Could lifting the ''Jones act'' be a help in this mess.

[zqvol]

On 4/20/2020 at 9:06 PM, dolittle said:

Many have ports, the Jones Act says a ship can not go to two U.S. ports in a row .It is some what more complex . I am sure someone will explain it better . It is a frequent subject on this site.

 

The Jones Act has NOTHING to do with passengers, it applies to cargo. Maybe you are thinking of the PVSA?

[Homosassa]

6 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

That is because the ship stays on the Virginia side of the bay, and Virginia allows shipboard casinos.  Gambling laws on ships are a state issue, not federal.

 

??????

 

Until the ship reaches the Maryland/Virgina border, there really isn't a section of the Chesapeake Bay that might be a east/west side of section where one state border is closer than the other to Baltimore.

 

 On the west side of the Bay, the Maryland/Virginia  border  follows the Potomac River (Maryland gets the whole river to the high tide mark on the Virgina shore) and at the mouth of the Potomac, angles slightly north east to pass under the populated section of Smith Island but leaving part of the island in Virginia (very much a sore point on the Island). It then turns sharply south east to pass under the marshy peninsula south of Crisfield, MD, heads north east to go up the Pocomoke Sound to enter and follow the Pocomoke River for a short distance before turning due east to the Atlantic.

 

As the ship channel is between the west shore and Tangier and Smith islands and the mouth of the Potomac is approximately 84 nautical miles from Baltimore, how could a cruise ship reach the border crossing the Bay in a half hour?

 

(Before anyone asks, my husband worked with the marine police in both states to inspect the oyster growing areas in the Bay and has the Viginia/Maryland Chesapeake Bay state line engraved in his memory).

[dolittle]

10 hours ago, ChinaShrek said:

Let's try to have an open mind about repealing the PVSA in order to allow cruising to American ports only. What would the positive and negative ramifications be of such a decision on the cruising world? Everyone has posted why it's not going to happen. So, what? What if it did change?  Many of you have chimed in providing about why the law was put into place. What happened in the 1800s should irrelevant to my cruising experience today. The past may indeed by prologue but I am tired of living in it! Let's paint a picture of a new world order of domestic cruises.

You said it better than I did the letter of the law and the history are of no meaning in this crisis .

 

 

[navybankerteacher]

3 hours ago, Homosassa said:

 

??????

 

Until the ship reaches the Maryland/Virgina border, there really isn't a section of the Chesapeake Bay that might be a east/west side of section where one state border is closer than the other to Baltimore.

 

 On the west side of the Bay, the Maryland/Virginia  border  follows the Potomac River (Maryland gets the whole river to the high tide mark on the Virgina shore) and at the mouth of the Potomac, angles slightly north east to pass under the populated section of Smith Island but leaving part of the island in Virginia (very much a sore point on the Island). It then turns sharply south east to pass under the marshy peninsula south of Crisfield, MD, heads north east to go up the Pocomoke Sound to enter and follow the Pocomoke River for a short distance before turning due east to the Atlantic.

 

As the ship channel is between the west shore and Tangier and Smith islands and the mouth of the Potomac is approximately 84 nautical miles from Baltimore, how could a cruise ship reach the border crossing the Bay in a half hour?

 

(Before anyone asks, my husband worked with the marine police in both states to inspect the oyster growing areas in the Bay and has the Viginia/Maryland Chesapeake Bay state line engraved in his memory).

True, but the mouth of the Potomac - where the west side of the bay is not that far south of Baltimore. Still well north of the Virginia Capes where the Chesapeake joins the Atlantic.

 

[dolittle]

B.T.W. I do not think the Phila. port was in the Navy Yard it was near Penn's landing . There had a Celebrity ship at one time .

[chengkp75]

11 minutes ago, dolittle said:

You said it better than I did the letter of the law and the history are of no meaning in this crisis .

 

 

Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of US citizens who work on PVSA compliant vessels, that you want to take their livelihood away for the ability to have a vacation.

 

7 minutes ago, dolittle said:

B.T.W. I do not think the Phila. port was in the Navy Yard it was near Penn's landing . There had a Celebrity ship at one time .

Well, the address of the defunct Philadelphia Cruise Terminal is 5100 S. Broad St, which is in the Navy Yard.  And, if it was at Penn's landing, you would have to go under the Whitman Bridge, which is even lower, at 153' high. 

[njhorseman]

50 minutes ago, dolittle said:

B.T.W. I do not think the Phila. port was in the Navy Yard it was near Penn's landing . There had a Celebrity ship at one time .

