If Kamala Harris Wants To Lower Energy Costs in Puerto Rico, She Should Support the Repeal of the Jones Act
For decades, the Jones Act has increased costs and hurt grid reliability in Puerto Rico.

Vice President Kamala Harris unveiled a plan on Sunday to increase "access to reliable, affordable electricity" in Puerto Rico and strengthen the island's grid against extreme weather. Like other Harris proposals, the plan would inflate the size of the federal government through top-down decision making and increase tax credits for Harris' preferred energy sources. Noticeably, Harris' proposal does not include a repeal of the Jones Act, which for decades has increased energy costs and hurt grid reliability in Puerto Rico.
The Merchant Marine Act of 1920, also known as the Jones Act, requires any goods being shipped between U.S. ports to be transported on an American-owned, built, and flagged vessel with a majority American crew. Originally intended to protect U.S. shipbuilding, the Jones Act has made America's maritime industry less competitive while increasing costs for consumers.
The failures of the Jones Act have disproportionately hurt Puerto Rico. In 2017, when Hurricane Maria ravaged the island, U.S. aid was delayed for more than a week until President Donald Trump signed a 10-day Jones Act waiver. Hurricane relief efforts were yet again stalled in 2022 after Hurricane Fiona. This time a BP tanker with 300,000 gallons of diesel remained idle off of the coast of the island until President Joe Biden granted a waiver for the ship.*
But even aside from disaster relief efforts, the Jones Act has also made energy in Puerto Rico more expensive and less reliable. Despite ambitious plans to source 100 percent of its electricity from renewable sources, Puerto Rico relies on fossil fuels for 94 percent of its electricity needs. However, since there are no Jones Act–compliant liquefied natural gas (LNG) tankers, Puerto Rico can't just have LNG shipped in from continental U.S. Compliant coal vessels are few and far between too, so Puerto Rico is forced to source a majority of its fossil fuels from foreign nations.*
For Puerto Rico's citizens, the costs of these decisions are exorbitant. "For every dollar per barrel in additional costs imposed by the Jones Act, Puerto Rico is effectively paying an annual tax of $14 million," according to Colin Grabow and Alfredo Carrillo Obregon of the Cato Institute. Meanwhile, the cost of using Jones Act–compliant barges to move propane around the island brings on $3 million to $5 million in additional costs for consumers.
The cost of the law is not lost on Puerto Rico's government. In 2018 the island applied for a 10-year waiver for U.S. LNG, which was ultimately denied. Had it been approved, the measure would have saved the island an estimated $800 million.
With artificially high energy costs, Puerto Rico has struggled to rebuild its power grid cost-effectively after hurricanes, which has led to outages and the suspension of maintenance projects. The island's forced outage rate, which is the likelihood that a power station will be unavailable for service when needed, is 30 percent. Florida, meanwhile, has a forced outage rate of 3 percent.
Just as this law has hurt Puerto Rico's power grid in the past, it also poses a threat to the island's goal of 100 percent renewable energy. Offshore wind energy production in the U.S. has been stunted in part due to the Jones Act.
Before the construction of a $715 million vessel, Dominion Energy's Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind project was forced to ferry turbine blades from Halifax, Canada, to Virginia Beach because no Jones Act–compliant barge existed. While Dominion's consumers won't have to pay for the construction of the vessel, they will have to pay for using it for the installation of the turbines. Danish clean energy developer Ørsted, meanwhile, was forced to cancel two offshore wind projects in New Jersey last year due to a lack of available ships.
While Puerto Rico may be able to skirt some of these restrictions by sourcing its materials from foreign ports, the Jones Act will inevitably rear its ugly head just as it has done in the past. Absent the construction of offshore wind turbines, the Jones Act will continue to restrict the import of affordable LNG, which will be needed to provide baseload power to the island's renewable sources.
To be sure, the Jones Act is not the only cause of Puerto Rico's energy woes. The responsibility rests at least partially on the island's government, which is riddled with corruption and is pursuing an energy plan that is not contingent on market signals and that excludes nuclear power—the most reliable source of electricity available.
Fixing Puerto Rico's grid is a daunting task. Harris' plan to have the federal government lead on the issue will result in higher project costs and longer timelines. Instead of increasing the size and scope of the government, lawmakers should repeal harmful regulations like the Jones Act.
*CORRECTION: The original version of this article mischaracterized Biden's waiver and Puerto Rico's source of fossil fuels.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Can’t they burn garbage ?
Not if PR wants to conserve its' primary natural resource.
It would sink.
I suspect they will ‘refuse’. Throwing away a real opportunity.
This guy won’t be around here long advocating for less government.
Sarcasmic strawman goes here.
He’s probably passed out by now. The only question is if it’s in a pool of his own urine and vomit, or if that part might take a few more hours.
“If Kamala Harris wants to lower energy costs …”
Nope, that’s not what she wants to do. What she wants is to get elected President of the United States. What she is doing is reading fine-sounding slogans that mean nothing to her, given to her by campaign aides holding their fingers into the wind to see which way the swing vote is blowing. If you woke her from a nap and asked her what the Jones Act is, she would look confused and say something meaningless about getting back to you on that. Even if she did actually want to reduce energy costs, she would have no clue as to how to go about doing that; would not be willing to actually do the things it would take because in the real world it would totally contradict her world view and sociopolitical narrative; and could not say anything cogent about “energy” anyway. She has peeps for that.
Harris wants to increase energy costs, with more Green regulations and mandates.
And she wants to increase home prices, by handing out cash to help unqualified buyers buy houses.
