To amend title 46, United States Code, to allow transportation of merchandise in noncontiguous trade on foreign-flag vessels, and for other purposes.

2/5/2025, 1:49 PM
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E90-91)
Bill 119 hr 667, also known as the "Noncontiguous Trade Act," aims to amend title 46 of the United States Code to permit the transportation of merchandise in noncontiguous trade on foreign-flag vessels. This means that goods can be transported between US ports that are not part of the contiguous 48 states, such as Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico, and Guam, on foreign-owned ships.

The bill seeks to promote more efficient and cost-effective transportation of goods to these noncontiguous regions by allowing foreign-flag vessels to participate in this trade. Currently, only US-flag vessels are allowed to transport merchandise between US ports, which can be more expensive and less competitive than using foreign-flag vessels.

Supporters of the bill argue that allowing foreign-flag vessels to participate in noncontiguous trade will lower shipping costs, increase competition, and improve access to goods for residents of these regions. They also believe that it will help to stimulate economic growth and create jobs in the maritime industry. Opponents of the bill raise concerns about national security and the potential impact on the US maritime industry. They argue that allowing foreign-flag vessels to transport goods between US ports could weaken the US maritime sector and compromise national security interests. Overall, the Noncontiguous Trade Act aims to address the challenges and inefficiencies in transporting goods to noncontiguous regions of the US by allowing foreign-flag vessels to participate in this trade. The bill is currently under consideration in Congress and has sparked debate among lawmakers and stakeholders in the maritime industry.
Congress
119

Number
HR - 667

Introduced on
2025-01-23

# Amendments
0

Sponsors
+5

Cosponsors
+5

Status of Legislation

Bill Introduced
Introduced to House
House to Vote
Introduced to Senate
Senate to Vote

Purpose and Summary

Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E90-91)
Bill 119 hr 667, also known as the "Noncontiguous Trade Act," aims to amend title 46 of the United States Code to permit the transportation of merchandise in noncontiguous trade on foreign-flag vessels. This means that goods can be transported between US ports that are not part of the contiguous 48 states, such as Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico, and Guam, on foreign-owned ships.

The bill seeks to promote more efficient and cost-effective transportation of goods to these noncontiguous regions by allowing foreign-flag vessels to participate in this trade. Currently, only US-flag vessels are allowed to transport merchandise between US ports, which can be more expensive and less competitive than using foreign-flag vessels.

Supporters of the bill argue that allowing foreign-flag vessels to participate in noncontiguous trade will lower shipping costs, increase competition, and improve access to goods for residents of these regions. They also believe that it will help to stimulate economic growth and create jobs in the maritime industry. Opponents of the bill raise concerns about national security and the potential impact on the US maritime industry. They argue that allowing foreign-flag vessels to transport goods between US ports could weaken the US maritime sector and compromise national security interests. Overall, the Noncontiguous Trade Act aims to address the challenges and inefficiencies in transporting goods to noncontiguous regions of the US by allowing foreign-flag vessels to participate in this trade. The bill is currently under consideration in Congress and has sparked debate among lawmakers and stakeholders in the maritime industry.
Alternative Names
Official Title as IntroducedTo amend title 46, United States Code, to allow transportation of merchandise in noncontiguous trade on foreign-flag vessels, and for other purposes.

Comments

APPROVED
Layla Dougherty
@strawberry_orange_runner_bean79379
This bill is so dumb, like why are they even wasting time on it? It's like, just let it happen already. I don't get why people are so worked up about it. Just let it do its thing.

Recent Activity

Latest Action2/4/2025
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E90-91)