Alabama senator Richard Shelby is an a'hole in the pocket of BAE

who on earth is this supposed to help other than BAE?

[B]Alabama Senator Richard Shelby seeks waiver of Jones Act for U.S. Navy[/B]

By MarEx November 21, 2013

Alabama Senator Shelby has introduced S.1197, which would amend the Jones Act and allow foreign vessels to be hired to move U.S. Navy equipment between domestic shipyards.

The amendment would allow for a general coastwise waiver for all vessels owned by a contractor or subcontractor providing supplies or services under a shipbuilding or ship repair contract.

Essentially, this means foreign shipbuilders operating in the U.S. can deploy their foreign flag tugs and barges to move modules, ships and equipment to another shipyard.

What this amendment would do is circumvent the Jones Act. The vote on this piece of legislation will take place no later than next Thursday.

WHAT AN ASSHOLE!

Damn that’s one of my guys. Sounds like I got a nastygram to send out. Might have to make a phone call also.

Yes I write him letters about once a month, time for another plus a couple phone calls. I really can’t believe he did this.

Well damn, this just killed my good mood… If Hawaii didn’t get that Jones Act amendment passed for them, I sure as hell hope that this douche bag doesn’t get this amendment passed for him. Selling out our domestic industries to foreign influence is bad enough, but selling out pieces of our domestic defense industry to foreign influence is UNFORGIVABLE. Free enterprise be damned on this one. Sometimes a nation just has to stand on its own two feet, whatever the cost… There’s such a thing as national dignity, we’ve just forgotten what it is.

Paddy, it’s 1800 on Friday, go get a bottle of rum or an auxiliary 30-pack of pabst, and don’t worry about it. I would if i were in your shoes! Some survivor flip cup ought to pass the time…don’t let it sour a mood! Write your reps Sunday.

[QUOTE=z-drive;124895]Paddy, it’s 1800 on Friday, go get a bottle of rum or an auxiliary 30-pack of pabst, and don’t worry about it. I would if i were in your shoes! Some survivor flip cup ought to pass the time…don’t let it sour a mood! Write your reps Sunday.[/QUOTE]

Ahh, not to worry Z, just trying to pass the time before the party starts! Doing the O.P. tonight there 'Bub! If you know what that means, keep it to yourself! Let the rest of these jokers keep on wondering!

Da fresh hell??? No doubt this would extend to MarAd vessels being towed to the shipyard as well (that is their practice).

Outrageous! Time to send another Catgram to my local reps.

It is time that someone teaches you how shipping works in the 21th century!

      • Updated - - -

Skål! Store blå tar alt!

OP has me guessing, but maybe it will come to make sense as a clearer head prevails in the mornin’ bub. Jokers may wonder, but even if I Lack the latest academy terminology I know how things go up there…tell you what! What a shame such belligerence isn’t accepted elsewhere in New England !

I hate to be the one to point out the obvious, but every politician to take shots at the Jones Act have been Republicans. What the hell? We used to have strong support in Reagan and Bush senior. When and why did we end up in the right’s cross hairs?

[QUOTE=Sea Opus;124937]I hate to be the one to point out the obvious, but every politician to take shots at the Jones Act have been Republicans. What the hell? We used to have strong support in Reagan and Bush senior. When and why did we end up in the right’s cross hairs?[/QUOTE]

What’s interesting is that it’s not that the other side supports the Jones Act while the right tries to kill it, it’s more that they just don’t know or care. In that sense there’s really no one to support the Jones Act in Washington. I will say though that the few politicians who have come out in support of the Jones Act have been Republicans. It may also be noted that Wesley Livsey Jones, the author of the Jones Act, was a Republican himself. Reagan and Bush may have seemed like allies to the Jones Act but if anything they were probably just lesser enemies to it than other administrations. Hopefully I don’t blow up C.Captain’s ego too much by quoting him but I do have to agree with his statement that “the Jones Act hasn’t had a true friend in the White House in many, many decades.”

[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;124939]Hopefully I don’t blow up C.Captain’s ego too much by quoting him but I do have to agree with his statement that “the Jones Act hasn’t had a true friend in the White House in many, many decades.”[/QUOTE]

While it appears that there are few in that great Cesspool otherwise known as our nation’s capital who give a shit, contrary to what many think there are friends of the Jones Act from both sides of the aisle in Washington. Vis…

[B]Congressional Subcommittee Expresses Strong Support for Jones Act During Committee Hearing[/B]

July 2011

Members of the House Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation recently described the Jones Act – one of America’s most important maritime laws – as critical to the national, economic and homeland security needs of the United States.

