The Nation: The House Sinks The Cargo Bill

• Share

A rare coalition votes no

Not often do Consumer Advocate Ralph Nader and the liberal lobbying group Common Cause find themselves on the same side of an issue with the major oil companies, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the leadership of the Republican Party. But last week just such a formidable, if unlikely coalition sank the Energy Transportation Security Act of 1977, better known as the cargo preference bill. In a confused and acrimonious vote, the House of Representatives defeated the bill, 257 to 165. In so doing, the legislators rejected both Jimmy Carter's endorsement of the measure and a campaign by U.S. shipping companies and maritime unions to ensure its passage.

For the President, the defeat may have come as a relief in disguise. His economic advisers had predicted that the bill —which would require that by 1982 at least 9.5% of the nation's imported oil be transported in U.S.-flag ships—would fuel inflation. Main reasons: since U.S. shipping lines pay higher wages and observe higher safety standards than foreign competitors, they cost up to 50% more to operate. Domestic tankers now carry only 4% of U.S. oil imports. If their share of the market were increased to 9.5%, it would mean more business for the U.S. shippers and more jobs for U.S. seamen, but, economists estimate, it could cost the nation an additional $300 million for foreign oil. Because of higher transportation costs, the big petroleum companies would have to pay more for Arabian crude and charge more for gasoline at the pump. Hence the curious coalition between giants of the industry and consumer advocates in lobbying against the bill.

The maritime unions have traditionally been an influential lobby, disproportionately so, given their membership of only 73,000. Over the years they have funneled millions in campaign contributions to selected politicians, mostly Democrats. In last year's elections, maritime-related unions doled out $449,410 to 215 successful House candidates, including $16,200 to New York's John Murphy, chairman of the House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee, and $51,713 to five other prominent committee members. Jimmy Carter was another beneficiary of the unions' largesse; he received more than $100,000 in his bid for the presidency. So when Murphy sponsored the cargo preference bill and Carter backed it last July, House Republican Leader John Rhodes was not totally unjustified in charging "political payoff."

Last week Republican Congressman James Quillen of Tennessee picked up the partisan attack where Rhodes had left off. Said he: "The House has no business inflicting higher oil prices on the American people in order to fulfill President Carter's campaign promises to the maritime unions." Sponsor Murphy replied that he and his supporters were only trying to salvage the U.S. merchant fleet, which has dwindled from 5,000 to 570 ships during the past three decades.