Same old same old, I think some right-wing think tank spams this stuff every storm in PR.
Except in this case it’s offered not by some “right-wing think tank” but by the Editorial Board of The Washington Post itself, a paper of late which no one would reasonably call right-wing.
2 Likes
But owned by someone who does a lot of shipping 
1 Like
Just tell the masses that amazon / fuel prices will be cheaper… 
I noticed they left out the tugs making the run. I am on one of them towing a roro barge from Jacksonville to San Juan. There are bunch of tugs and atbs making the run. They left out how many people in Puerto Ricans are on welfare somewhere around 43%. You want to receive the US money but not play by the US rules?
6 Likes
Turns out that the Supreme Court weighed in on weather or not PR should receive welfare as we know it in the states. Interestingly enough they ruled that PR isn’t eligible. They receive a different, highly specific and locally controlled program. Check out the article here: PR Welfare
Give PR its freedom. Let them be free to collect their own taxes, issue their own passports, apply for visas to visit the USA, build their own economy, issue their own currency, maintain their own infrastructure and, like Haiti, devolve into a seething pit of putrid corruption and criminality. Set them free.
5 Likes
Jones Act opinion pieces are to be expected - except this time we have 8 members of Congress (mostly from NY) actually pushing for it to be suspended to PR for a year:
Ironically one of them is AOC - SUNY Maritime is literally in her own congressional district
1 Like
gCaptain article goes in more depth
AOC is a knee jerk anti Jones Act crusader. AOC has become a wealthy celebrity and is feeding at the lobbyist trough. Her abuela still lives in poverty in Puerto Rico. Is AOC helping her? Is AOC taking her into her DC apartmemt after the storm?
Isn’t Puerto Rico already provided with plenty of regular and reliable Jones Act shipping?
Don’t Crowley’s foreign flag ships provide regular service from Panama and the rest of Latin America to Puerto Rico?
Don’t Crowley tankers and ATBs serve Puerto Rico?
Doesn’t Crowley have extra tankers in lay up that could take US source fuel to Puerto Rico?
If Puerto Rico has its heart set on using our tax dollars to pay foreign flag tankers, why isn’t it buying cheaper diesel fuel in Barranquilla? That’s much closer than Texas.
Don’t Chinese ships keep Walmart well stocked in Puerto Rico?
1 Like
The OP article mentions a 10 Day waiver for Hurricane Maria in 2017…is there any data on the number of vessels and number of runs made by vessels under the waiver?
Does crowley have layed up ships? For that matter does OSG or Seabulk? I thought recently they had all been pulled out of stack because rates were so high, even in non JA routes. If not, that Marshall Islands flag tanker chartered by BP should not be given any waiver.
She got a little over $29,000 from PACs 2021-2022. Available from financial disclosures.
Net worth? Politifact is usually pretty accurate.
3 Likes
She is a new rep without a lot of power, but is very popular as The Resident Evil among certain people
2 Likes
Lots of grassroots small donor fundraising adding up to big dollars. Books? Speaking fees? Cameos? Endorsements?
She is in a position to help her grandma in Puerto Rico without repealing the Jones Act.
1 Like
Holy crap the news feed is packed with articles about the BP tanker idling with a load of diesel, and besides the gCaptain article none of them mention that there is no requirement/request by receiving terminals on-island for a delivery. There is no volume shortage.
So who/where the hell is the regular Jones act diesel supplier for PR? If they too are unaffected by the weather and standing by with uninterrupted supply then they should be screaming at the top of their lungs and reaching out to these media outlets stating so and correcting the record.
And if AMP is supposedly the voice for the industry they they should be more specific and more vocal about this too. It’s easy to complain about the waiver and claim US carriers are sufficient, but it’s much more poignant and a direct rebuke to be able to say “Hey, that BP tanker isn’t needed because here’s the regular JA supplier vessel “M/V Get Fu$&ed” already making that delivery as we speak”.
4 Likes
Whats wrong with a edit to the law to allow 2 stops for foreign vessels if one is Hawaii or PR?
1 Like
Thanks for that list.
My general reaction to the second list of vessels which called on PR is that it shows a general failure of US Gov/FEMA resource management rather than lack of available tonnage.
Clipper New Haven and Lolland are general cargo vessels that delivered water. If it was water from their potable tanks then there is nothing special about those vessels that any OSV in the gulf with cargo potable/drill water couldn’t have covered in spades. If they couldn’t be mobilized then shame on us.
Betty K VI is 180’ and basically an old OSV, so if a waiver was required in lieu of any vessel based in Fourchon, again, shame on us.
Nera II is a tiny container vessel that appears rated for less than 30teu. If the regular JA carriers could take that capacity then that is simply embarrassing.
Adventure of the Seas is a cruise ship that delivered cargo, generators, and evacuated persons to the mainland. In theory we have the academy training ships for this, but in reality they could never mobilize that fast and certainly are not as practical. But lest we forget the reason people needed evacuation by sea was that the TSA couldn’t get their systems functioning at the airport to process plane tickets!
And as for the tankers, if it was needed and JA shippers were inadequate, then ok, but in the current situation it appears they are not needed.
So I guess I go both ways on waivers. The people arguing for repeal after every storm I cannot agree with. And if JA vessels are suitable and responding, then don’t just grant a waiver because of mis-information. However, if after a devastating hurricane an island needs potable water for example, and there’s a ship with water 100nm away, grant the waiver, don’t make survivors wait.
But if FEMA and US JA shippers can’t plan ahead to ensure an actual fast response plan exists and adequate tonnage can be routed when it does in fact exist, then it’s our own damn fault when waivers become the default.
1 Like
This appears to be an orchestrated publicity stunt to disparage the Jones Act.
BP ought to be fined a few million dollars for its part in this.
This is all just static. Congress knows that there won’t be any non-government ship or boat building without the Jones Act , and virtually no US mariners, and we’ll be totally dependent on not so friendly foreign sources of supply and labor.
5 Likes