger spending for themselves.

They are a blight on sustainable travel imho.

Also a big factor in the initial spread of COVID...

People who love cruises also seem to enjoy extolling the joy of cruises to everyone they meet especially if they know you spend time on boats. My mother in law is determined to convince us that a cruise would be the perfect vacation and it could not appeal any less to me. Following a set itinerary that is completely out of my control, with throngs of people trying to do the same thing at the same time is the exact opposite about everything I enjoy running my own boat. I am glad for the people that enjoy them but it is the antithesis of small boat cruising as far as I can tell.

 

[Keysdisease]

They don't need an exemption and shouldn't get one. I have cruised Alaska and really liked starting in Vancouver with a final stop in Victoria.

Jones Act is important for US Shipbuilding, the Cruise lines are just getting greedy

 

[Shrew]

People who love cruises also seem to enjoy extolling the joy of cruises to everyone they meet especially if they know you spend time on boats. My mother in law is determined to convince us that a cruise would be the perfect vacation and it could not appeal any less to me. Following a set itinerary that is completely out of my control, with throngs of people trying to do the same thing at the same time is the exact opposite about everything I enjoy running my own boat. I am glad for the people that enjoy them but it is the antithesis of small boat cruising as far as I can tell.

Yet, despite that not being the scope of the discussion, you spent a paragraph extolling your disdain for something you've admittedly never experienced.

We love both boating and cruises. They would be like comparing apples and oranges. You can avoid the throngs easily.

 

[kthoennes]

Of course the Jones Act has been hotly debated for decades. The cruise line implications are just one distorted, twisted angle of the whole byzantine thing. The Wall Street Journal's opinion page has been hammering on it lately, although I won't post any links because they're all behind a paywall and I don't want to get into politics anyway. It was a blatantly protectionist law since its adoption of course, just like sugar or agriculture or lots of other areas, and we can have a public policy or economics debate on that forever -- although not here. Politics aside though, just as a practical matter, over the decades and as the world changes, in my view the Jones Act has become a relic that's become more and more contorted and produces absurd results that are increasingly illogical and downright silly. Again, I'm just talking practicality for anything that moves on the water. It's gotten to the point where the law irrationally protects domestic shipping even though we no longer have the domestic ships or shipping capacity or even the merchant marine personnel to protect anymore, or at least not enough to meet the country's demands. Like this for example, this is what I mean by absurd results as a practical matter. Severe market distortion:

https://www.cato.org/blog/east-coas...ertainty-amidst-heavy-fines-alleged-jones-act

 

[Gdavid]

Yet, despite that not being the scope of the discussion, you spent a paragraph extolling your disdain for something you've admittedly never experienced.

We love both boating and cruises. They would be like comparing apples and oranges. You can avoid the throngs easily.

You are right on all counts

 

[SteveK]

I wonder if the cruise industry is pushing for this ONLY as a workaround should they be locked out of Canada in the future. I am sure if it were passed, the cruise industry would still stop in Vancouver and Victoria as restocking may be cheaper, and the demand is/was here.
I only took one cruise to Alaska so only experienced a crowded boarding terminal once, the demand was there then.

 

[HTurner]

I hate those giant floating petri dishes. I just had to say that.

 

[mike66]

For my wife and me it's the best way to travel away from our local waters. Certainly not taking my Albin to the Med transatlantic.
The whole world is a petri dish to some extent. Wash your hands, don't touch your face. Repeat.

 

[rgano]

I have less than zero interest in taking a "cruise" on one of these leviathans, but until he died this year I had a good friend who enjoyed them a lot, and he very seldom left the ship unless it was on his own terms to hire a taxi to drive him to whatever sights he wished to see. One of his favorite routes was a trans-Atlantic run between Barcelona an Ft Lauderdale which he took several times because he enjoyed being at sea so much. He was a gregarious but solo cruiser who took several trips a year and enjoyed meeting new people aboard.

