Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Implications of Republican sweep, part II

Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear [quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal [quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear [quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Another prediction: Look for the Jones Act to be eliminated. This action would have a huge impact on rail operations, as it would allow foreign flagged ships to sail between U.S. ports. It might make Alaskan coals price competitive with PRB coals in coastal coal consumer markets. Also could take some north-south trade away from the railroads on the East Coast. [/quote] What a bunch of BUNK. The usual FM drivel. FM, get with the program. The Congressional support for a repeal of the Jones Act doesn't exist, even with a Republican majority in both Houses and a Republican President... What is your source of information for this unfettered speculation??? LC [/quote] Yes it is speculation. That is why it is a prediction. Speculation is part of prediction. You forget that the Alaskan congressional delegation supports repeal of the Jones Act, and their members are in key positions to introduce such legislation. The opposition to repeal of the Jones Act would comes primarly from the blue states, and last time I checked they lost influence in the last election. I also don't believe they'd go to the extreme of fillibustering a Jones Act repeal or revision as part of a general transportation legislation. Again, I will go out on a limb and predict that repeal or revision of the Jones Act will be acted on in the next four years. [/quote] No. Generally a prediction is based upon some fact or facts and is not mere speculation. I sincerely doubt Sen. Stevens or the rest of the Alaskan delegation has enough pull to overcome the opposition to repeal of the Jones Act. Further, as our native Merchant Marine is so tied to our military I think you will find there is a lot more support for the Jones Act than you realize. I would suggest you read the last link in my post above carefully. It indicates that the Marine Cabotage Task Force (MCTF) founded to oppose efforts to repeal the Jones Act included over 400 companies and organizations including shipping companies, barge companies, shipyards, industry associations, labor organizations, defense industry groups and others. Also, you should be aware that there is a significant support for U.S. flag shipping in the entire Great Lakes area and along the east coast. I would expect that there is likely additional support elsewhere. Further, the last time efforts were made in the Congress to seek a repeal of the Jones Act, not a single cosponsor could be found for the legislation, Democrat or Republican. Hardly a ringing endorsement of your position. I hardly see this as a Democratic issue. It is likely to be a jobs issue and I doubt anyone wants to endorse giving U.S. jobs to foreign companies, that would be political suicide given the current outsourcing issues. Jobs are just as important to red and blue states. I'll look forward to sawing off that limb, if you're still here in 4 years... LC [/quote] I'll ignore the thinly disguised personal threat for now, and just leave you with this: The Jones Act flies in the face of the trend toward free trade, which by the way is the largest job growth faction in the industrial sector. Eliminating the Jones Act would allow Alaskan crude to be delivered to West Coast ports at lower cost, which usually translates to lower prices at the pump. Right now it is cheaper to ship Alaskan oil to Japan than it is to ship it to West Coast refineries, even though it is roughly the same distance, and this is soley due to the restrictions of the Jones Act. Alaskan coals could become price competitive with U.S. coals as well. Eliminating the Jones Act would create more jobs, not "outsource" them. What jobs may be lost for U.S. flagged carriers (not a done deal at that) would be more than offset by increased job opportunities at U.S. port and inland production. All the Jones Act has done is make it cheaper for foreign manufacturers to ship product to U.S. ports than for their counterparts in the U.S. who might otherwise use coastal shipping options. Or consider U.S. semi-finished products, which are cheaper to ship to a foreign port for final assembly than to a U.S. final assembly facility. Transport costs can be a deciding factor in determining where and how production is finalized. Most U.S. economists, free trade advocates, even some labor unions whose members would benefit would like to see the Jones Act eliminated or revised, and logic would dictate that it will happen sooner rather than later (or never). In this day and age of free trade agreements, the Jones Act is an anachronism, akin to the Smoot-Hawley tariff. It may even violate WTO rules, and it's possible that it's eventual demise may come about as a result of a WTO ruling.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag