America's Shipping Laws Made the Gas Crisis Worse

The protectionist Jones Act makes it harder to move fuel around the country.


A cronyist, obsolete shipping law the federal government insists is supposed to protect America in times of crisis is being waived…because of a crisis.

That's the absurdity of the Jones Act. Technically titled the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, the Jones Act requires that ships engaging in commerce between multiple U.S. ports be built in America, owned by an American company, and crewed by Americans.

The law drives up the cost of transporting goods around the United States using ships (particularly in places like Hawaii and Puerto Rico), and the protectionist consequences become very pronounced whenever fuel issues arise. The recent hacking and outage of the Colonial Pipeline resulted in fuel shortages in Southern states, and the restrictions dictated by the Jones Act have made it difficult to transport fuel from elsewhere.

On Wednesday, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas announced that in the name of "national defense," he was authorizing a temporary waiver allowing a company to travel between ports along the Eastern Seaboard with ships that don't comply with the Jones Act.

This announcement comes with an absurd disclaimer:

How can anybody justify the Jones Act's existence by saying it helps maintain "the strength of the American shipbuilding and maritime industries," despite the fact that any major energy crisis requires it to be waived in order to meet very basic infrastructure needs?

The Jones Act has, in reality, profoundly limited America's domestic transportation options and limited growth in sea commerce, all in the name of protecting a small number of entrenched maritime interests, both corporate and union, from international competition. And President Joe Biden has declared support for the Jones Act even with these predictable bad outcomes.

Colin Grabow, a trade policy analyst at the Cato Institute, noted Wednesday how the Jones Act thoroughly undermines smart energy policy in the United States. It's cheaper for California to purchase gasoline from Singapore instead of transporting it from the Gulf Coast. Refined gas from the Gulf Coast is sent to Latin America instead of up north to East Coast ports. He adds:

At its worst, the Jones Act can even make domestic transportation outright impossible. While the United States is the world's leading exporter of propane, Hawaii must buy it from as far away as Africa owing to a complete lack of Jones Act‐​compliant ships capable of transporting it from the U.S. mainland. A similar absence of appropriate ships, meanwhile, means that Puerto Rico has no choice but to meet its bulk liquefied natural gas needs from foreign sources.

These inefficiencies are not just a hit to the country's economic pocketbook, but a threat to its security. Reduced transportation options or over‐​reliance on a single method of transport can lead to significant problems when things go awry, as we are painfully finding out. Redundancy and flexibility are key to overcoming systemic breakdowns, and the Jones Act means less of both.

It's just complete nonsense whenever supporters of the Jones Act say it exists to protect national security. It's not good for national security when our own federal laws limit domestic transportation of important infrastructure resources like fuel.

What is to be done? Well, the reason why Mayorkas had to claim a "national defense" need to justify the Jones Act waiver is because the law limits exemptions only for that purpose or by the Secretary of Defense for military operations.

Ideally, the Jones Act should just die already. But because there's too much bipartisan political pressure to keep it by lawmakers from both parties in port cities, it seems unlikely. Grabow does propose an alternative, though:

Congress should create a new type of waiver allowing the use of non‐​Jones Act ships if no vessel meeting the law's requirements is available—no "national defense" justification required. Canada already has such a system. Other measures that should be on the table include a scrapping of the law's U.S.-built requirement and permanent exemptions for parts of the United States that are uniquely dependent on maritime transportation such as Alaska, Guam, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico.

Until then, we're going to see this every time there's a fuel crisis, as we have when hurricanes hit the Gulf Coast or Puerto Rico. The Jones Act doesn't help prevent emergencies. It makes them even worse.

NEXT: Rebekah Jones, Florida's COVID-19 Whistleblower, Seems Like a Fraud

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. America’s Shipping Laws Made the Gas Crisis Worse

    What are you talking about? I have it on good authority that there is no gas crisis.

      1. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its ddd earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
        on this page…..VISIT HERE

    1. He means he’s farting more lately.

    2. Law, i.e., institutionalized initiation of force, threats thereof, creates chaos, NOT order.
      Rules agreed on by choice would “give peace a chance”, because there would be competition between ideas, allow for change based on experience, trial & error.
      Brute force is always destructive, not constructive. It is the opposite of reason, creates fear, tyranny.

  2. Ugh, I’m disappointed that Reason’s writers are using this “gas crisis” framing.

    Actually, there is no crisis. Biden’s Presidency is going so well that Republicans knew they had nothing concrete on which to attack him, so they cynically manufactured this fraudulent narrative. We saw them attempt the same pathetic trick with the “border crisis” nonsense a few weeks ago.


  3. The Jones Act requirements for vessel usage and build is important for support to the armed forces in the time of conflict. What happens if there are no US-Flagged merchant vessels left, in the absence of this requirement? The gap will be filled by low-bid foreign competitors, right? How are materials to be shipped into conflict zones where American lives are at stake? By air? Not a chance. Almost ALL tonnage is shipped in via sea. Who then shall we get to haul essential supplies via sea?

    1. Who then shall we get to haul essential supplies via sea?

      I don’t know. How about the fucking MILITARY SEALIFT COMMAND???

      1. There is nowhere near enough haul capacity in MSC. And, it costs 10 times as much to transport a ton as with the civilian merchant fleet. You know absolutely NOTHING about this.

    2. By the way, without the Jones Act, US flagged ships could be built anywhere in the world.

      1. But they won’t be, and the principal reason is that for a US flagged ship to ply trade between ports, the vessels have to comply with US regulations. And they won’t. A prime example would be to look at the Cruise industry. They would LOVE to go between US Ports, but won’t because the costs would skyrocket having to comply with US regulations. Do you remember when that cruise ship had an engine room fire and had to return to a US port after leaving a US port? The inspectors swarmed the vessel and levied MILLIONS of dollars in fines for lax standards and violations. But it’s something that US flagged vessels comply with every day.

    3. As long as the ships are flagged from friendly and allied nations, why should it matter? Getting the freight transported by cheaper means would result in more money to spend on Troops, Sailors, Marines, Pilots, and Coast Guard i a time of war.

  4. Another good reason to be against the Jones act… sending less Americans to their deaths in order to protect corrupt foreign governments sounds like a win in my book.

    1. That was supposed to be a reply to CityGuySailing. Hopefully I’m replying to mine but who knows sometimes.

  5. Never knew Alex Jones’ act was protectionism.


  6. Nah not likely its not like they can ship supplies that fast anyway.

    Pipelines are best, and Biden is wrecking that system. Be prepared.

  7. Kmart conducted Kmart Customer Experience Survey to get an idea about a customer’s experience and Kmart Customer Service at

  8. on Saturday I got a gorgeous Ariel Atom after earning $6292 this – four weeks past, after lot of struggels Google, Yahoo, Facebook proffessionals have been revealed the way and cope with gape for increase home income in suffcient free time.You can make $9o an hour working from home easily……. VIST THIS SITE RIGHT HERE

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.