Bill Overview
Title: Secure Our Ports Act of 2022
Description: This bill prohibits an owner or operator of a U.S. port from entering into a contract with a Chinese, Russian, North Korean, or Iranian state-owned enterprise for the operation or management of such port. It also prohibits entering into a contract with any foreign entity for which a percentage is owned by one of those countries.
Sponsors: Rep. Steel, Michelle [R-CA-48]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in or affected by U.S. port operations and their international partners
Estimated Size: 3000000
- The bill targets U.S. port operations, impacting individuals who work at or conduct business with these ports.
- There are approximately 360 commercial ports in the United States.
- The bill prohibits contracts with certain foreign state-owned enterprises, indicating it affects international business and trade partners as well.
- Individuals involved in logistics, supply chain management, and transportation will be impacted due to changes in port management and operations.
- The trade volume that passes through the ports affects millions of people nationally and globally.
Reasoning
- This policy specifically affects those who have direct dealings with U.S. ports, such as port workers, logistics staff, and international trade partners.
- The policy could have a range of effects from altered business relationships to changes in employment patterns.
- Multiple perspectives should be gathered to cover a cross-section of the population impacted, from whether they even notice the change to those whose livelihoods could be deeply affected.
Simulated Interviews
Logistics Manager (Long Beach, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could disrupt some of our existing contracts, but I believe it will ultimately strengthen national security.
- In the short term, we might face some operational challenges, especially if we need to switch provider companies quickly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Dock Worker (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about job security if management changes and they decide to cut costs.
- However, having more control over who operates our ports could mean safer working conditions eventually.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Customs Officer (Houston, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe stricter regulations on foreign operators are beneficial and could improve my workflow through clearer guidelines.
- Some of the operational partners may face challenges, adjusting to new management systems.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
International Trade Consultant (Miami, FL)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy limits our choice of partners but ensures we're working with trusted entities.
- In the long term, this can streamline processes by eliminating unreliable entities from the chain.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Port Authority Executive (New York, NY)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This change is needed for national security and aligns with broader strategic goals.
- Some of our partnerships may become challenging, but it ensures we're aligned with U.S. interests.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Freight Forwarder (Seattle, WA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried that shifting companies could affect my operation timelines and efficiency.
- Policy gives us more control over our contracts, potentially improving reliability eventually.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Ship Captain (Norfolk, VA)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The additional bureaucracy this policy might introduce worries me, but safety is crucial.
- Alternative contractors might be less familiar with the unique needs of our fleet.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Container Terminal Operator (Savannah, GA)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We might have some downtime as new management is established, affecting our turnover.
- Long-term, it's a step towards more autonomy over national ports.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Port Maintenance Supervisor (Portsmouth, NH)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned that changes might affect maintenance budget and job security.
- However, keeping port operations under U.S. control might lead to better funding in the long run.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
International Business Owner (Baltimore, MD)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy can limit our operational freedom, but it potentially opens opportunities for new domestic partnerships.
- Some current partnerships will need revision, impacting costs and timelines.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $20000000)
Year 2: $8000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $18000000)
Year 3: $7500000 (Low: $4000000, High: $17000000)
Year 5: $7000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $15000000)
Year 10: $5000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $12000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The bill aims to enhance national security by restricting certain foreign entities from managing U.S. ports.
- While initial disruption due to contract changes might occur, long-term effects could stabilize if domestic industries adapt successfully.
- Potential legal challenges or disputes in existing contracts might arise, requiring additional oversight and legal resources.