And she wants to cause food shortages, by implementing price controls on groceries.
And she wants to tank your 401K balance, by increasing taxes on corporations and by threatening to tax unrealized capital gains.
Look at what the policies would actually do, not what says they will do.
Don't know who Jeff Luse is strategically and reluctantly voting for, but this amounts to a carbon tax on "unsustainable" fuel sources. Sounds like... from a Harrisite perspective, this is doing exactly what it's designed to do.
And… if Puerto Rico, being an Island nation… doesn’t have enough wind and solar to easily power the entire island, cheaply… even cheaper than the artificially raised prices of the coal, fuel and lng due to the Love Jones act, then… wind and solar will never be competitive. Food for thought!
And it’s probably a sunny and windy place.
We may never know.
Curious how long it would take to get a solar/wind system back up and running after a hurricane takes out the solar panels and windmills.
Zen koan for modern audiences:
If the US builds an LNG Carrier or shipyard and the Biden-Harris Administration blows it up and blames the Russians, does Reason report on it?
Yes, as long as Trump gets the blame.
Totally-not-closeted progressives advocate for LNG carrier fleet to deliver cheap energy to floating pile of garbage harder than a California politician advocating for intra-state high speed rail between a garbage pile and a homeless encampment.
Politicians in DC, on both sides of the aisle, do not repeal legislation.
That goes against their way of thinking.
Both sides believe more laws, rules, regulations, laws and restrictions are a good idea when common sense dictates just the opposite.
Want a good example?
Try deciphering the IRS code some time.
Good luck with that.
However, they have a long record of “amending” truly bad legislation, either making it less egregious or, more likely, more complicated and lengthy with growing lists of all the other unconstitutional laws amended by reference. They could simply amend the Jones Act to correct for some of the most outrageous unintended consequences engendered by what was originally intended to be a protectionist racket. But, of course, the knee-capping by government thugs will never stop.
Does she want to lower costs or give subsidies to people so they can pay the higher costs?
Here's the X post under the “unveiled a plan” link. Spoiler alert, there is no plan.
“Throughout my career, I’ve always fought for the people of Puerto Rico. Every chance he got, Donald Trump abandoned and insulted them.
As president, I will invest in Puerto Rico’s future so that Puerto Ricans can not just get by, but get ahead.””
The accompanying video is in Spanish so perhaps she is saying more. But I doubt it based on her record speaking much but saying little.
And by "invest," she means "funnel taxpayer funds and increase the national debt even more."
The Jones Act should be repealed. The End.
No doubt, but if you actually read the Act (shudder …) there are a number of other things in it that should not be simply repealed. For example, merchant mariners employed on ships must be covered for medical attention everywhere in the world if they become ill or injured. Imagine you’re working in the Engine Room on a tanker when you come down with appendicitis. You’re in Hong Kong and need an emergency appendectomy. If you repeal the Jones Act, what happens to you? And – yes – it’s obvious that merchant mariners can take look out for their own contractual terms with their employers. Just sayin’ there’s more to the Jones Act than idiotic protectionist trade restrictions.
There is another option to avoid this: become a full state.
Puerto Rico has rejected that multiple times.
While I defer to the Puerto Ricans on that issue. I would like to point out that statehood is the checkmate of colonialism.
There is another option to avoid this: become a full state.
Incorrect. They have to 'secede' as a territory or build their own LNG Carrier shipyard. Statehood leaves the Jones Act in effect. But, of course, were they to secede, all of the disaster relief and infrastructure spending becomes foreign aid.
The problem is, it's a resource-poor island nation and there's no real or reliable profit to be had shipping LNG from the mainland US to the PR even with a/the $25-50M lead that The Jones Act nominally imposes. It's like wondering why someone doesn't set up direct deposit for their unstable relative who lives off the grid in a trailer in a remote woods somewhere.
>>If Kamala Harris Wants To Lower Energy Costs in Puerto Rico, She Should
KH has no ability to lower energy costs anywhere but in her home.
Liberals conflate the concept of lowering costs with subsidies.
We could solve this problem by setting Puerto Rico free. Its ports would become foreign and not subject to Jones Act restrictions.
This is the way.
Disagree. Beating retarded, bleeding heart liberals and closeted progressives with a bat until they decide to build their own LNG carrier, which they are entirely free to do, *might* help.
Otherwise, Evicting PR from the Union is just a horse trade on whether we ship the aid to them or whether we wind up air dropping Puerto Ricans into rural neighborhoods to help control the local pet population and letting them collect the aid on the mainland.
Or the idiots who run PR turn to China.
By ‘free’, do you mean untethering the floating pile of garbage of which you speak? If so, where would the oceanic currents take it?
Politicians are evil.
Which Jones Law? Republican bigot Wesley Livsey Jones rammed all manner of force-initiating usurpations into "the law" of the land. The Jones Law of May 26, 1922, also known as the "Narcotic" Drugs Import and Export Act or the Jones-Miller Act? The coastwise shipping laws? Or perhaps the Jones 5 and 10 law of 02MAR1929 making watery beer a federal felony for 5 years hard time and a fine of $605,319 in today's dollars? This, BTW when the League of Nations was hearing Chinese pleas for a global narcotics monopoly!
You'd think these morons could, at the very least, amend the law to deal with non-contiguous states, territories, and possessions.
Keep beating that Jones Act drum. Eventually someone will wonder what that repetitive noise is.
It would be rough for her to come out against the Jones Act when the Democrats are owned by the Unions.