[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 95 (Wednesday, June 23, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Page S5322]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. McCAIN (for himself and Mr. Risch):
  S. 3525. A bill to repeal the Jones Act restrictions on coastwise 
trade and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce 
legislation that would fully repeal the Jones Act, a 1920s law that 
hinders free trade and favors labor unions over consumers. 
Specifically, the Jones Act requires that all goods shipped between 
waterborne ports of the United States be carried by vessels built in 
the United States and owned and operated by Americans. This restriction 
only serves to raise shipping costs, thereby making U.S. farmers less 
competitive and increasing costs for American consumers.
  This was highlighted by a 1999 U.S. International Trade Commission 
economic study, which suggested that a repeal of the Jones Act would 
lower shipping costs by approximately 22 percent. Also, a 2002 economic 
study from the same Commission found that repealing the Jones Act would 
have an annual positive welfare effect of $656 million on the overall 
U.S. economy. Since these studies are the most recent statistics 
available, imagine the impact a repeal of the Jones Act would have 
today: far more than a $656 million annual positive welfare impact--
maybe closer to $1 billion. These statistics demonstrate that a repeal 
of the Jones Act could prove to be a true stimulus to our economy in 
the midst of such difficult economic times.
  The Jones Act also adds a real, direct cost to consumers--
particularly consumers in Hawaii and Alaska. A 1988 GAO report found 
that the Jones Act was costing Alaskan families between $1,921 and 
$4,821 annually for increased prices paid on goods shipped from the 
mainland. In 1997, a Hawaii government official asserted that ``Hawaii 
residents pay an additional $1 billion per year in higher prices 
because of the Jones Act. This amounts to approximately $3,000 for 
every household in Hawaii.''
  This antiquated and protectionist law has been predominantly featured 
in the news as of late due to the Gulf Coast oil spill. Within a week 
of the explosion, 13 countries, including several European nations, 
offered assistance from vessels and crews with experience in removing 
oil spill debris, and as of June 2l, the State Department has 
acknowledged that overall ``it has had 21 aid offers from 17 
countries.'' However, due to the Jones Act, these vessels are not 
permitted in U.S. waters.
  The Administration has the ability to grant a waiver of the Jones Act 
to any vessel--just as the previous Administration did during Hurricane 
Katrina--to allow the international community to assist in recovery 
efforts. Unfortunately, this Administration has not done so.
  Therefore, some Senators have put forward legislation to waive the 
Jones Act during emergency situations, and I am proud to cosponsor this 
legislation. However, the best course of action is to permanently 
repeal the Jones Act in order to boost the economy, saving consumers 
hundreds of millions of dollars. I hope my colleagues will join me in 
this effort to repeal this unnecessary, antiquated legislation in order 
to spur job creation and promote free trade.

                          ____________________