[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 133 (Friday, August 1, 2025)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E747]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
INTRODUCTION OF THE MERCHANT MARINE ALLIES PARTNERSHIP ACT
______
HON. ED CASE
of hawaii
in the house of representatives
Friday, August 1, 2025
Mr. CASE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleague Congressman
Jim Moylan of Guam, in highlighting the urgent need to modernize U.S.
maritime policy through our Merchant Marine Allies Partnership Act,
which we have introduced to realign federal incentives in our domestic
shipping industry away from adversaries, such as the People's Republic
of China (PRC), and toward our trusted allies with proven mainline
capacity, such as Japan and South Korea.
Our measure directly responds to the real-world consequences of
gaping loopholes in the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, better known as
the Jones Act, which restricts domestic shipping including routes
between the U.S. West Coast and Hawaii to vessels that are U.S.-built,
U.S.-flagged, U.S.-owned and U.S.-crewed. The rationale for this
ancient and outdated restriction has always been argued as national
security, to maintain a strong U.S. shipbuilding industry and merchant
fleet capable of supporting the military in times of conflict.
But today that argument, if it has any merit at all, is being
dangerously undermined, and not by our adversaries, but by the very
companies benefiting from the monopolistic protections of the Jones
Act.
Specifically, Jones Act loopholes allow for supposedly minor parts
fabrication and supposedly minor repairs to be conducted in foreign
shipyards using foreign workers with no condition or restriction as to
country. But these are not minor parts but whole sections, and not
minor repairs but full retrofits. And the preferred source of this
fabrication and these repairs in the People's Republic of China (PRC).
Jones Act vessels such as the Daniel K. Inouye, Kaimana Hila and
Manukai have undergone major structural conversions, including
liquefied natural gas (LNG) engine retrofits, at PRC-based shipyards
like COSCO's Nantong facility, which has known ties to the Chinese
government and military-industrial complex. These modifications are
frequently reclassified as mere ``major modifications'' to avoid
triggering the 50 percent U.S. import duty intended to disincentivize
foreign work. But AIS data, company filings, U.S. Coast Guard
correspondence and even photographs confirm that these are anything but
routine.
This poses a significant and immediate national security concern.
First, by enabling vessels critical to U.S. domestic supply chains to
undergo major upgrades in foreign-controlled shipyards of adversaries,
we introduce unnecessary strategic risk. These ships support domestic
commerce, but they also arguably constitute the backbone of sealift
capacity that would be required during any military mobilization.
Second, the continued outsourcing of vessel modification and
construction undermines the U.S. shipbuilding and repair base, leaving
us with fewer than 100 Jones Act--compliant vessels in active service
nationwide, many of which are aging or specialized. And third, it sends
U.S. dollars, jobs and technological investments directly into the
hands of a strategic competitor identified by out National Defense
Strategy as the most significant long-term challenge to U.S. interests.
Nowhere are the consequences of this policy failure more acute or
more strategically dangerous than in my home state of Hawaii. Located
in the middle of the Indo-Pacific, Hawaii is not just a remote island
economy dependent on maritime commerce. It is the linchpin of U.S.
power projection and force posture across the Indo-Pacific. Any
disruption to Hawaii's shipping system is not only an economic risk to
our residents but a direct vulnerability in America's strategic
readiness.
Moreover, while Jones Act supporters continue to claim the law
protects U.S. jobs, the evidence says otherwise. According to the
Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, maritime employment in the U.S.
shipbuilding and repair sector has declined by 15 percent over the past
23 years. This steady erosion is not due to foreign competition alone,
but to deliberate business decisions by Jones Act carriers who choose
to take advantage of legal loopholes that let them outsource high-value
work overseas while still reaping the benefits of domestic
protectionism.
Despite these clear defects in the law, Hawaii and other islands and
noncontiguous parts of our country remain a fully captive market, with
no viable alternatives to a Jones Act duopoly that prioritizes profit
over preparedness. We see no meaningful return on this federal maritime
policy. The economic burden of this broken system, including inflated
shipping costs driven by duopoly protections and foreign outsourcing,
is borne daily by Hawaii's families and businesses. We have previously
introduced three separate measures to address these specific
consequences.
The overall answer for our country to this national security risk is
not to force any and all fabrication, repair and operation exclusively
into our country since that just compounds a problem we can't
effectively fix. It is instead to cease rewarding our adversaries and
start incentivizing our international friends and allies to assist us
with our domestic merchant marine and related defense sealift needs.
Our Merchant Marine Allies Partnership Act addresses these problems
through a targeted, security-conscious realignment of incentives.
Specifically, the bill exempts the current 50 percent import duty on
major vessel modifications only if the work is performed in shipyards
located in allied or partner countries, such as Japan and South Korea--
nations with world-class maritime industries and deep national security
alignment with the United States. It allows ships constructed in those
allied countries to qualify for the U.S. domestic (coastwise) trade
under a limited Jones Act exemption, thereby expanding access to
modern, secure and cost-effective vessels without subsidizing
adversarial economies. Finally, the legislation establishes a regulated
pathway for foreign-built, foreign-crewed vessels operated by companies
from allied nations to participate in the U.S. coastwise trade under
clearly defined national security safeguards.
This legislation does not repeal or abandon the Jones Act. It
restores the law to its intended purpose--to serve as a foundation for
national resilience, industrial strength and strategic security, rather
than being hijacked by the hypocritical umbrella of national defense at
the expense of increased costs of consumer goods across the country. It
recognizes that modern maritime commerce is global, but that global
alignment must be rooted in trust, shared values and common defense. By
partnering with our allies and closing loopholes that empower our
adversaries, this bill protects the U.S. supply chain, reduces security
vulnerabilities and ensures that the Jones Act serves our people, our
economy, and our military, not just corporate bottom lines.
Mr. Speaker, we cannot afford to continue defending a system that
fails to defend us. The Merchant Marine Allies Partnership Act is a
bipartisan, commonsense step toward maritime policy that reflects 21st-
century challenges and opportunities. I urge my colleagues to support
this legislation and update our maritime policy to modern world
reality.
____________________