The Case Against the Jones Act by Colin Grabow & Inu Manak

Author:Colin Grabow & Inu Manak [Grabow, Colin & Manak, Inu]
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9781948647984
Google: ijeVzQEACAAJ
Amazon: B089Y96WBK
Barnesnoble: B089Y96WBK
Goodreads: 53959497
Publisher: Cato Institute
Published: 2020-06-11T00:00:00+00:00

Illusory National Security Benefit

The national security benefits the Jones Act purportedly brings are similarly nonexistent. Supporters of the protectionist law argue that such benefits include a merchant fleet that the Department of Defense can use in times of crisis, and sustaining the industrial base for U.S. shipbuilding.

Neither argument has been borne out by actual experience.23 Both the domestic fleet of ships and U.S. shipbuilding capabilities have atrophied significantly.24 By 2000, the Jones Act–eligible fleet consisted of just 193 ships, and that number has now shrunk to 99, with 79 qualifying as militarily useful.25

Furthermore, the Department of Defense has frequently leased foreign vessels to execute missions that require additional sealift capacity. The Maritime Administration’s Ready Reserve Force also proves that maritime security does not rely on the Jones Act.26 This fleet, created for “transport of Army and Marine Corps unit equipment, combat support equipment, and initial resupply during the critical surge period before commercial ships can be marshaled,” has supplied the military at the outset of both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, as well as in past conflicts.27

Currently, 30 of the 46 Ready Reserve Force ships are foreign-built.28 If the U.S. military is comfortable with using foreign vessels during wartime, the argument that they are less safe in commercial use makes little sense. Jones Act supporters often point out that Jones Act mariners would be available to crew reserve fleet ships in times of war. However, if more mariners are necessary for sustained periods of war, the Navy should address any strategic readiness shortfalls and mobilization needs it deems necessary using the defense appropriations process, which could include expanded training through the Navy Reserve. Providing the Navy’s requirements through defense funding will allocate resources to what the Navy actually needs without the harmful economic distortions the Jones Act causes.

Even if there were a demonstrable national security benefit, the Jones Act is an incredibly inefficient way to maintain naval capabilities. Subjecting the entire U.S. economy and specific industries to the inefficiencies of a massive protectionist regime for the claimed security benefits is absurd, and it also has numerous distortionary impacts. If the U.S. military is not comfortable using foreign vessels, then it should simply purchase the ships it needs as part of the defense program and spread the costs to all American taxpayers as a public good.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.