I personally think it is a matter of time before there is a major terrorist issue with one of these ships.

On the tax issue, while I have no clue what fees these foreign flagged and crewed vessels pay, it would seem simple enough to enact any directed tax law the US deems appropriate (note I do not say "fair") to wring more money from them.

 

[CaptTom]

Big picture, I see the Jones Act as more of a national security thing. We've already lost so much capability in other areas. Ship builders and mariners are resources we probably shouldn't let totally die domestically. Yeah, I know. I'm all for cheap stuff too. And you can't go protectionist for everything. But we've all seen the problems with outsourcing other capabilities (computer chips for cars come to mind.)

There are no easy answers. It's a nuanced issue.

 

[BandB]

Just reading this thread you see the debate and multiply that by many and you'll quickly gather the fact that congress is highly unlikely to do anything. No one doubts the Jones Act needs looking at but everyone has different ideas on how to fix it.

 

[phillippeterson]

I hate those giant floating petri dishes. I just had to say that.

Succinctly said. I agree.

Too much dna in one place.

 

[fgarriso]

Just reading this thread you see the debate and multiply that by many and you'll quickly gather the fact that congress is highly unlikely to do anything. No one doubts the Jones Act needs looking at but everyone has different ideas on how to fix it.

 

[Lepke]

I think the Jones Act is fine as is. The purpose is to ensure a shipbuilding industry, maintain trained mariners, and ships in US waters meet our standards. It was written 8 years after the Titanic disaster.
Coastwise shipping means ships traveling between US ports and ships leaving and returning to the same port, Like fishing boats and oil rig supply boats.

Without the Jones Act we could have ships from any nation moving people and cargo between US ports. Most yards that build yachts or commercial boats would close, and large shipyards not doing military work would probably disappear.
You could have Bangladesh or Philippine ships for ferries. At least one capsizes every year. Without the Jones Act shipping would go to the cheapest operator.

 

[kthoennes]

I don't mean to touch off a debate about the Jones Act provisions per se, that debate may never end, but here's the fundamental problem:

https://www.citypopulation.de/en/world/bymap/merchantmarine/

...In a country of 330 million people. Or look at the per capita column. There's the fundamental absurdity. It's like a protectionist act for ice delivery guys after refrigerators, or horse carriage drivers.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

Just reading this thread you see the debate and multiply that by many and you'll quickly gather the fact that congress is highly unlikely to do anything. No one doubts the Jones Act needs looking at but everyone has different ideas on how to fix it.

Well they also said the Alaska congressional team had no chance getting the temporary provision through Congress. Critics were proven wrong.

 

[rsn48]

Took a cruise out of Baltimore with my son and girlfriend. What I learned surprised me. There were folks (I met them) who have cruised on this route for 32 times. Other folks cruised on the same run for 20 times, 15 times, etc. My take is that they feel safe on the ship, realize the ship is the main event, not the ports, as we are lead to believe. Almost all of those I listed above don't bother to get off the ship once in port.

The ships will be back to Vancouver and Victoria, too good of ports to pass up. Vancouver was and may still be, after the plague is over, the third busiest city for filming and tv series in North America. I asked the now retired film commissioner for British Columbia why Seattle wasn't used more in the movie industry I won't go into much of what she said, don't feel like getting flamed but the long and short of it was Vancouver had more to offer.

My own personal view is that although financially bad for Victoria, I'd prefer the ships didn't dock there. Too many dumbed off downtown

 

[Benthic2]

Cruising has a lot to offer. Think about what a $100/night hotel offers...... not a lot. A clean room and a continental breakfast, if you're lucky..maybe a pool. You can cruise for well under $100/day and you get 6 meals/day, 2 shows per night, an ocean view, free babysitting..... If your goal is to experience the carribean, it's not great....you don't have much shore time and its all institutionalized mass tourism....but if your goal is to just relax and enjoy yourself its a very cost effective way to do that. I used to meet people that had done dozens of cruises pretty regularly. In the offseason the rates are ridiculously low just to get people on board.