It certainly was at the Navy Yard. I cruised from there.

[Homosassa]

14 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

True, but the mouth of the Potomac - where the west side of the bay is not that far south of Baltimore. Still well north of the Virginia Capes where the Chesapeake joins the Atlantic.

 

Yes, I am well aware of that. After living the the area for thirty years and traveling by land (car),  sea (small boat) and air (private single engine air craft), I can give good estimates on travel time by any of those modalities in the area.

 

Mouth of the Potomac River to the entrance of the Chesapeake Bay is approximately 67 nautical miles.

 

Baltimore to the mouth of the Potomac River is 84 Nautical miles.

 

However, I was dealing with the statement in an post that said that a half hour after leaving the port of BALTIMORE, the casinos was opened and an explanation was offered that the ship crossed the state line into Virginia waters where the casino was allowed to be opened.

 

My explanation of the state line was for those not familiar with the Maryland - Virginia area and the Chesapeake Bay.

 

I couldn't figure out how a cruise ship could travel the approximate 84 nautical miles from Baltimore to the Potomac River mouth (the most easily recognized point for those not from the area - I doubt Smith and Tangier Islands would ring many bells) in an half hour given the speed that the ship would be going.

 

 

[jcl410]

1 hour ago, Homosassa said:

...

 

However, I was dealing with the statement in an post that said that a half hour after leaving the port of BALTIMORE, the casinos was opened and an explanation was offered that the ship crossed the state line into Virginia waters where the casino was allowed to be opened.

 

My explanation of the state line was for those not familiar with the Maryland - Virginia area and the Chesapeake Bay.

 

---

 

I can confirm that earlier in the century - it feels odd typing that - that I was on the Grandeur of the Seas out of Baltimore. The casino opened at 6pm, just as we were going under the Bay Bridge. The bridge runs between Annapolis and Kent Island, Maryland.

 

I have no clue what regs allowed the casino to open - if any... On more recent trips, the casino has opened only after getting out of the Bay.

 

Aloha,

 

John

 

[Homosassa]

2 hours ago, jcl410 said:

 

I can confirm that earlier in the century - it feels odd typing that - that I was on the Grandeur of the Seas out of Baltimore. The casino opened at 6pm, just as we were going under the Bay Bridge. The bridge runs between Annapolis and Kent Island, Maryland.

 

I have no clue what regs allowed the casino to open - if any... On more recent trips, the casino has opened only after getting out of the Bay.

 

Aloha,

 

John

 

Yes, the Bay Bridge would be about a half hour cruising time from the port and yes, the ship would still be in Maryland waters.

 

And I think I dug out the answer.

 

Sometime between 1993 when the bill were first introduced in Maryland and 1999 when the attached article was written, Maryland passed a law allowing cruise ship casino to open once past the Francis Scott Key Bridge (geographically the bridge is spans the entrance to the estuary that become the Baltimore Harbor).

 

https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1999-05-30-9905300113-story.html

 

I don't know when the law was repealed or if was. If only Maryland allowed the casino to be opened but Virginia did not, perhaps the cruise lines decided it wasn't worth the trouble to open the casino and then close it at the Virginia state line.

[dkjretired]

4 hours ago, jcl410 said:

 

I can confirm that earlier in the century - it feels odd typing that - that I was on the Grandeur of the Seas out of Baltimore. The casino opened at 6pm, just as we were going under the Bay Bridge. The bridge runs between Annapolis and Kent Island, Maryland.

 

I have no clue what regs allowed the casino to open - if any... On more recent trips, the casino has opened only after getting out of the Bay.

 

Aloha,

 

John

 

Wether it’s open or not probably depends on paying a fee. 

[iancal]

Changing a piece of legislation would not in any way convince me to take a cruise if I was of the opinion that it was not safe to do so.  There is a reason why many countries have and continue, to close ports.

 

We would have zero desire to take a cruise.  I am as concerned about getting covid on an international cruise as I am on an America only cruise.

[SRF]

On 4/20/2020 at 9:27 PM, clo said:

But I bet somebody has the authority to grant exceptions.

 

You would have to change US law. 

 

The law has no method of exceptions.

[clo]

3 hours ago, SRF said:

 

You would have to change US law. 

 

The law has no method of exceptions.

Yeah. So what?

[ontheweb]

8 hours ago, SRF said:

 

You would have to change US law. 

 

The law has no method of exceptions.

I thought I read in another thread that there can be exceptions for weather related problems or mechanical problems.

