Bill Overview
Title: Trailer Safety Improvement Act
Description: This bill requires that state highway safety programs address safety equipment, preventive maintenance, and other aspects of the proper and safe usage of light- and medium-duty trailers.
Sponsors: Rep. Burchett, Tim [R-TN-2]
Target Audience
Population: People who use or are affected by the use of light- and medium-duty trailers
Estimated Size: 24000000
- The bill targets light- and medium-duty trailers, which are often used by private owners, small businesses, and recreational users.
- Trailers are used globally for a variety of purposes, including moving goods, transporting livestock, and recreational activities like camping.
- The legislation targets improvements in safety equipment, which means it impacts users who operate trailers, the manufacturers who produce them, and organizations involved in safety certification and inspection.
Reasoning
- The policy will affect trailer owners, users, manufacturers, and associations involved in trailer safety regulations.
- The budget constraint means only a fraction of the large target population can be directly impacted in the initial phase, with gradual roll-out expected over time.
- Individuals who regularly use trailers for work or recreation stand to benefit the most initially.
- Feedback from a variety of demographics ensures diverse perspectives on the potential impact.
- Allocating resources efficiently is crucial—prioritizing high-risk and frequently used trailers can maximize cost-to-benefit outcomes.
Simulated Interviews
small business owner (Texas)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the safety act is beneficial as it can reduce accidents.
- Initially, costs might increase for retrofitting trailers, but long-term benefits outweigh this.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
frequent RV traveler (California)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Safety improvements for trailers can prevent breakdowns on long trips.
- Increased inspections might be inconvenient but are essential.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
construction worker (Florida)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not sure how much it would affect me as a renter.
- If rental companies comply, it might make using trailers less worrisome.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
retired (New York)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rarely use trailers, so it's unclear how much this policy will affect me.
- If costs of occasional use go up, I might reconsider using trailers.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
trailer manufacturer (Illinois)
Age: 41 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This can be good for business if it encourages more compliance checks and retrofits.
- Safety innovations are always welcome as they drive tech advancements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
livestock farmer (Ohio)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased maintenance requirements may raise costs, but safety is crucial.
- Proper guidelines can prevent animal injuries during transport.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
safety inspector (Colorado)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A focus on trailer safety will increase demands on inspection teams.
- It provides an opportunity but could strain resources without proper staffing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
college student (Arizona)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We use the trailer a few times, so not sure if this affects us much.
- More regulations might discourage occasional users like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
RV park manager (Oregon)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If trailer safety improves, it could increase park users' satisfaction.
- In the short term, compliance might confuse users not used to detailed checks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
event planner (Nevada)
Age: 33 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improved safety checks would be reassuring, but rental costs might rise.
- Important to ensure restricted access to unsafe trailers.
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 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)
Year 2: $180000000 (Low: $130000000, High: $230000000)
Year 3: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $210000000)
Year 5: $120000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $170000000)
Year 10: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $150000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $75000000)
Key Considerations
- The initial costs associated with implementing new safety standards could be substantial, but are necessary to achieve long-term safety and economic benefits.
- Administrative efforts and costs will vary across states depending on the current state of their trailer safety programs.
- The policy will likely require collaboration with trailer manufacturers, safety standard bodies, and state agencies.