SIU Executive Vice President Augie Tellez testified at the subcommittee’s June 14 hearing, most of which focused on America’s maritime transportation system (MTS) and its capacity to create jobs, facilitate commerce and help the U.S. maintain and increase its exports. In addition to the MTS, panelists and members of the subcommittee discussed other issues that directly involve the maritime industry, including several programs that have come under attack in recent months.

Chairman Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.), after pointing out that the Jones Act requires that cargo moving between domestic ports be carried aboard ships that are crewed, flagged, owned and built American, stated the law is “something I strongly support. I hear rumors from time to time about ideas or suggestions that can be advanced, either legislatively or otherwise, that would dramatically change or weaken the Jones Act. I can assure you that as chair of this committee, I’ll do everything in my power not to allow that to happen.

“As we focus our efforts on ways to maximize the (maritime transportation) system’s potential, it is imperative that the policies we develop promote the transportation of goods on American ships, built in American shipyards, and operated by American mariners,” LoBiondo continued.

In addition to the effects that the Jones Act and other pro-maritime legislation have on the national economy, certain state-level economies would be in dire straits without the protections afforded to American workers and companies.

“I just want to note, for the record, that in Hawaii, Jones Act activities provide 23,000 jobs, just in Hawaii, and approximately $1.1 billion in wages and benefits to Hawaii’s economy,” said U.S. Rep. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), a member of the subcommittee. “I’m a strong supporter of that act.”

U.S. Rep. Chip Cravaack (R-Minn.) said that as a retired Navy captain, “I understand the importance of a maritime industry and how important it is to have a U.S.-flag, U.S.-crewed vessel ensuring that when we do have to go over the horizon we have the proper assets to do it; with the proper people that have been trained in a way that we need to make sure they’ll be able to carry the flag when rubber starts hitting the road. So I highly support U.S.-flag vessels and U.S. Jones Act, as well.”

Panelist Mike Roberts, who is a senior vice president of SIU-contracted Crowley, thanked the committee for its support of the Jones Act and mentioned its paramount importance to his company.

“This fundamental maritime law provides important national security, homeland security and economic security benefits to our nation,” Roberts stated. “This subcommittee’s support for the Jones Act is greatly appreciated.”

In addition to Tellez and Roberts, others testifying before the subcommittee were Maritime Administrator David Matsuda, Chamber of Shipping of America President and CEO Joseph Cox, and John Mohr, executive director of the Port of Everett, Wash. Each of the men on the panel gave brief summaries of their submitted remarks and answered questions by members of Congress on the maritime industry and the important role it plays in our economic and national security.

The MTS is made up of 25,000 miles of channels, the Great Lakes, and over 3,700 terminals around the country. In addition, the MTS includes nearly 175,000 miles of railways, more than 45,000 miles of interstate highways, and over 1,400 intermodal connections. Due to its reach, the MTS is a key aspect of the nation’s economy.

“The commerce which moves on the MTS fuels the economy,” said Rep. LoBiondo. “Approximately 99 percent of the volume of overseas trade enters or leaves the country by water. The movement of cargo and associated activities add more than $649 billion annually to U.S. gross domestic product, sustains more than 13 million jobs and contributes over $212 billion in annual federal state local taxes. Domestic shipping alone is responsible for 500,000 American jobs and $100 billion in annual economic output.”

U.S. Rep. Rick Larsen (D-Wash.), ranking member of the subcommittee, looked to the future to provide solid justification for fully funding the MTS today. Larsen’s district, which encompasses some of the most important ports on theWest Coast, has an understandable interest in ensuring that the MTS and other programs are fully funded and defended by lawmakers.

“The overarching reality is that our economic future and the MTS are closely intertwined,” said Larsen. “To think that our economy can fully recover and grow if we fail to invest in this critical infrastructure is both unrealistic and shortsighted. We must summon the will to invest in the system or we risk choking off the very conduit that makes our economy hum, that drives job creation, and that ensures the U.S. market remains preeminent in global trade.”

Matsuda emphasized the economic importance of the MTS and touted its proven job-producing capabilities.

“The MTS accommodates 78 percent of U.S. exports and imports by weight and 48 percent by value,” Matsuda told the subcommittee. “In addition to supporting the needs of U.S. exporters and industry, it is an important source of employment in its own right. The MTS supports millions of American jobs, facilitates trade, and moves people and goods in a safe, cost-effective, and energy-efficient manner.”

While there have been calls both within and outside of the industry for more laws that will enable the U.S. Merchant Marine to continue to thrive, there are several long-standing laws that need sustained implementation.