 

[CaptTom]

It's like a protectionist act for ice delivery guys after refrigerators, or horse carriage drivers.

The difference, in my mind, is that neither ice delivery guys nor horse carriage drivers are required for national security.

If we allow all the ships to be built in Asia, and staffed by whichever country is presently the lowest bidder, we've lost something.

I prefer to keep a small but well-trained group of ship builders and mariners employed here. It's not about protection for the few workers in that field. It's protection of our ability to build and staff ships. Once a shipyard or training academy is converted to condos, that infrastructure and knowledge is lost forever.

 

[rslifkin]

Keep in mind, most of the cruise ships are foreign flagged and plan routes as needed to avoid the Jones act already. So exempting them doesn't cost us any ship builds, as they're not being built here anyway. But it may lead to some becoming US flagged, which would mean tax revenue and other potential upsides (in addition to the gain in operating flexibility for the companies).

So I wouldn't want to kill the Jones act, but for certain situations like cruise ships it's not doing anything useful anyway, so I see little downside to an exemption.

 

[kthoennes]

I think the national security benefits diminished to almost nothing a long time ago. It takes us about 20 years to build (one) replacement for the Twin Towers. Empire State Building went up in 14 months. When it comes to maintaining robust industrial and commercial capacity in the U.S., that ship has sailed.

 

[psneeld]

Might all want to review the difference between the Jones Act and the Passenger Vessel Services Act which is what may be more focused on Cruise Ships.

https://www.cruisecritic.com/articles.cfm?ID=3363

 

[costalive]

I think the Jones Act is fine as is. The purpose is to ensure a shipbuilding industry, maintain trained mariners, and ships in US waters meet our standards. It was written 8 years after the Titanic disaster.
Coastwise shipping means ships traveling between US ports and ships leaving and returning to the same port, Like fishing boats and oil rig supply boats.

Without the Jones Act we could have ships from any nation moving people and cargo between US ports. Most yards that build yachts or commercial boats would close, and large shipyards not doing military work would probably disappear.
You could have Bangladesh or Philippine ships for ferries. At least one capsizes every year. Without the Jones Act shipping would go to the cheapest operator.

Well said, factual, and to the point.
Thank you Lepke

 

[CaptTom]

It takes us about 20 years to build (one) replacement for the Twin Towers. Empire State Building went up in 14 months. When it comes to maintaining robust industrial and commercial capacity in the U.S., that ship has sailed.

Very true, but all the more reason not to lose what we have left. There is still some shipbuilding going on in the US. Look at Bath, ME or Mobile, AL. On the merchant mariner side, I know Maine, Massachusetts and New York have great maritime academies. In a national emergency, these relatively small facilities can be the seed for ramping up more domestic building and training, should a national emergency require it.

 

[DryDoc]

Just reading this thread you see the debate and multiply that by many and you'll quickly gather the fact that congress is highly unlikely to do anything.

A well-made point, which applies to so many topics today and emphasizes why it is difficult to get anything done.

Might all want to review the difference between the Jones Act and the Passenger Vessel Services Act which is what may be more focused on Cruise Ships.

I wondered if/when someone might make that distinction and the glaring error here.

The title and body of the gCaptain piece linked, clearly states the PVSA but the title of this thread, refers to the Jones Act. In fact, the Jones Act is not mentioned anywhere in the gCaptain article.

If people claiming to be educated, longtime experienced mariners can’t get it right, well, it supports the above quote by BandB.

 

[ancora]

From the Professional Mariner: In the same vein, a trade group supporting US flagged offshore service companies has launched the first ever Jones Act enforcement vessel, a 175 footer named the "Jones Act Enforcer." The crew has been trained identify and document Jones Act violations, using photo, video equipment and aerial surveillance gear.