[Shmoo here]

43 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

I thought I read in another thread that there can be exceptions for weather related problems or mechanical problems.

Yes, short term weather or mechanical issues that pop up unexpectedly.  Not really an "exception" but a waiver may be granted.  Not for an ongoing situation.

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, Shmoo here said:

Yes, short term weather or mechanical issues that pop up unexpectedly.  Not really an "exception" but a waiver may be granted.  Not for an ongoing situation.

So, in those situations is the fine first levied and then a waiver is applied for?

[Aquahound]

On ‎4‎/‎20‎/‎2020 at 6:27 PM, clo said:

But I bet somebody has the authority to grant exceptions.

 

There is no one person with the power to grant waivers to the PVSA.  In order for a waiver to be granted, the Secretary of Defense must first determine there to be a matter of interest to national defense.  The DOD Secretary must then make a request to the Secretary of Homeland Security, who then forwards the request to CBP.  As an exception to that rule, the DHS Secretary can make his own national defense determination but in that case, he must consult with the U.S. Maritime Administrator who will determine availability of U.S. vessels before granting approval.  But still, this is only under a matter of national defense (defense vs emergency). 

 

A blanket waiver to cruise lines from the PVSA has nothing to do with national defense, therefore there is no other exception in the law to allow for waivers. 

[JRG]

2 hours ago, Aquahound said:

...A blanket waiver to cruise lines from the PVSA has nothing to do with national defense, therefore there is no other exception in the law to allow for waivers. 

 

As the PVSA is an act of congress....it can be repealed.

 

It's happened before

 

 

 

Edited April 26, 2020 by JRG

[Aquahound]

15 minutes ago, JRG said:

As the PVSA is an act of congress....it can be repealed.

 

It's happened before

 

Well, of course it can be repealed.  Any law can be repealed.  But all-out repeal is a whole different discussion.  

[JRG]

It would never be all-out,   subsequent or replacement legislature would need to somehow salvage the maritime protectionist provisions.

 

 

 

[chengkp75]

6 hours ago, JRG said:

It would never be all-out,   subsequent or replacement legislature would need to somehow salvage the maritime protectionist provisions.

 

 

 

And, where do you draw the line in granting exemptions?  Is it length of cruise?  Is it number of passengers?  What data do you use when choosing a delineation point, because you'll have to have a reason for allowing one type of passenger vessel to be foreign flag and requiring another to be US flag, or you'll lose a court challenge in a heart beat.  Can you justify creating a legal difference between Oasis of the Seas doing an East Coast itinerary and the "American Revolution" from American Cruise lines doing the same itinerary, or the "Grande Mariner" from Blount Small Ship Adventures?  I ask seriously, because this question would be asked immediately upon a request for an exemption or change to the law, by those companies, and subsequent to any change, on a charge of discriminatory business practices.

Edited April 26, 2020 by chengkp75

[Charles4515]

 

As the PVSA is an act of congress....it can be repealed.

 

It's happened before

 

 

 

 

It could be repealed but that would not change the “mess” the cruise lines are currently in. Also congress has no reason to do anything to help the cruise lines out of their mess. Cruise lines are not incorporated in the US. They don’t want to pay US taxes or comply with US laws. It is not going to happen now.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[JRG]

 

10 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Can you justify creating a legal difference between Oasis of the Seas doing an East Coast itinerary and the "American Revolution" from American Cruise lines doing the same itinerary, or the "Grande Mariner" from Blount Small Ship Adventures?

 

I could try to make the argument that a certain Jeffersonian principle might  outweigh the needs of the status quo.   

 

Prudence dictates that the PVSA be evaluated for feasibility.   Objectivity is justification.  Correction...be evaluated for potential feasible changes to better accommodate passenger and crew shipboard travel and its industry.

Edited April 26, 2020 by JRG

[JRG]

2 hours ago, Charles4515 said:

It could be repealed but that would not change the “mess” the cruise lines are currently in. Also congress has no reason to do anything to help the cruise lines out of their mess. Cruise lines are not incorporated in the US. They don’t want to pay US taxes or comply with US laws.

 

You are correct.  If you had to recommend a reason for congress to help please suggest an idea. An example would be a cruise line incentive for taxes for registering under US or Canadian Flag?.  Fully deductable T&E write-offs for Fortune 500 to spur ship utilization.   

 

This is the Kobayashi Maru Syndrome and we need somebody like Captain Kirk to step forward and boldly go where no man has gone before...