Open America's Waters Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT]
- Committees
- Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jun 12, 2025
Bottom line
The "Open America's Waters Act" seeks to liberalize U.S. domestic maritime shipping by eliminating long-standing restrictions that mandate U.S.-built, U.S.-owned, and U.S.-crewed vessels for coastwise trade, potentially increasing competition and lowering shipping costs.
What it actually does
This bill repeals key provisions of the Jones Act (Section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920) by amending Title 46 of the U.S. Code. Specifically, it removes the requirement that vessels engaged in coastwise trade must be built in the U.S., owned by U.S. citizens, and crewed by U.S. citizens. It mandates the Coast Guard to issue new regulations ensuring safety and security for all vessels in coastwise trade.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the Jones Act is an outdated protectionist measure that inflates shipping costs, harms consumers, and hinders economic development, particularly in non-contiguous states and territories. They contend that repealing it would foster competition, reduce prices for goods, and improve supply chain efficiency by allowing foreign-built or foreign-flagged vessels to operate in U.S. domestic trade, while still maintaining safety and security standards.
Opponents contend
Opponents of repeal, primarily the U.S. maritime industry, labor unions, and national security advocates, argue that the Jones Act is crucial for national security, maintaining a domestic shipbuilding capacity, and ensuring a skilled U.S. merchant marine for defense readiness. They contend that repeal would lead to job losses, undermine U.S. maritime infrastructure, and make the nation reliant on foreign vessels and crews, posing significant economic and security risks.
The bill text is very short and straightforward, allowing for quick comprehension of its direct legislative changes.
Section 2(a)
Amendment to 46 U.S.C. 12112(a)
This section amends existing law to remove the specific requirements for a vessel to qualify for a coastwise endorsement. Previously, this section implicitly linked eligibility to U.S. build, ownership, and crew requirements. The amendment simplifies it to state that a coastwise endorsement may be issued for "a vessel that qualifies under the laws of the United States to engage in the coastwise trade," effectively removing the Jones Act's core restrictions by eliminating the specific criteria that defined "qualifies" in the context of U.S.-built, owned, and crewed vessels.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this change will introduce much-needed competition into the U.S. domestic shipping market, which has long suffered from high costs and limited capacity due to the restrictive Jones Act requirements. They believe it will lower consumer prices, improve supply chain resilience, and stimulate economic activity by reducing transportation expenses for businesses.
Critics contend
Opponents contend that this repeal would dismantle the foundation of the U.S. maritime industry, leading to the collapse of domestic shipbuilding and the loss of thousands of American maritime jobs. They argue it would compromise national security by making the U.S. dependent on foreign vessels and crews for domestic transport and military sealift capacity.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances economic efficiency and lower costs through increased competition against national security concerns, the preservation of domestic shipbuilding capabilities, and the protection of U.S. maritime jobs.
Section 2(b)
Coast Guard Regulatory Authority
This section mandates the Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard to issue new regulations within 90 days of the Act's enactment. These regulations must ensure that all vessels allowed to engage in coastwise trade, regardless of their origin or ownership after the repeal, meet "all appropriate safety and security requirements." This aims to maintain high standards for maritime operations even with increased foreign participation.
Section 2(c)
Removal of Redundant Jones Act References
This subsection makes several technical amendments to Title 46 of the U.S. Code, striking out various references to the repealed Section 12132 and other provisions that previously enforced Jones Act restrictions. For example, it repeals Section 12132 entirely, which dealt with the loss of coastwise trade privileges, and removes specific requirements related to tank vessel construction standards and liquified gas tankers that were tied to Jones Act compliance. These are necessary clean-up provisions to ensure consistency with the primary repeal.
This provision explicitly repeals Section 12132 of Title 46, which previously outlined conditions under which a vessel could lose its coastwise trade privileges, often related to foreign repairs or reconstruction. It also removes the entry for this section from the table of sections.
Section 2(c)(4) and (8)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for technical clean-up after a major policy change. The primary policy change is in 2(a), and these are consequential but secondary adjustments.
Case for: Supporters would argue that with the general repeal of Jones Act restrictions, the specific provisions for losing coastwise trade privileges (which were tied to those restrictions) become obsolete and must be removed for legal consistency.
Case against: Opponents would see this as a further erosion of the regulatory framework designed to protect the U.S. maritime industry, removing mechanisms that ensured vessels maintained a strong U.S. nexus to retain their domestic trading rights.
Estimated impact: This change removes a specific penalty mechanism that incentivized U.S. repairs and construction for vessels in coastwise trade, potentially shifting more repair work to foreign shipyards.