I read your recent article, “Jones Act’s new horizon” (January issue, pages 28-32), with great disappointment that Guam is apparently a “non-entity” from your view.
With the loss of Horizon lines Guam now has no competition and is solely reliant on Matson for U.S. goods. Since the departure of Horizon, Matson has recorded record profits, while continuing to increase pricing even though they have experienced increased volume and greater efficiency as a result of Horizon’s departure.
For anyone to say fuel surcharges are actually regulated is a joke! Any adjustments by Matson are simply “rubber stamped” from my view. In my 25 years representing Nissan in Guam, we have never received an invoice with “fuel surcharges” added to it from foreign carriers delivering vehicles from Japan.
Mike Hansen (president of the Hawaii Shippers Council) has echoed my comments for years that if the Jones Act is in fact a national defense issue, why aren’t all 300-plus million Americans paying for it rather than just the 6 million living in the non-contiguous U.S.? In Guam, I not only continually ask this question, but I also ask (since I represent the automotive industry), if there were only one car company legally allowed to sell cars in Guam, do you think you’d pay more for your car?
Although I am disappointed you didn’t see the need or importance to include Guam in your article, I applaud you for continuing to educate the public on this antiquated law. There shouldn’t be a question in anyone’s mind at the time it was written, the authors had no idea the additional cost of living they would inflict on those living in Guam, Hawaii, Alaska or Puerto Rico as a result. I ask and hope that going forward you also consider and include the negative impact this law has on all the people of Guam as well.
Van R. Shelly
President and CEO,
Nissan Motor Corp. in Guam,
Tamuning, Guam
This letter to the editor was published in the February 2015 issue of American Shipper.
Letter to the Editor: Don’t forget Guam in Jones Act shakeup