Tellez (pictured testifying before the subcommittee at left) encouraged the committee members to continue enforcing laws that are already on the books, including the Jones Act, cargo preference laws and the U.S. Maritime Security Program (MSP). Enforcing existing enacted laws would strengthen the industry and would subsequently strengthen the economy as a whole.

“We must ensure that our U.S.- flag merchant fleet remains strong and viable in the international and domestic trades,” said Tellez. “It is only by defending our existing programs, reducing the regulatory burden on our operators, ensuring the tax system is fair and competitive internationally, seeking opportunities to expand the industry both internationally and domestically and maintaining the key government programs that keep the fleet afloat that we will be able to create jobs and increase U.S. exports.”

Tellez pointed out that it would stimulate the national economy if more U.S.-produced cargo were shipped on American-flagged, American-crewed vessels.

“The U.S. Merchant Marine is effective in that our reliability and performance are second-to-none, particularly when it comes to productivity and safety,” Tellez said. “For too long, we have allowed foreign competitors to undercut the American-flag fleet and our ship operators. This foreign competition is often supported by generous tax regimes, little or no-cost health care, and tax exempt wages for foreign seafarers by a number of foreign governments that make the international playing field far from even.”

Another issue that was raised was cargo preference and food aid, both of which are of great importance to maritime industry workers. With budget cuts involving food aid and other cargo financed through the Export-Import Bank, Tellez made it clear to members of the committee that cutting funds for those programs would have disastrous effects on U.S. Merchant Mariners.

“When it’s all said and done, the various maritime industry programs are fine, but we must not overlook one other imperative point,” said Tellez. “Namely, our industry’s lifeblood is cargo. Cargo cures practically every ill. That’s what keeps us afloat.”

While the present laws have beneficial effects on the U.S. economy and its worker pool, Tellez and others believe that the future is dependent on a stronger American-flag fleet.

“Maritime labor believes that we as a nation have to think and plan long-term, and such planning absolutely must include maintaining a strong American-flag fleet and a reliable pool of U.S. shipboard manpower,” said Tellez. “Ideally, we’ll reach a point where shippers look first for ways to use the U.S. vessels, rather than having to be convinced.”

Tellez concluded, “I respectfully urge continued support of the Maritime Security Program, the Jones Act and cargo preference laws, and I further ask that any and all reasonable steps be taken in order to further encourage the maintenance and growth of the American-flag fleet and the U.S. Merchant Marine.”

Regardless of the likes of the Shelby’s and McCain’s out there, the Jones Act is safe…remember, the Jones Act shipowners are the biggest proponents of the law. Do you think any of the mafia families in the Bayoo would be as big, wealthy and powerful as they are without a Jones Act to keep the Norwegians off their turf?

Unions are good in some areas, this is one of them. It is unfortunate how the unions are crap when it comes to pay. But they do fight for everyone DEPENDANT on the Jones Act, union member or not. In my view, support from the entire industry should come in some form from non-union members. And worth discussion here as they try to inform new politicians the importance of the Jones Act, fight everyone who is against it and continue to inform the public about it’s importance. I am against union membership where it is not wanted, but am for supporting their efforts in protection of the Jones Act.

[QUOTE=seacomber;124969]Unions are good in some areas, this is one of them. It is unfortunate how the unions are crap when it comes to pay. But they do fight for everyone DEPENDANT on the Jones Act, union member or not. In my view, support from the entire industry should come in some form from non-union members. And worth discussion here as they try to inform new politicians the importance of the Jones Act, fight everyone who is against it and continue to inform the public about it’s importance. I am against union membership where it is not wanted, but am for supporting their efforts in protection of the Jones Act.[/QUOTE]

Ok since this has been a topic in the past and nothing has been done, I will make a suggestion. Form an alliance, anyone welcome. Call it something like J.A.G. (JONES ACT GROUP), DONATE by direct deposit from mariner paycheck into its’ fund, put GCAPTAIN in charge of the money and purpose, i think John will know what to do. Get political and be heard, but most of all stop sitting on our asses and watching those that would try to take our jobs away.

