Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/6864

Bill Overview

Title: Ocean Shipping Antitrust Enforcement Act

Description: This bill removes the exemption from federal antitrust laws for ocean common carriers.

Sponsors: Rep. Costa, Jim [D-CA-16]

Target Audience

Population: People who are dependent on goods and services transported by ocean common carriers

Estimated Size: 330000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Logistics Manager (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Currently, we benefit from reliable agreements with ocean carriers. Increased competition could drive down shipping costs, ultimately benefiting us, but it might disrupt established logistics channels.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

Small Business Owner (Chicago, IL)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • My business might benefit if shipping costs decrease due to more competition. Yet, if logistics become unpredictable, it could hurt my ability to plan purchasing effectively.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 5

Retail Chain Buyer (New York, NY)

Age: 30 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • There could be potential savings in shipping costs that might reduce product prices, which is positive. However, this transition could also lead to some initial supply chain instability.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Consumer (Houston, TX)

Age: 37 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 18/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As a consumer, fluctuations in product prices due to shipping costs can affect my budget. Lower shipping costs might lower prices, but the market response is uncertain.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 5

Sustainability Analyst (Boulder, CO)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could potentially encourage more sustainable practices if companies are pushed to optimize costs and reduce emissions. However, the primary focus of this change isn't on sustainability.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 8 7

Hedge Fund Manager (Miami, FL)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could provoke volatility in the shipping industry, impacting investments. However, increased competition might drive innovation and create opportunities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 6 5

Tech Company Supply Chain Director (Seattle, WA)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope the increased competition will lead to lower shipping costs, but if it disrupts the supply chain, it may cause issues with manufacturing schedules.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 9 8
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 8 8

Port Authority Official (Savannah, GA)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Changes in shipping agreements might alter port operations. It could mean increased efficiency but also more complexities in import/export management.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Economist (Austin, TX)

Age: 33 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 9

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I foresee this policy fostering a more competitive environment which could potentially drive market efficiencies, though the initial turbulence might cause economic ripples.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 9 9
Year 2 9 9
Year 3 9 9
Year 5 9 9
Year 10 9 9
Year 20 10 9

Graduate Student (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 24 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I am curious to see how this policy change could create opportunities for research and new business models. It’s an interesting case study for global trade dynamics.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 8 8

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $30000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $50000000)

Year 2: $32000000 (Low: $21000000, High: $53000000)

Year 3: $34000000 (Low: $22000000, High: $57000000)

Year 5: $38000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $63000000)

Year 10: $44000000 (Low: $29000000, High: $75000000)

Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $160000000)

Key Considerations