ASK AHAB

OCTOBER 30, 2026

Dear Ahab:

While everyone seems focused on the U.S. midterm elections, what other races should shippers be watching closely?

– Excited for Elections

Dear Excited for Elections:

One race you should keep a close eye on is California’s gubernatorial election. With California’s ports handling roughly 38% of U.S. containerized imports and 28% of exports, the outcome could affect supply chains nationwide. For the past eight years, shippers knew what to expect from Governor Gavin Newsom’s administration. Now, with two new candidates offering very different approaches, the direction of California’s trade and transportation policies could change. Here is what shippers may be able to expect:}

• Democrat Xavier Becerra has emphasized infrastructure investment, clean-energy initiatives, and environmental goals. For shippers and ports, that could mean continued modernization and transportation investment, but also additional environmental requirements and potentially higher compliance costs.

  
  

• Republican Steve Hilton has focused on reducing regulations and business costs. His approach could lower operating burdens for trucking, ports, and logistics providers while shifting priorities away from some environmental initiatives.

  
  

Ultimately, the stakes extend far beyond California. The next governor could influence freight costs, port investment, trucking regulations, and how attractive California remains for moving cargo. For shippers, this is not simply a choice between two candidates. It is a choice between two different directions for America’s largest trade gateway, and the outcome could help determine where and how U.S. cargo moves for years to come.

Dear Ahab:

Is the East Coast becoming a multi-gateway market? Which ports are competing for New York’s market share, and what does that mean for shippers?

– More The Merrier

Dear More the Merrier:

More ports competing for cargo is generally good news. Instead of automatically routing freight through New York/New Jersey, importers can increasingly evaluate Savannah, Norfolk and Charleston based on the final destination of the cargo. For an importer serving the Northeast, New York/New Jersey can still make excellent sense because of its scale and connectivity. For cargo headed into the Southeast or certain inland markets, Savannah or Norfolk may offer a more attractive overall supply-chain solution. The key is to compare total landed transportation cost, not simply the ocean rate. The growth of alternative gateways also gives shippers something particularly valuable: optionality.

A company can establish primary and secondary port routings so that congestion, capacity constraints, weather or another disruption at one gateway doesn't automatically bring its inbound supply chain to a halt.

New York/New Jersey still has enormous scale, but Savannah in particular is becoming too large and too well-invested to be viewed merely as a regional alternative. The competitive pressure should ultimately benefit shippers through more routing choices, greater supply-chain flexibility and stronger negotiating leverage with carriers.

Bottom line: New York isn't going anywhere, but its southern competitors don't need to overtake it to matter. They only need to give carriers and BCOs a credible reason to route the next container somewhere else.

More viable East Coast gateways mean more choices, greater flexibility, and more options when developing routing strategies. Depending on cargo origin, destination, transportation costs, and available capacity, Charleston, Norfolk, or Savannah may sometimes offer shippers a  better option, while New York may make more sense for cargo destined for the Northeast. The key is not choosing one port over another but understanding the advantage each port offers over the others.