[QUOTE=seacomber;125008]Ok since this has been a topic in the past and nothing has been done, I will make a suggestion. Form an alliance, anyone welcome. Call it something like J.A.G. (JONES ACT GROUP), DONATE by direct deposit from mariner paycheck into its’ fund, put GCAPTAIN in charge of the money and purpose, i think John will know what to do. Get political and be heard, but most of all stop sitting on our asses and watching those that would try to take our jobs away.[/QUOTE]

I suggested that a couple months ago, didn’t take. John had something to say about it, although I can’t remember what at the moment. I seem to remember it was something along the lines of gCaptain already has an impact on the industry and they don’t want to get too much more political than they already are. There are already maritime lobbies in Washington but I’ll grant you they don’t seem to reach out to the average mariner on a personal level, they’re all business interests. You would think that this would be a role for the unions to fill but as I’ve said before and I say again, they are USELESS. I wouldn’t want some union fat-cat prick representing me in Washington anyway…

[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;125009]I suggested that a couple months ago, didn’t take. John had something to say about it, although I can’t remember what at the moment. I seem to remember it was something along the lines of gCaptain already has an impact on the industry and they don’t want to get too much more political than they already are. There are already maritime lobbies in Washington but I’ll grant you they don’t seem to reach out to the average mariner on a personal level, they’re all business interests. You would think that this would be a role for the unions to fill but as I’ve said before and I say again, they are USELESS. I wouldn’t want some union fat-cat prick representing me in Washington anyway…[/QUOTE]

American Professional Mariners calling John Konrad…come in John,.

Do you copy?

Hello?

Anybody there?

[QUOTE=c.captain;125021]American Professional Mariners calling John Konrad…come in John,.

Do you copy?

Hello?

Anybody there?[/QUOTE]

You guys are mixing up my comments from two separate threads.

In one thread I said that gCaptain isn’t going to start shouting from the rooftops that we need to protect the jones act. I said this because 1) We have done it in the past 2) Other respected editors are still doing it 3) None of it has had any positive effect.

In another thread I said I would be for a PAC but I would use most of the money to investigate the SOB’s in washington and publish the findings on gCaptain.

These two threads seem to be opposed but they are not. Editorial type articles (where I rant and rave c.captain style) don’t have any effect… what does have an effect is exposing the corruption and transgressions that are undermining the average mariner. The other difference between the two types of articles is that Editorials are free (which is why they are useless) and investigative articles are expensive (you need to hire real journalists and pay their expenses).

I would be in favor of a Jones Act Group and having gCaptain be the recipient and I do think such a group would bring about significant change BUT… going after these sob’s would bring on a lot of heat. I don’t mind shouldering that heat from an editorial perspective but the money needs to be completely separate and insulated from attack.

SO… I am in favor of the idea only someone else needs to set it up. Collecting, managing and spending the money all from within gCaptain would make us too juicy of a target for the people we would, inevitably, piss off.

In short, yes I do know what to do… but gCaptain doesn’t have the funds to do it. Get me the funds (i.e. stop writing letters, which are a useless waste of time, and put together a grass roots campaign offline that will funnel money into hiring investigative reporters) and I promise that you will see results.

John - Who is gCaptain’s audience? Is it global mariners or just those from US?

If global, would you lobby every country to have their own version of the Jones Act?

Granted, most the active members on the forum are US based but I suspect the blogs have more of a mixed readership. Just something to think about before campaigning hard in support of American jobs.

[QUOTE=john;125030]SO… I am in favor of the idea only someone else needs to set it up. Collecting, managing and spending the money all from within gCaptain would make us too juicy of a target for the people we would, inevitably, piss off.

In short, yes I do know what to do… but gCaptain doesn’t have the funds to do it. Get me the funds (i.e. stop writing letters, which are a useless waste of time, and put together a grass roots campaign offline that will funnel money into hiring investigative reporters) and I promise that you will see results.[/QUOTE]

John…you’re completely contradicting yourself here. First you say you and gCaptain cannot become or even sponsor a professional association that will have a political function and then in the next paragraph you’re telling us that you know what to do. You are the single man in the US (short of maybe Tony Munoz) that has the clarion voice that would be heard in Washington. You have already formed that association here with the sizable loyal gCaptain membership and believe most here will contribute to the cause if we knew it had viable leadership which is your lone distinction. I will become your major domo and chief of staff to gather intel and point you at the enemies of the American Professional Mariner but the general who leads us needs to be a man roundly respected by all the troops and the US maritime community at large. Become the face and voice of all of us here…I am close to getting on my knees and begging you to (since I have nothing to use as a noisy stick to point at your head)!

Think that such an association could someday become something with its own mass and momentum…wouldn’t that be a legacy you would like to leave? Think a future MarAd Administrator’s job!

so I simply must say…LET’S DO THIS THING!

How much money are we talking about here? I can fire off $100 without batting an eye. And I am just one guy. If this gets rolling there is more where that came from.