Puerto Rico has endured a multitude of unimaginable difficulties over the past several years. At the top of that list was the 2017 hurricane season. This event was among the worst in the island's history.
When Hurricane Maria made landfall on the island on September 20, 2017, it featured wind gusts as high as 113 mph in San Juan. The fallout effectively brought the tourism sector, which Puerto Rico relies on desperately to supplement the massive level of financial support the island receives from the United States government, to a halt.
Flash forward to 2022 and many of the issues facing the island were still firmly in place as Hurricane Fiona made landfall in southwest Puerto Rico on Sept. 18 as a Category 1 storm. And as is often the case in jurisdictions that are controlled by Democrats, crisis brings about an opportunity to create undeserving scapegoats. This year, just like in 2017, the Jones Act is again under attack.
The Jones Act requires that goods shipped between U.S. ports be transported on ships that are built, owned, and operated by United States citizens or permanent residents.
This time, the Left used the story of a singular fuel ship that was unable to deliver fuel in the aftermath of Hurricane Fiona.
A British Petroleum vessel, the GH Parks, claimed that it couldn't deliver energy supplies because of the Jones Act.
But that was untrue. The hurricane was no surprise.
Nor was the GH Parks' stop in San Juan. If the GH Parks wanted to stop in Puerto Rico, it could have scheduled a trip after stopping in either British Virgin Islands or the Dominican Republic. Instead of heading to its filed destination, it made a beeline for Puerto Rico then pressured U.S. officials into granting a Jones Act waiver.
In yet another example of not protecting the sovereignty of the United States, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas granted the waiver.
The shortsighted decision by Mayorkas undermines the very purpose of the Jones Act. The GH Parks had just made its last stop at a port in Texas and obviously timed its decision to anchor off the Puerto Rico coast in order to claim it needed a Jones Act waiver.
According to American Maritime Partnership president Ku'uhaku Park, "American Maritime has been meeting and exceeding the needs of Puerto Rican residents in the wake of Hurricane Fiona and there continues to be absolutely no justification for a waiver of the Jones Act, as the U.S. Coast Guard, FEMA, the Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Department of Energy all have made clear that the supply of fuel to the Island is not an issue."
The Jones Act waiver was also opposed by one of the highest-ranking political figures in Puerto Rico. Jenniffer González-Colón, the resident commissioner of Puerto Rico, issued a statement voicing her displeasure with the idea of the waiver.
She explained that in attending "continuous briefings, multiple times a day, on the state of the federal response and recovery efforts on the island" she has "been assured by federal agencies, including the Department of Energy, FEMA and the Corps of Engineers that there is an adequate supply of fuel on the Island that is available to consumers and that subsequent delivery is planned of more fuel in the short, medium and long term."
González-Colón's statement also acknowledged that the "vast majority of the fuel that Puerto Rico consumes comes from outside the United States, which is why it is transported on foreign-flagged ships from foreign ports. Therefore, the Jones Act would not apply, and a waiver would not change the way fuel is transported at all."
Much to do about nothing it seems. Especially when considering that during the period following Hurricane Maria when the last waiver program was in effect, only a small handful of vessels even applied for one.
The decision was also questioned by a bipartisan collection of legislators, as a letter addressed to both Mayorkas as well as Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg looking for an explanation for the reasoning behind the waiver program was signed by House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure chair Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., ranking member Sam Graves, R-Mo., Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation chair Salud Carbajal, D-Calif., and ranking member Bob Gibbs (R-Ohio).
The American people deserve answers as the national security protections provided by the Jones Act are just too crucial to allow them to be neutered in this way. Americans are made safer by the fact that it requires all goods transported by water between U.S. ports be carried on ships that have been constructed in the United States and that fly the U.S. flag, are owned by U.S. citizens, and are crewed by U.S. citizens.
Undermining the Jones Act could eventually lead to exporting our shipbuilding industry, potentially to a country like China, and we'd only further lose control of our already shaky supply chains.
An America without the Jones Act would also make itself more vulnerable to potential espionage, as it would be much easier for foreign ships to maneuver up and down our coasts while making our country more susceptible to potential terrorism.
The truth is, attacking the Jones Act is tantamount to attacking national security. Over 100 years later, the Jones Act is as relevant as it ever was, and do-nothing politicos need to stop weakening it in their shortsighted attempts to appear to be heroic in crisis.
Julio Rivera is a small business consultant, political activist, writer, and editorial director. He has been a regular contributor to Newsmax since 2016, on both its web pages and television network. His commentary has also appeared in The Hill, The Washington Times, The Washington Examiner, American Thinker, The Toronto Sun, and more. Read Julio Rivera's Reports — More Here.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.