Senate looks at modifying
law that may affect prices
on goods sold here

By Pete Pichaske
Star-Bulletin

WASHINGTON--Not even Monica Lewinsky can keep the U.S. Congress from its annual acrimonious debate over the Jones Act.

The 1920 law that requires all ships sailing between U.S. ports to be built and owned in the United States and crewed by American sailors was the subject of a typically contentious hearing today before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

Farmers argued the law had to be modified to help them sell stockpiled grain, shipbuilders argued the law was needed to maintain a strong domestic fleet, and senators were left to sort through the conflict.

"I feel like I've been dealing with this for 40 years," said committee member Sen. John Breaux, D-La.

The hearing focused on a proposal from Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kansas, to exempt bulk commodities (such as oil and grain), forest products and livestock from the "build requirement" of the Jones Act.

Brownback wants to help farmers in his home state. But his proposal's impact would reach all the way to Hawaii, where more goods have to be imported than in any other state, and where, critics argue, consumers suffer most from the higher costs of using U.S. ships.

The Jones Act is "an enormous burden on each and every family in Hawaii," said Orson Swindle, the former GOP candidate for Congress in Hawaii, who showed up at a morning pep rally for Brownback's bill. Paying the higher costs of using U.S. ships, claimed Swindle, adds to the "staggering difference in the price of goods" between Hawaii and the mainland.

Attempts to repeal or modify the Jones Act are supported by a long list of farm and taxpayers's groups, including the Hawaii Cattlemen's Council, the Hawaii Shippers' Council and the Hawaii Small Business Legislative Council.

Those Jones Act opponents say today's hearing, the first in four decades, is proof that they are gaining ground in Congress.

But the law still has powerful friends in Congress, and even Brownback conceded any change is highly unlikely this year.

"It's not going anywhere," said Phil Grill, an executive with Matson Navigation Co., one of the two U.S. shipping lines that serve Hawaii, and chairman of the Maritime Cabotage Task Force, a coalition of groups opposed to any changes.

ip Grill said estimates of the cost of the Jones Act to Hawaii consumers are grossly inflated and "pulled from the air. The shipping company is the whipping boy for consumer costs."

Hawaii lawmakers here, including Sen. Daniel Inouye, a member of the Commerce Committee, have traditionally supported the Jones Act, calling it essential for maintaining a dependable maritime link between Hawaii and the mainland.