Letter to the Editor: On Repealing the Jones Act

The better question is why repealing the law wouldn’t. That’s because the cost of shipping necessarily helps determine the prices a store must charge, and there is little doubt that the Jones Act drives shipping costs higher.

U.S.-built ships like those used by Matson in its Guam service currently cost at least four times as much to build as similar ships constructed overseas. In addition, Jones Act-compliant vessels are at least three times more expensive to operate than internationally flagged ships. Add reduced competition to this mix and expensive shipping is inevitable — with Guam consumers paying the price.

Lotz expressed concern about using foreign shipping to supply Guam’s needs, but relying on such vessels would hardly break new ground. After all, Guam already welcomes scores of foreign ships of various types each year that reliably transport goods from neighboring countries. Repealing the Jones Act would simply enable these ships to transport goods from the U.S. as well.

The only folks that should have cause for concern over the Jones Act’s demise are the ocean carriers such as Matson who profit from the status quo. There’s a good reason they lobby heavily to keep this law in place: They are terrified of the competition and lower shipping rates the Jones Act’s repeal would bring.