On July 6, 2026, Colin Grabow’s op-ed titled ‘America lifted its self-imposed energy blockade. Here’s what happened,’ referenced a statement I made nine years ago. I remarked that the absence of the Jones Act might lead to increased crude oil movements from Texas to Philadelphia. It’s important to clarify that this was a specific observation related to the circumstances at that time.
The Jones Act, enacted in 1920, requires goods transported by water between U.S. ports to be carried on ships that are U.S.-flagged, U.S.-built, and mostly U.S.-owned and operated. The law was designed to support the American maritime industry, encourage shipbuilding, and ensure reliable and secure shipping routes.
When discussing the Jones Act’s impact, context is critical. While the specific observation highlighted a potential increase in regional oil transport without the act, it wasn’t an argument to weaken or repeal it. Instead, it was intended to highlight how the law’s provisions influence shipping patterns and choices.
Understanding the Jones Act’s role is essential for policymakers when considering both its economic impacts and national security benefits. The act shapes the U.S. maritime industry and affects energy transportation, which are factors that must be weighed carefully in any discussions regarding potential amendments.