Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

McClatchy: GOP's false talking point: Jones Act blocks Gulf help

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 05:29 PM
Original message
McClatchy: GOP's false talking point: Jones Act blocks Gulf help
FINALLY McClatchy figured this out!


GOP's false talking point: Jones Act blocks Gulf help

By William Douglas | McClatchy Newspapers


WASHINGTON From former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to Arizona Sen. John McCain to junior members of the House of Representatives, conservative Republicans have accused President Barack Obama of failing to do all he can to help clean up the Gulf of Mexico oil spill because he hasn't waived a U.S. maritime law called the Jones Act.

That statute, established in 1920, requires that all goods transported between U.S. ports be carried on U.S.-flagged, U.S.-built and U.S.-owned ships crewed by U.S. citizens or permanent residents. Critics say that's needlessly excluded foreign-flagged vessels that could have helped.

"It's a little shocking to me that a president that has such a multinational orientation as this president didn't immediately see the benefits of waiving the Jones Act and allowing all of these resources to come in," former House Majority Leader Richard Armey, R-Texas, said in remarks to Newsmax.com, a conservative website.

Armey and the other Republican critics are wrong. Maritime law experts, government officials and independent researchers say that the claim is false. The Jones Act isn't an impediment at all, they say, and it hasn't blocked anything.

"Totally not true," said Mark Ruge, counsel to the Maritime Cabotage Task Force, a coalition of U.S. shipbuilders, operators and labor unions. "It is simply an urban myth that the Jones Act is the problem."

In a news briefing last week, Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen said he'd received "no requests for Jones Act waivers" from foreign vessels or countries. "If the vessels are operating outside state waters, which is three miles and beyond, they don't require a waiver," he said.


On Tuesday the State Department announced that new offers of aid would be accepted from 12 foreign countries and international organizations, but spokesman P.J. Crowley noted that booms donated by Mexico, Norway and Brazil had been in use since May 11,and that 24 foreign vessels from nine foreign countries already have been helping with the cleanup.

more...

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/06/30/96831/gops-false-...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. You know Fox their pipeline to the 1920's
doesn't leave much room for what is happening today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TreasonousBastard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 06:01 PM
Response to Original message
2. I used to deal with the Jones Act all the time years ago, but there have been...
significant revisions since then. The cabotage provisions don't seem to have changed much, though-- that's the part that requires US built, crewed, and owned vessels for trade between US ports. The three mile thing seems like an odd technicality in the definition of trade between ports.

As far as I know, however, there is a provision in the law for foreign flag skimmers and other vessels to work US waters cleaning up oil spills WITHOUT the need for a waiver as long as we have a reciprocal relationship for cleanup with that country.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NHLrocks Donating Member (64 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 11:00 PM
Response to Original message
3. so then why the hell were they turned away? did we think we didnt need the help?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-01-10 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. If you really cared, you could do some research and find
Edited on Thu Jul-01-10 10:08 AM by babylonsister
out a timeline for what went down and why.

Here, I'll help you.


Myth: Obama waited weeks before responding to the oil spill

http://mediamatters.org/research/201006240025


And here's a timeline of what went down.

http://mediamatters.org/research/201004300053

Oh, and read post #4 and stop listening to faux if you do. I hear it's bad for your health! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
4. Plus the lying liars have been crapping that FEW skimmers have been in use
Imagine my surprise to hear ABC news say yesterday that because of the hurricane THOUSANDS of skimmers and other craft had to be taken out of use. So, THOUSANDS have been out there, eh?

But HANNITY and LIMBOsevic keep stamping their feet and the networks just LUERVE to have the Billy NUNGESSER dude filling up the screen with his ranting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-01-10 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
6. K & R
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-01-10 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
7. Botton line is that the Obama administration had the responsibility to deal with this
and people can look at the facts since April and judge for themselves how they've done.

What started as a convenient excuse has now come back to bite... funny how that happens, eh?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-01-10 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
8. Sorry but I am tired of the cleanup after the fact
The White House has a media dept, does it not? They need to jump on this shit as soon as they hear it. During the campaign Obama did a much better job of controlling the message than he is doing as president. That's inexcusable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Sep 02nd 2014, 08:06 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC